I realize that. But I found ISO 3200 unacceptable on the *istD. Yet 1600 on the K10D appears to yield better results than the same sensitivity on the *istD. Thus, at this point, I believe I can attain higher shutter speeds in low light with the K10D than I could with the *istD. Where I couldn't get enough shutter speed with either camera, I would combine some slow shutter flash with an ambient exposure. I might get some motion blur, but I'd get a sharp central image as well. That's generally how it's done. Paul On Nov 26, 2006, at 7:00 PM, William Robb wrote:
> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Stenquist" > Subject: Re: Handled the K10D today > > >> My results are preliminary, but after about 400 exposures with the >> K10D, I'm quite sure that I can get better results in low light with >> this camera than I can with the *istD. It's a combination of SR and >> very good high ISO performance. I think you'll feel the same way once >> you try it. > > I think Rob is talking about low light photography where there is > subject movement to deal with. > I've done some work in the past where High Speed Recording film > processed to give a theoretical ASA6400 was the best option, and > even it > wasn't enough to give an acceptable shutter speed. > > William Robb > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
