Did you actually read the current Modern Photograpy review. I'll paraphrase they found that it had impressive built in anti noise software. You're mistaking firmware with physics.
Adam Maas wrote: > I have been paying attention and you obviously haven't. You're talking > about the older 10+MP bodies (K10D, D2X, D200, D80, D40X, A100) with > last-generation CCD or CMOS sensors. The new 10/12MP CMOS sensors > introduced in the last month or so ( in the D300, 40D, and A700) have > massively improved high ISO performance achieved at the sensor, not by > processing (The Sony A700, which is the one I've had a chance to look at > seriously, produces results at ISO 6400 that is about as good as a K10D > at 1600). > > This is the same sensor tech that gives the D3 2+ stops of noise > advantage over the 5D at the same pixel density. > > -Adam > > > P. J. Alling wrote: > >> I'm sorry, haven't you been paying attention. Every review I've read >> that doesn't gloss over high ISO performance mentions the loss of detail >> at high ISO in the 10+ mp bodies. Pentax simply doesn't offer 3200 ISO >> on the K10D, makes you wonder why. Well maybe you don't and I don't but >> for different reasons. I know why and you think it isn't so. All the >> other manufactures are using advanced software algorithms to reduce >> noise and maintain detail. The limits already being reached, you can use >> software to mask it, you can pretend it isn't here, but that just >> doesn't change the facts. >> >> Adam Maas wrote: >> >>> P. J. Alling wrote: >>> >>> >>>> What you need, and what Pentax needs to do, are two different things. >>>> Try this on for size "If I could get that kind of performance without >>>> SR, I wouldn't need SR." You probably won't acknowledge that that >>>> statement makes as much sense as your argument. Yet that's converse of >>>> your argument, and just as valid. They both make equal sense from a >>>> personal stand point. >>>> >>>> There is one immutable fact. Image quality will degrade as sensor >>>> densities increase beyond a certain point. That's simple physics. Pentax >>>> has pretty much reached that point. Nikon had as well. This degradation >>>> can b/e //ameliorated /with software, but at a price. In the case of >>>> Pentax, noise that was massaged to make it look more film like. Nikon >>>> was more aggressive and sacrificed detail. Nikon knew they were at the >>>> limit so they stepped around it with a larger sensor, (something that >>>> they were always planning to do). >>>> >>>> >>> Pentax certainly hasn't reached that point. The new crop bodies from >>> Nikon, Sony and Canon indicate that the limit was far higher than >>> previously thought (the 40D matches the 5D's high ISO performance, the >>> D300 appears to have even better high ISO performance, the A700 is in >>> the same ballpark). Sure, FF is always going to have an advantage, but >>> current-gen cropped bodies are already exceeding what was current for FF >>> performance in August. What was unachievable 6 months ago for >>> crop-sensor high ISO performance is about to become the norm. FF isn't a >>> holy grail and I don't see Pentax doing it until they can do a $999 FF >>> body, which isn't anytime soon. Pentax isn't competing with the 5D market. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> I know what you think you need, but what does Pentax need? Well they >>>> need two things market share and profits. Pentax probably cannot be the >>>> number one manufacture any time soon, (don't say never, Canon wasn't >>>> always number one, but I'll be realistic). Being number two is also >>>> unlikely, (as I said realistic), but being number three is doable. >>>> That's what they have to aim for and to do that they pretty much have to >>>> fight Olympus and Sony. >>>> >>>> >>> True. >>> >>> >>> >>>> The current Olympus system is based on the 4:3 system. Why hasn't >>>> Olympus brought out their new Pro body? Because the image sensor is >>>> giving them fits, that's why. >>>> >>>> >>> Actually, they solved that with the E-510/E-410 bodies, which match the >>> midrange crop bodies in high-ISO performance. And that's before they >>> look at adding the improvements Sony, Nikon and Canon have found which >>> look to improve high ISO noise by 2 or more stops. They'll never match >>> FF, and will ahve a hard time matching APS-C, but they certainly are at >>> the point where high ISO noise is adequately controlled. >>> >>> >>> >>>> High ISO quality is lacking due to noise >>>> at increased pixel density. Everyone else involved with the 4:3 system >>>> is in the same boat, these cameras will be high end consumer grade from >>>> here on, nothing more, (no matter how expensive Leica's versions are), >>>> no matter what Olympus markets their new high end body as, partly >>>> because the FF Nikon has raised the bar, and partly because of their >>>> inherent limitations. Olympus has decided to compete with small camera >>>> size with "reasonable" picture quality at low to medium ISO first, and >>>> gimmicks like "Live View" second. (Of course Canon can match that >>>> gimmick any time they feel like it, I know some will say it's not a >>>> gimmick, but it is, really, just think about it). >>>> >>>> >>> Nobody other than Nikon, Canon and Sony have the resources necessary to >>> compete in the pro FF market. >>> >>> >>> >>>> . >>>> Sony has been slow up to now because they are feeling things out, they >>>> are probably still integrating the K/M engineers and project managers >>>> into Sony's culture. Sony sales managers insist on the cameras being >>>> profitable, and they are milking the old K/M system as much as possible. >>>> However they know to maintain and increase their market share they will >>>> have to match the big boys, and that means a FF body, (as far as I know >>>> they don't even make any reduced frame lenses), so look for a FF body soon. >>>> >>>> >>> Dunno about that, Sony as a company has not been particularly >>> competetive in consumer electronics of late. They're relying too much on >>> branding and not enough on providing superior product for good prices. >>> Their last bastion of dominance was gaming systems and they've been >>> pushed into distant third their by MS and Nintendo. The pricing on the >>> A700 shows that Sony still doesn't get it, Canon's higher-performance >>> 40D has a $100USD lower MSRP. And this in a market where Canon is the >>> Big Dog. >>> >>> >>> >>>> That means that Pentax will have to get a FF body to keep from becoming >>>> locked in a contest for 4th place with Olympus and the 4:3 system.. Hoya >>>> will probably not like the odds at that point. They too are interested >>>> in the camera line being profitable. If it isn't, and shows no signs of >>>> becoming so, that's all there will be. >>>> >>>> >>> Profitable and large market share are not inherently linked. See Apple >>> Computer or BMW for details. Pentax is filling a market niche that Sony, >>> Nikon and Canon are all ignoring to some extent. Small, fast, and good >>> glass is being ignored by all the other makers. >>> >>> >>> >>>> The market Pentax plays in is mutable. Four years ago the *ist-D sold >>>> for $1600.00 The least expensive FF was the Kodak DCS 14n available for >>>> about $4000.00. Today the Kodak is gone and you can buy a Canon 5D for >>>> $3000, and the K10D is considered by many, (not just Pentaxians), to be >>>> semi pro competition for mid range Nikons and Canons, thought it sells >>>> for the price of an expensive consumer DSLR. Oh yes and 6 to 8mp >>>> consumer grade DSLRs can be had for 1/2 what a consumer SLR cost just a >>>> couple of years ago, and what an expensive P&S sells for now. >>>> >>>> >>> Things seem to be settling out. The price brackets have essentially been >>> stable for the last 2 years, certainly since the DL was introduced. >>> >>> >>> >>>> Notice that I didn't mention megapixels much, well lets talk about them >>>> briefly. 6mp sensors in DSLRs are now more or less dead, (like the >>>> dinosaurs of my youth, you could kill one but it would take some time >>>> for that knowledge to get to it's brain through it's gigantic body, >>>> today's dinosaurs are different, much smarter and more active but I >>>> digress). Sure 6mp cameras are just as capable as they were before, but >>>> from a marketing standpoint they are history. So are 8mp cameras. Pentax >>>> will probably start upgrading everything in January, they have to, to >>>> remain competitive, (the K100D super was a stopgap with easy to >>>> implement upgrades). The megapixel wars, silly as they may seem, are on, >>>> and image quality will require bigger sensors, not just more megapixels >>>> and Pentax will have to compete there or become an also ran, then to >>>> take the Dinosaur analogy in whole different direction, extinct. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> 6MP is dead outside the bargain market. There will be a 10MP K100 >>> variant, I'm sure. And Pentax has made room for a model above the K10D >>> in the sub-$1000 market. I don't see Pentax aggressively trying to move >>> upmarket, at least not until they have a better handle on the >>> low/midrange market. >>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
