The problem with that thread on www.foto.no is that the theory was based on Canon 5D highlight warning and exposure meter, so how I´m not sure how relevant it is for Pentax. The highlight warning on the Canon seems to be based on the jpg-files, while in my experience the highlight warning is closer to the RAW files on K20D. Also, as also stated by dpreview K20D seems to be basing the exposure meter on the highlights so it is different from both K10D and Canon 5D. The guy who was claiming this had a look at my K20D files and found lack of details in the same areas that had highlight warnings on the camera. He claims that his method works on K20D but I´m not convinced.
In my experience the exposure meter on K20D goes more to the right than K10D (and thus follows some of the recommendations in the mentioned thread) and it has a little better dynamic range in RAW. A very rough test based n the chimping method shows that the range between higlight and low light warnings on K20D was 10EV... DagT Den 26. juni. 2008 kl. 15.20 skrev AlunFoto: > I have been trying to look into this, but haven't been able to reach > any conclusions yet. The tests I did last week was done with the K20D > on a tripod and using the 2s self-timer. So alas, I'm left with a set > of test shots with an awful lot of weird noise. I have learned about > the firmware update adressing that problem, but haven't got around to > update the camera yet. :-( > > Though off-topic for a Pentax group, there was a very interesting > discussion at www.foto.no last week (in Norwegian, unfortunately), > discussing the dynamic ranges in raw files from various cameras. With > the Canons in particular, but also the Nikons, it seems one can pull > down details from highlights that seem to be blown by up to 2-2.5 > stops, judged from the chimping screen. It was argued quite forcefully > that underexposure was to be dreaded much more than overexposure, > because of the lousy S/N ratio in the deeper shadows. > > Apparently, the K10D does not provide much leeway in the > post-processing compared to what appears on the chimping screen, but > nobody tested the K20D. It's tempting to speculate that the switch to > a CMOS sensor in the latter could make a big difference... :-) > > Jostein > > > 2008/6/26 Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Hi! >> >> The review just published on DPReview and mentioned here mentions >> that >> K20D has 9.0 Ev of usable dynamic range whereas according to their >> test of K10D, it has only 7.3 Ev of DR. I wonder if anyone can >> actually confirm this. I am not interested in numbers of course, more >> of a perception resulting from real life use of both cameras under >> similar conditions. >> >> Thanks in advance. >> >> -- >> Boris >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > > > -- > http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ > http://alunfoto.blogspot.com > > -- > 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. -- 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.
