DP Review: K20D gets highest award, but with slight sensor concerns

[dnaxe]

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk20d/

slight bias: "The off-to-shot time is perfectly respectable and is likely to be a problem only in the very unlikely circumstances that a press photographer decides to use one."

possible banding / hot pixels : http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk20d/page22.asp

--

I think it's quite fair. I haven't noticed the hot pixels or banding myself, but then again I haven't shot at 3200.

I did notice that the images seemed to be slightly more noisy than my k100d, but it's almost not noticeable and the output is (still) excellent.

[hjbyeo]

I don't shoot at 3200 currently.. or at least I have not got into a situation that I need to shoot at that kind of ISO.

So it means that the reservation they have is not applicable for me.

Noisy images? Noisier than K100D? hmm... post some for us to see?

[longko]

Originally Posted by dnaxe I did notice that the images seemed to be slightly more noisy than my k100d, but it's almost not noticeable and the output is (still) excellent.

It's likely due to a much larger MP output. But if possible do show an example. Maybe can convinced me not to upgrade K20D Only reason I need a K20D is to shot at ISO1600 and ISO3200, if the noise level is similar to K100D, then I don't wanna upgrade liao.

[creampuff]

The so called review deliberately omits any comparison with the Nikon D300.
Now why is that?

I don't even shoot at anything above ISO 800 so like hjbyeo, I have to say the reservation doesn't apply to me too! Besides, in low light situations, I'd rather use the advantage of a fast prime than to boost ISO.

[longko]

Originally Posted by creampuff Besides, in low light situations, I'd rather use the advantage of a fast prime than to boost ISO.

My photography had always allowed me to stay at below ISO400 most of the time. Till last Sunday covering SKC show where no flash should be allowed at ring side. With a FA 50mm f1.4 @ f2.0 and ISO1600 I can only get 1/180s, which just barely managed to freeze the dog movement. But the noise lvl was horrible after all the shadow area enhancement

So like these no retake shots, it'll be good to know if you can rely on the camera

[flowerpot]

Originally Posted by creampuff The so called review deliberately omits any comparison with the Nikon D300. Now why is that? I don't even shoot at anything above ISO 800 so like hjbyeo, I have to say the reservation doesn't apply to me too! Besides, in low light situations, I'd rather use the advantage of a fast prime than to boost ISO.

well...not only D300, 40D is also omitted ...instead compare with 450D

anyway we know how good our camera is, not need to be so obvious and escape reality

was surprise K20D able to get 9 stops of DR at ISO100, dun seems so much to me, but definitely more than K10D, which is the main reason for me to get K20D, else i still prefer the CCD output of K10D...

when will they do a review on K200D, hoping to see what kind of DR is able to achieve...also what N or C cam will they compare to ?? 1000D or maybe some PnS?

[dnaxe]

Originally Posted by longko It's likely due to a much larger MP output. But if possible do show an example. Maybe can convinced me not to upgrade K20D Only reason I need a K20D is to shot at ISO1600 and ISO3200, if the noise level is similar to K100D, then I don't wanna upgrade liao.

Well, TBH, I think both 1600 and 3200 might be slightly better, but they're definitely not settings I would use usually.

The noise in the lower ISOs is almost completely unobtrusive, but it's there when zoomed in.

I recommend the upgrade, for these reasons:
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showt...22#post4123122

[longko]

Originally Posted by dnaxe Well, TBH, I think both 1600 and 3200 might be slightly better, but they're definitely not settings I would use usually. The noise in the lower ISOs is almost completely unobtrusive, but it's there when zoomed in. I recommend the upgrade, for these reasons: http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showt...22#post4123122

Thx^^

[flowerpot]

the high ISO 1600 and 3200 is definitely better than K10D, i dunno why the reviews shows such poor iso performance...even iso100 looks bad to me...

anyway go figure, K20D is High ISO NR off while A700 is on...thats how they compare...

ask any K20D user out there, ISO1600 is definitely usable...

[longko]

Originally Posted by flowerpot the high ISO 1600 and 3200 is definitely better than K10D, i dunno why the reviews shows such poor iso performance...even iso100 looks bad to me... anyway go figure, K20D is High ISO NR off while A700 is on...thats how they compare... ask any K20D user out there, ISO1600 is definitely usable...

Actually such comparisons will depend a lot if the tester is bias. It's easy to create noise at high ISO. like ISO1600 if maybe f2.8 1/180s will give u a bright less noise, but if the tester uses 1/250s the noise lvl will be much much more. Or in jpeg, a stop of EV adjustment will give diff noise lvl>.<

[dnaxe]

FWIW, I think it's true, about the noise all through the range. Doesn't affect most pictures though, especially at screen resolution and probably even if printed up to A3 (although this I haven't tried).