Handled a K200D today and below are my observations:-
1. Body is larger and heavier than that I would like, at least noticeably more weight and bulkier than the K100D. The build quality is felt just a little bit better than the K100D, though, which is similar to the K10D and the K20D. Anyway, the plasticky outshell must not be something that I really like;
2. Viewfinder is the same as that of the K100D, for both the image magnification and the brightness, that is, medium image size and medium brightness for an APS-C DSLR - no particular excitement or disappointment here;
3. The AF point red illuminated marks are yet again misaligned, as usual. No real surprise here;
4. AF speed is the same, nothing considered speedy and it will become rather slow and hunt at just lower light conditions;
5. Mirror slap and shutter actions have been improved, smoother and quieter, very similar to the K20D, better than both K10D and K100D. Shutter lag and finder black out time are quite noticeable, close to the K20D for what I could see;
6. Auto ISO does work even when the Exposure Compensation is applied. The function and setting of the Auto ISO is just the same as that of the K10D and K20D. With the launch of the K200D and K20D and the dis-continuation of other older Pentax DSLR models, it has marked a full-stop for the annoying long lasting Pentax DSLR Auto ISO bug since the *ist D, which has been persistent for five year!(?) But yet, my question is: WHY Pentax do NOT release firmware updates for those other older Pentax DSLR models for all we old users so as to get rid of this annoying old problem completely??
7. The operations and settings of the camera are mostly identical to that of the K10D/K20D. Of course, the K200D has only one e-dial, though - but now there is a green reset button, also;
8. The LCD monitor looks the same as that of the K20D, larger than that of the K10D and the K100D but the pixels are now even more obvious as the resolution of the new monitor is yet the same;
9. It should be noted that set price of the K200D is the most expensive amongst the latest 10+ Mega Pixel DSLR offers from the brands C, N, O and S. Nevertheless, the K200D still costs less than half of the price of a K20D;
All in all, I can see a real dilemma here for the existing Pentax DSLR users who just wish to find a better upgrade path, especially for the old K users. The dilemma is that the K200D and the K20D are almost designed and built identically, feature wise and in many characteristics, even for those which are not published, e.g., the improved mirror damping and quieter shutter action (but along with some noticeably system time lag and finder black-out, which are very similar). The major (only) differences, which are obvious or published on paper, between the two latest DSLRs are just on the pixel count (and the new Samsung CMOS sensor) and the new Live View feature of the K20D which is weakest in the market in terms of features and functionality.
It seems that the K200D has a far better price-performance ratio than the K20D but it does not have the Live View (anyway, I think it is not a real concern as far as the K20D's LV is not further improved by Pentax with their upcoming firmwares which are to be issued, if any). But as far as price is concerned alone, the price of the K200D is not really competitive in any sense for a new purchaser whom has no "system concern". The AF of the K200D is indeed slow and the K20D's one is not really fast neither, despite that quite some users have already reported that the K20D has improved software algorithm for the AF-C mode now (it seems that the hardwares are the same) and has improved AF accuracy (which *should be* at the very *beginning*, frankly).
So, if the K200D is proved to have the same debugs as the K20D later on (e.g., so far I could see no more "soft in-camera jpegs" from the K200D and K20D so far), than I would say it is a no-brainer for anyone who want to buy or must buy a new Pentax DSLR now. If it is not, then I don't think it is valuable to get the K20D just for a few of those found debugs - I do believe many of the old Pentax DSLR users do wish for more for that premium price we would pay for the cost of a K20D!
To sum up, my final conclusion and comments are that the K200D is competitive for new users only if it is made smaller, sold cheaper (at least comparable to the D60, A200/300/350, 400D etc.) and should have some unique features, e.g. a better LiveView or tilting LCD or a better one and so on. On the other hand, if a current Pentax DSLR who really need an upgrade, I think the K200D should be the better choice, especially when the P/P ratio must be taken into account, but don't expect a *real* or significant upgrade for what we could get with the K200D, especially when we already have a later generation of Pentax DSLR, e.g., the K100D.
All in all, I do think Pentax should make a real entry level DSLR (which should be sold cheaper, and more importantly, smaller and lighter) and a real advanced level DSLR (like the D300, that has faster and stronger AF and quicker system responses), otherwise they again could seek no further market share at all, with their current somehow "weak" offers which are unable to compete in *any* market segments (Indeed, I really have big doubts about what are the actual *targeted* market segments which the K200D and K20D are positioned for by Pentax?? which is indeed very unclear, at least to me!)
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Improved Continuous AF Tracking of the K20D
A new K20D user has made an interesting and systematic comparison test in comparing the AF-C hit rate and performance with his new K20D against his old K10D :-
http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=475739&extra=page%3D2
(Text in Traditional Chinese, use Babelfish if required)
What's the most interest test he did is the "Goldfish Test" (to be exact, the goldfish is called "Peacock"), he used a stop watch/time counter, set it to five minutes and then put his K10D or K20D in AF-C mode. There are 11 numbers of the goldfish in the tank. Each time he focused on one fish. After the focus confirmation is achieved, he focused on another nearest fish and repeated the test for five minutes. The number of taken shots was then counted and then the shots were then classified into "Good", "Fair" and "Bad" according to the sharpness in focusing or the amount of out-focusing. For example, "Bad" shots were those totally out-of-focus ones which are not usable and should go to the trash bin anyway, "Fair" means that there were slight out-focusing in the shots, but the amounts of errors were yet acceptable.
So, here are the raw results of his:-
K10D: 64 shots taken: 14 "Good", 23 "Fair", 27 "Bad";
K20D: 90 shots taken: 30 "Good", 44 "Fair", 16 "Bad".
Thus, it's obvious that the K20D has smarter continuous AF tracking ability than the K10D. The K20D had taken 40% more photos within the time limit! .. which simply means more photo opportunities which I have been emphasizing on from time to time.
I tabular the following on the successful, failure and in-between rates by simple calculations for our more easy reading:-
So, for ideal "Good" shots, K20D has a 52.47% improvement (by comparing the numbers of "Good" shots) over the K10D although the hit rate of 33.33% is still on the low side IMHO and there is pretty much room for improvement. As for the "Bad" share of shots of total failure, the difference between the two cameras are huge. That means that the "usable" rates for acceptable pictures, in counting both "Good" and "Fair" are 57.8% versus 82.22% for the K10D and K20D respectively. Oh well, for the K10D case, I can't think out a better quick phrase to describe that as what "hit and miss" could tell for a such a low hit rate on even "Acceptable" shots - nearly one picture out of two is trashable for the K10D!(?)
Do note also that the user had also tested the AF-C for *static* objects, which he found NO difference between the K10D and the K20D. But, who would use the AF-C mode for shooting *static* objects then?
Besides, the user has also done some quick checking on the image quality differences between two cameras. We can note the purple fringing difference and the noise level difference in the comparison shot he made and posted along the above same thread which shows that the K20D is just better.
So, now back to the AF issues, as stated in the user's above opening post. In fact, he has been much dissatisfied with the AF performance of his old K10D owing to the poor AF-S accuracy that decreased the resolution (and thus decreased the image quality of his good lenses) and the inferior AF-C performance as well. As such, he just took a gamble to go ahead to acquire the K20D without second thought as he just won't want to switch, he told. Well, just as one responded poster said, he was considered to be "very brave", as he had already found that the K10D to be performing so poorly in the AF department. I do second this viewpoint totally - just imagine IF the K20D's AF is actually identical to the K10D's one, then!?
In fact, I found that Pentax has once again to be 200% unwise (or simply *stupid*, I would say) to tell the world that the K20D uses the SAFOX VIII AF system, which is actually infamous for poor AF speed, low light performance and accuracy. In fact, since it has been verified that various new K20D users have found *improvements* of the AF for the K20D. WHY don't Pentax just tell us it is of an improved version, say, it can be named as SAFOX VIII E (Enhanced) or something, just to tell the difference.
Indeed, to explain such stupidity, it is just the typical and classic Pentax behaviour - they never admitted problems and tried to hide them as far as possible! BUT why not let the old bugs in the past over and be *positive* in promoting their new products? What wrong to tell the world that they have debugged (or maybe just using the word "improved" marketing-wise) the old system (although after so many years) and now they have been able to bring out a better version of the SAFOX VIII. I think it should still be a very positive thing afterall!
Read also: Improved AF accuracy of the K20D (Under White Lights Only)
http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=475739&extra=page%3D2
(Text in Traditional Chinese, use Babelfish if required)
What's the most interest test he did is the "Goldfish Test" (to be exact, the goldfish is called "Peacock"), he used a stop watch/time counter, set it to five minutes and then put his K10D or K20D in AF-C mode. There are 11 numbers of the goldfish in the tank. Each time he focused on one fish. After the focus confirmation is achieved, he focused on another nearest fish and repeated the test for five minutes. The number of taken shots was then counted and then the shots were then classified into "Good", "Fair" and "Bad" according to the sharpness in focusing or the amount of out-focusing. For example, "Bad" shots were those totally out-of-focus ones which are not usable and should go to the trash bin anyway, "Fair" means that there were slight out-focusing in the shots, but the amounts of errors were yet acceptable.
So, here are the raw results of his:-
K10D: 64 shots taken: 14 "Good", 23 "Fair", 27 "Bad";
K20D: 90 shots taken: 30 "Good", 44 "Fair", 16 "Bad".
Thus, it's obvious that the K20D has smarter continuous AF tracking ability than the K10D. The K20D had taken 40% more photos within the time limit! .. which simply means more photo opportunities which I have been emphasizing on from time to time.
I tabular the following on the successful, failure and in-between rates by simple calculations for our more easy reading:-
| Camera | Good | Fair | Bad |
| K10D | 21.86% | 35.94% | 42.19% |
| K20D | 33.33% | 48.89% | 17.78% |
So, for ideal "Good" shots, K20D has a 52.47% improvement (by comparing the numbers of "Good" shots) over the K10D although the hit rate of 33.33% is still on the low side IMHO and there is pretty much room for improvement. As for the "Bad" share of shots of total failure, the difference between the two cameras are huge. That means that the "usable" rates for acceptable pictures, in counting both "Good" and "Fair" are 57.8% versus 82.22% for the K10D and K20D respectively. Oh well, for the K10D case, I can't think out a better quick phrase to describe that as what "hit and miss" could tell for a such a low hit rate on even "Acceptable" shots - nearly one picture out of two is trashable for the K10D!(?)
Do note also that the user had also tested the AF-C for *static* objects, which he found NO difference between the K10D and the K20D. But, who would use the AF-C mode for shooting *static* objects then?
Besides, the user has also done some quick checking on the image quality differences between two cameras. We can note the purple fringing difference and the noise level difference in the comparison shot he made and posted along the above same thread which shows that the K20D is just better.
So, now back to the AF issues, as stated in the user's above opening post. In fact, he has been much dissatisfied with the AF performance of his old K10D owing to the poor AF-S accuracy that decreased the resolution (and thus decreased the image quality of his good lenses) and the inferior AF-C performance as well. As such, he just took a gamble to go ahead to acquire the K20D without second thought as he just won't want to switch, he told. Well, just as one responded poster said, he was considered to be "very brave", as he had already found that the K10D to be performing so poorly in the AF department. I do second this viewpoint totally - just imagine IF the K20D's AF is actually identical to the K10D's one, then!?
In fact, I found that Pentax has once again to be 200% unwise (or simply *stupid*, I would say) to tell the world that the K20D uses the SAFOX VIII AF system, which is actually infamous for poor AF speed, low light performance and accuracy. In fact, since it has been verified that various new K20D users have found *improvements* of the AF for the K20D. WHY don't Pentax just tell us it is of an improved version, say, it can be named as SAFOX VIII E (Enhanced) or something, just to tell the difference.
Indeed, to explain such stupidity, it is just the typical and classic Pentax behaviour - they never admitted problems and tried to hide them as far as possible! BUT why not let the old bugs in the past over and be *positive* in promoting their new products? What wrong to tell the world that they have debugged (or maybe just using the word "improved" marketing-wise) the old system (although after so many years) and now they have been able to bring out a better version of the SAFOX VIII. I think it should still be a very positive thing afterall!
Read also: Improved AF accuracy of the K20D (Under White Lights Only)
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Improved AF Accuracy of the K20D (Under White Lights Only)
An experienced Pentax DSLR user, who has a bundle of Pentax AF/digital lenses and various Pentax DSLR bodies including the K100D, K10D and the new K20D, has tested and compared (side by side) the AF accuracy between his K10D and K20D with different higher grade Pentax fine lenses of his putting on both bodies:-
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&thread=27049158
First of all, here is his detailed comparison tests (two sets - will explain more below) regarding the AF accuracy differences with the DA 21 Limited lens on K10D against the K20D, pair of comparison test shots are posted:-
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=27066095
Do note that since the DA 21 was found to have strange focusing behaviour on the K10D that the focusing accuracy actually depends on the Av number selected (as well as if the lens is turned from the infinity or closest), which I have reported here before, the user also carried out a second batch of the test in the above to compare the focus accuracy of the K10D against the K20D under the procedure which he believed his K10D should work best.
Well, as it is mentioned in the user's opening post and can be seen from the above detailed tests and measurements, there are significant focusing errors with the K10D whereas with the K20D could do very well with the same DA 21 (and other various Pentax AF lenses he has as well, as told - so far he has not posted all the test photos with all different lenses in the thread, though).
Indeed, I was a bit susceptible on his report when I first read his opening post just because usually people would have some kind of honey moon period effect when they've received their new toys and usually think that the new toys are better (maybe just because they've got excited or actually time will tell for many things, when they use their "new" gear longer). However, since there is some solid measurbation evidence shown above, I think I should believe.
In fact, I am really glad and pleased that Pentax have improved their design finally (as it seems to be from judging from the above) after years of the same persistent AF problem for inaccuracy, at last. I do think that "late is just better than none"!
Well, I do believe that it is always a good thing to let Pentax and the public know about those annoying gear problems as wide as possible so that Pentax should listen and potential buyers/users should be fully aware of such problems as well, before they are sold. Furthermore, for letting more people to know about the problems, more pressure would be made to Pentax so that they are forced to improve to a certain extent, instead of letting the problems drag on for long or even forever! That's is in fact my clear objective in setting up and updating my this blog.
Now, have all the AF accuracy problems (just say for shooting static objects only) been resolved totally? So, what are some of the well-known problems? Just read back my early Blog article about the "AF Accuracy's Dependency on Lenses and Yellow Light", then you will know more about these.
On the other hand, here comes the bad thing as reported also by the above Pentax user who carried out also the test to verify if AF accuracy has been improved under the yellow lights, i.e., tungsten light source or any artificial light source with low colour temperature. Unfortunately, he found that obvious Front Focusing *still* occured, as always for ALL Pentax DSLRs:-
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=27066212
This is yet a disappointment, although I would not be of big surprise. In contrast, I have been surprised this time for what it has been proved that one of the most annoying "Pentax's" problems has actually been removed, with the K20D.
Since I shoot a lot under tungsten lightings which are often dimmer conditions, I had found that such AF system problems to be a big annoyance. This is in fact one of the main reasons that I was forced to get a Canon 5D kit in June last year. Later on, I got also the Canon 50/1.8 fast prime which I have never seen the Yellow Light Symptom of the Pentax DSLRs (which I was the very first person on the Net to conduct a quick experiment to verify this problem), even at fully wide opened and under very dim conditions and even with low contrast objects. More importantly, the focusing was still fast and decisive with the 5D at lower light conditions, unlike all other Pentax DSLRs that would hunt seriously in the same conditions. Moreover, do note that Pentax film AFSLRs like the expensive MZ-S flagship and the entry level model MZ-30 which I have both do not slow down like what the Pentax DSLRs would do under lower light conditions, neither. Nevertheless, the MZ cameras do shift a little bit with slight front focusing under tungsten lightings but the magnitude is not that large as those Pentax DSLRs - that I can tell - just believe it or not!
A few days before, I tried two units of the K20D, I am not overall impressed with the AF responsiveness of the K20D neither. That says the K20D required to think longer than I would expect for the AF motor start to move and it also need longer time to re-confirm the focus and re-adjust the lens as well. This slow responsiveness that I can feel easily is not really a good thing, IMHO.
Last but not least, here are the remaining posted test results (a few pairs of shots only) for the AF accuracy comparison between the K10D and the K20D with a few other different lenses which the above mentioned user has, which proves again the AF accuracy of the K20D has improved whereas the AF accuracy of the K10D is just rather poor:-
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=27066277
So, for those old Pentax DSLR users who have being wanted to upgrade just because of the particular deficiencies they don't like and ask me if it worths the upgrade to the K20D by now. My answer would be "Nope" at the current stage, undoubtedly. It is just because I won't spend another (US)$1,400 to cure only one of the long lasting and well known problems which exist mainly in all the previous models of Pentax DSLRs. Unless later on it can be confirmed that more of the old typical Pentax problems for the camera performance and accuracy aspects are cleared (like this time for the AF errors with different lenses), it is just too risky to put the bet *now*, I would say. Note that for $1,400, actually we could already invest into a few good lenses in the basic focal range for another better system, even if we are to start from scratch, like what I did last year (although these glass may not be as good as some of the original Pentax glass! ;-))
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&thread=27049158
First of all, here is his detailed comparison tests (two sets - will explain more below) regarding the AF accuracy differences with the DA 21 Limited lens on K10D against the K20D, pair of comparison test shots are posted:-
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=27066095
Do note that since the DA 21 was found to have strange focusing behaviour on the K10D that the focusing accuracy actually depends on the Av number selected (as well as if the lens is turned from the infinity or closest), which I have reported here before, the user also carried out a second batch of the test in the above to compare the focus accuracy of the K10D against the K20D under the procedure which he believed his K10D should work best.
Well, as it is mentioned in the user's opening post and can be seen from the above detailed tests and measurements, there are significant focusing errors with the K10D whereas with the K20D could do very well with the same DA 21 (and other various Pentax AF lenses he has as well, as told - so far he has not posted all the test photos with all different lenses in the thread, though).
Indeed, I was a bit susceptible on his report when I first read his opening post just because usually people would have some kind of honey moon period effect when they've received their new toys and usually think that the new toys are better (maybe just because they've got excited or actually time will tell for many things, when they use their "new" gear longer). However, since there is some solid measurbation evidence shown above, I think I should believe.
In fact, I am really glad and pleased that Pentax have improved their design finally (as it seems to be from judging from the above) after years of the same persistent AF problem for inaccuracy, at last. I do think that "late is just better than none"!
Well, I do believe that it is always a good thing to let Pentax and the public know about those annoying gear problems as wide as possible so that Pentax should listen and potential buyers/users should be fully aware of such problems as well, before they are sold. Furthermore, for letting more people to know about the problems, more pressure would be made to Pentax so that they are forced to improve to a certain extent, instead of letting the problems drag on for long or even forever! That's is in fact my clear objective in setting up and updating my this blog.
Now, have all the AF accuracy problems (just say for shooting static objects only) been resolved totally? So, what are some of the well-known problems? Just read back my early Blog article about the "AF Accuracy's Dependency on Lenses and Yellow Light", then you will know more about these.
On the other hand, here comes the bad thing as reported also by the above Pentax user who carried out also the test to verify if AF accuracy has been improved under the yellow lights, i.e., tungsten light source or any artificial light source with low colour temperature. Unfortunately, he found that obvious Front Focusing *still* occured, as always for ALL Pentax DSLRs:-
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=27066212
This is yet a disappointment, although I would not be of big surprise. In contrast, I have been surprised this time for what it has been proved that one of the most annoying "Pentax's" problems has actually been removed, with the K20D.
Since I shoot a lot under tungsten lightings which are often dimmer conditions, I had found that such AF system problems to be a big annoyance. This is in fact one of the main reasons that I was forced to get a Canon 5D kit in June last year. Later on, I got also the Canon 50/1.8 fast prime which I have never seen the Yellow Light Symptom of the Pentax DSLRs (which I was the very first person on the Net to conduct a quick experiment to verify this problem), even at fully wide opened and under very dim conditions and even with low contrast objects. More importantly, the focusing was still fast and decisive with the 5D at lower light conditions, unlike all other Pentax DSLRs that would hunt seriously in the same conditions. Moreover, do note that Pentax film AFSLRs like the expensive MZ-S flagship and the entry level model MZ-30 which I have both do not slow down like what the Pentax DSLRs would do under lower light conditions, neither. Nevertheless, the MZ cameras do shift a little bit with slight front focusing under tungsten lightings but the magnitude is not that large as those Pentax DSLRs - that I can tell - just believe it or not!
A few days before, I tried two units of the K20D, I am not overall impressed with the AF responsiveness of the K20D neither. That says the K20D required to think longer than I would expect for the AF motor start to move and it also need longer time to re-confirm the focus and re-adjust the lens as well. This slow responsiveness that I can feel easily is not really a good thing, IMHO.
Last but not least, here are the remaining posted test results (a few pairs of shots only) for the AF accuracy comparison between the K10D and the K20D with a few other different lenses which the above mentioned user has, which proves again the AF accuracy of the K20D has improved whereas the AF accuracy of the K10D is just rather poor:-
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=27066277
So, for those old Pentax DSLR users who have being wanted to upgrade just because of the particular deficiencies they don't like and ask me if it worths the upgrade to the K20D by now. My answer would be "Nope" at the current stage, undoubtedly. It is just because I won't spend another (US)$1,400 to cure only one of the long lasting and well known problems which exist mainly in all the previous models of Pentax DSLRs. Unless later on it can be confirmed that more of the old typical Pentax problems for the camera performance and accuracy aspects are cleared (like this time for the AF errors with different lenses), it is just too risky to put the bet *now*, I would say. Note that for $1,400, actually we could already invest into a few good lenses in the basic focal range for another better system, even if we are to start from scratch, like what I did last year (although these glass may not be as good as some of the original Pentax glass! ;-))
Saturday, March 08, 2008
K20D First Hands-on Impressions
Tried out two different units of K20D (with a DA 70 Limited and the DA 16-45) yesterday and have the following first impressions:-
1. The whole shutter release action is smoother and quieter (than any other previous K cameras). That means the mirror up action is gentler, shutter sound is quieter and the mirror down damping is better;
2. However, the shutter release is not really instantaneous. I can observe a noticeable shutter lag plus an even longer blackout time of the finder (maybe even worse than what K10D does have which is already considered as not good);
3. Moreover, the shutter release button is badly loose, which means the reaction force is simply too little for the half-pressing. In fact, I found it just feels worse than my K100D. The shutter release button of the vertical grip suffers from the same problem as the main body button. The bad feel decreases the overall feeling about better build quality;
4. Metering and exposure accuracy *seems* to be better. No significant underexposure was seen for quite a number of test shots which I made, under sunlight outdoor and in different artificial lighting sources or even mixed source. I feel this to be a good thing since it *seems* that Pentax have tried to make their DSLR to expose right and at least brighter in the K20D production units. Nonetheless, for the various samples from beta models, I could still see obvious underexposure problems as what all Pentax DSLRs which I have used would do.
Do note that with my yet limited use on the K20D, I think it maybe too early to draw conclusion on an improved metering system yet. But so far I feel that this "new" metering system is just better!
5. Auto WB seems to has been improved, with less significant colour cast which would present under more difficult lighting conditions as for previous Pentax DSLRs. The AWB is not totally ideal, though - it just looks better but not perfect.
6. I shot stationary people and objects under the sunlight and indoor with the AF-S mode, using the central AF point mostly. What I would temporarily conclude that the AF system is the same as and identical to the K10D and K100D's (well, if Lithium batteries is used in the K100). The most annoying thing is the final focus reconfirmation which checked for if the first time AF movement stopped position had any errors and needed to re-adjust once more (aka hunting, although it is not in a serious way, just because the testing environment is just bright or not too dim indoor). The responsiveness of the AF is rather poor, too, which means that after you have half-pressed the shutter release button, there is a noticeable delay before the AF motor moves - the AF system just needed to think longer than what I would tolerate. Well, in short, I would still think that the AF system performance, speed, responsiveness etc. is still pathetic;
7. Furthermore, the classic Pentax AF red illumination indicator incorrect position problem does still exist for these two units I tested!(?) The first K20D was having the central AF red point shift upwards whereas the second one had it shifted upwards and to the right side. The problem is indeed rather annoying (at least to me and quite some other users as reported) although it have nothing to do for the actual AF sensor alignment, I just wonder why Pentax still and still have NOT debugged its design and adopt a better indication method which should not be having this persistent problem, which happened on day one with my *ist D bodies, which is just a very disappointed thing.
Moreover, do note that the misaligned AF red dot may mislead the user to level the image when looking through the *optical* viewfinder, which is a practical problem which much less people would notice.
8. I am not impressed with the overall build quality of the K20D. It feels exactly the same of all the *ist D and previous K cameras - the outer shell is just too plasticky somehow afterall.
9. As other reviewers have reported, I also found that the Live View AF is problematic and difficult to use. In the Live View mode, what we need is to press the AF button at the body back to do the AF. But then there is no indication of any kind for what AF has been done completely and correctly, or NOT! (unlike other LiveView DSLRs like the Olympus E-410 and 510 which have such an indication with red and green spot to tell the status).
I had eventually got some out-of-focus pictures with such an AF "function" under the Live View mode with the K20D. I think I just "didn't know how to use the camera" as particular Pentax fanboys always said when they were put into their "defense mode"!
10. The LCD video frame rate under the Live View mode is not very high. I can see the displayed "video" is jumpy when I panned the K20D in a not very fast manner. Do note that this jumpiness can only be seen when the Shake Reduction is disabled as the SR will smooth out any faster changes in motion and has a side effect of slowing down the motion of the displayed "video". On the other hand, if the SR is On, you will see the SR is functioning at real time through the Live View screen, just like what can be seen in the optical viewfinder of DSLRs for those lens-based IS or VR like what Canon and Nikon could. Anyway, it's a good thing to see that the SR is actually working but it can only be seen in the Live View mode. Nonetheless, for the lower frame rate of the Live View display, I think practically this would not impose major issue as we are to take still photos most of the time with DSLRs.
All in all, the quick conclusion of mine is that whilst I believe that the K20D should be the best DSLR body ever made by Pentax in the Pentax land. It just fell short of many things in the competition and by no means it is really a wise choice to choose by considering its relatively high price tag which it is just not worth the price no matter it is considered in many ways unless we are tied firmly to the Pentax system. Frankly, if I am starting from scratch, why not buy a Nikon D300 or a Canon 40D at around the same price? It is simply because both the D300 and the 40D are having better and faster AF, higher shooting frame rate, better build quality, less shutter lag, far less "classic" Pentax specified and unique problems, a stronger and more comprehensive system, better customer support and so on.
Finally, my bet is that the K20D will not be as "popular" as the K10D would as most of the potential new buyers who were interested in Pentax and such a "K10D" alike camera had already bought into a K10D already but I guess not many K10D users would upgrade to the K20D. The old Pentax *ist D series users might be interested but then the K20D by no means is an attractive offer for new comers, especially when they do not have any old Pentax lenses.
1. The whole shutter release action is smoother and quieter (than any other previous K cameras). That means the mirror up action is gentler, shutter sound is quieter and the mirror down damping is better;
2. However, the shutter release is not really instantaneous. I can observe a noticeable shutter lag plus an even longer blackout time of the finder (maybe even worse than what K10D does have which is already considered as not good);
3. Moreover, the shutter release button is badly loose, which means the reaction force is simply too little for the half-pressing. In fact, I found it just feels worse than my K100D. The shutter release button of the vertical grip suffers from the same problem as the main body button. The bad feel decreases the overall feeling about better build quality;
4. Metering and exposure accuracy *seems* to be better. No significant underexposure was seen for quite a number of test shots which I made, under sunlight outdoor and in different artificial lighting sources or even mixed source. I feel this to be a good thing since it *seems* that Pentax have tried to make their DSLR to expose right and at least brighter in the K20D production units. Nonetheless, for the various samples from beta models, I could still see obvious underexposure problems as what all Pentax DSLRs which I have used would do.
Do note that with my yet limited use on the K20D, I think it maybe too early to draw conclusion on an improved metering system yet. But so far I feel that this "new" metering system is just better!
5. Auto WB seems to has been improved, with less significant colour cast which would present under more difficult lighting conditions as for previous Pentax DSLRs. The AWB is not totally ideal, though - it just looks better but not perfect.
6. I shot stationary people and objects under the sunlight and indoor with the AF-S mode, using the central AF point mostly. What I would temporarily conclude that the AF system is the same as and identical to the K10D and K100D's (well, if Lithium batteries is used in the K100). The most annoying thing is the final focus reconfirmation which checked for if the first time AF movement stopped position had any errors and needed to re-adjust once more (aka hunting, although it is not in a serious way, just because the testing environment is just bright or not too dim indoor). The responsiveness of the AF is rather poor, too, which means that after you have half-pressed the shutter release button, there is a noticeable delay before the AF motor moves - the AF system just needed to think longer than what I would tolerate. Well, in short, I would still think that the AF system performance, speed, responsiveness etc. is still pathetic;
7. Furthermore, the classic Pentax AF red illumination indicator incorrect position problem does still exist for these two units I tested!(?) The first K20D was having the central AF red point shift upwards whereas the second one had it shifted upwards and to the right side. The problem is indeed rather annoying (at least to me and quite some other users as reported) although it have nothing to do for the actual AF sensor alignment, I just wonder why Pentax still and still have NOT debugged its design and adopt a better indication method which should not be having this persistent problem, which happened on day one with my *ist D bodies, which is just a very disappointed thing.
Moreover, do note that the misaligned AF red dot may mislead the user to level the image when looking through the *optical* viewfinder, which is a practical problem which much less people would notice.
8. I am not impressed with the overall build quality of the K20D. It feels exactly the same of all the *ist D and previous K cameras - the outer shell is just too plasticky somehow afterall.
9. As other reviewers have reported, I also found that the Live View AF is problematic and difficult to use. In the Live View mode, what we need is to press the AF button at the body back to do the AF. But then there is no indication of any kind for what AF has been done completely and correctly, or NOT! (unlike other LiveView DSLRs like the Olympus E-410 and 510 which have such an indication with red and green spot to tell the status).
I had eventually got some out-of-focus pictures with such an AF "function" under the Live View mode with the K20D. I think I just "didn't know how to use the camera" as particular Pentax fanboys always said when they were put into their "defense mode"!
10. The LCD video frame rate under the Live View mode is not very high. I can see the displayed "video" is jumpy when I panned the K20D in a not very fast manner. Do note that this jumpiness can only be seen when the Shake Reduction is disabled as the SR will smooth out any faster changes in motion and has a side effect of slowing down the motion of the displayed "video". On the other hand, if the SR is On, you will see the SR is functioning at real time through the Live View screen, just like what can be seen in the optical viewfinder of DSLRs for those lens-based IS or VR like what Canon and Nikon could. Anyway, it's a good thing to see that the SR is actually working but it can only be seen in the Live View mode. Nonetheless, for the lower frame rate of the Live View display, I think practically this would not impose major issue as we are to take still photos most of the time with DSLRs.
All in all, the quick conclusion of mine is that whilst I believe that the K20D should be the best DSLR body ever made by Pentax in the Pentax land. It just fell short of many things in the competition and by no means it is really a wise choice to choose by considering its relatively high price tag which it is just not worth the price no matter it is considered in many ways unless we are tied firmly to the Pentax system. Frankly, if I am starting from scratch, why not buy a Nikon D300 or a Canon 40D at around the same price? It is simply because both the D300 and the 40D are having better and faster AF, higher shooting frame rate, better build quality, less shutter lag, far less "classic" Pentax specified and unique problems, a stronger and more comprehensive system, better customer support and so on.
Finally, my bet is that the K20D will not be as "popular" as the K10D would as most of the potential new buyers who were interested in Pentax and such a "K10D" alike camera had already bought into a K10D already but I guess not many K10D users would upgrade to the K20D. The old Pentax *ist D series users might be interested but then the K20D by no means is an attractive offer for new comers, especially when they do not have any old Pentax lenses.
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
The Weakest Live View in the Market
Here is the latest Olympus E-420 which has just been announced:-
http://www.dcresource.com/news/newsitem.php?id=3720
With its latest Live View design by Olympus, it can do almost all a P&S or Prosumer DC can do in real-time, e.g. Contrast Detection AF (but yet there is the option of using the Phase Detection AF system - but mirror down-and-up is required, or both), Face Detection/Recognition up to 8 faces, Live Histogram and exposure checking etc. and so on..
Whilst the Canon's 450D/Rebel XSi has the Live Histogram and have the Contrast Detection AF and Sony's A300/350 do have a swivel monitor which can be tilted up and down at right angles plus a separate Live View sensor (thus also have the ability to do AF *full-time* in Live View mode), the rather primitive Live View design of the K20D, which is just crude and has even no indication for the AF, just look really rather outdated (on day one when it was just born) and is actually rather impractical to use which cause much inconvenience, which in turn makes the Live View function almost useless. Besides, as for the K200D, there is even no Live View function.
So, again, this time Pentax is yet again clearly lagging behind. Pentax, could you have the minimal foresight each time before you made a new product? They simply failed to look ahead almost everytime! Nonetheless, Pentax, please update the firmware of the K20D soonest so as to catch up and not lagging behind too far away and for too long!
The *hope* is the hardware of the K20D is capable of a better Live View function, it's just that the software, i.e., the firmware, is way too immature. Enough said. (But even Pentax is willing to and will be able to update the K20D's firmware and provide a "kind* offer for a firmware update to introduce those essential missing Live View features some days later, how long shall those new K20D users or just potential buyers will be required or will have the patience to wait? Or, it is just yet another endless waiting in the end until the next replacement model comes??)
http://www.dcresource.com/news/newsitem.php?id=3720
With its latest Live View design by Olympus, it can do almost all a P&S or Prosumer DC can do in real-time, e.g. Contrast Detection AF (but yet there is the option of using the Phase Detection AF system - but mirror down-and-up is required, or both), Face Detection/Recognition up to 8 faces, Live Histogram and exposure checking etc. and so on..
Whilst the Canon's 450D/Rebel XSi has the Live Histogram and have the Contrast Detection AF and Sony's A300/350 do have a swivel monitor which can be tilted up and down at right angles plus a separate Live View sensor (thus also have the ability to do AF *full-time* in Live View mode), the rather primitive Live View design of the K20D, which is just crude and has even no indication for the AF, just look really rather outdated (on day one when it was just born) and is actually rather impractical to use which cause much inconvenience, which in turn makes the Live View function almost useless. Besides, as for the K200D, there is even no Live View function.
So, again, this time Pentax is yet again clearly lagging behind. Pentax, could you have the minimal foresight each time before you made a new product? They simply failed to look ahead almost everytime! Nonetheless, Pentax, please update the firmware of the K20D soonest so as to catch up and not lagging behind too far away and for too long!
The *hope* is the hardware of the K20D is capable of a better Live View function, it's just that the software, i.e., the firmware, is way too immature. Enough said. (But even Pentax is willing to and will be able to update the K20D's firmware and provide a "kind* offer for a firmware update to introduce those essential missing Live View features some days later, how long shall those new K20D users or just potential buyers will be required or will have the patience to wait? Or, it is just yet another endless waiting in the end until the next replacement model comes??)
Sunday, February 24, 2008
A Quick but Full ISO Test by a New K20D User (Vs K10D too)
A Hong Kong Pentax user has acquired a new K20D at the street of Hong Kong and he has immediately carried out a quick test for checking the image quality and camera performance (variations) at all different ISO speeds and here is his post:-
http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=470500&extra=page%3D1&page=5
(Text in Traditional Chinese, use Babelfish to translate if needed. Btw, the captions in the posted test images are self-explanatory and are in English.)
The first thing to note is that the K20D image starts to appear grainy/noisy at ISO 800 and in my opinion ISO 1600 is already very marginally usable. But if you compare the K10D images which are shot at the same time for the same object with the same setup, the ISO 400 image is somewhat more or less the same as the ISO 800 image of the K20D, which means that there is a considerably obvious improvement in the noise performance of the K20D when it is compared to the K10D, especially considering that it has nearly 50% more pixels than the K10D. Having said that, it should be noted that the ISO 400 noise performance of the K10D is in fact sub-par, which is also quite some K10D users and I have been talking about for a while now.
The second thing is that the user reported that the (Auto) White Balance is far more accurate than the K10D, even under tungsten lighting. The reproduced color balance is more faithful to the original subjects as he could see so far (way better than the K10D, as reported). Well, it might be that it is really true or it is just that he is still enjoying his honey moon period with his new toy, anyway.
But the third thing which I can observe is the dark and gloomy pictures, which actually nearly becomes an unshakeable symbol or even icon for Pentax DSLRs, *can* *still* be seen. The K20D pictures look just a little bit brighter, though (but it still looks dark, muddy and dull).
Last but not least, since he purchased his K20D body (only) at near HK$11,000 (about US$1,400), which I would consider simply too expensive to consider objectively as the much more stronger (in specifications) and faster (for its true camera performance, e.g., AF and shutter lag, etc.) Nikon D300 is also selling just at a price which is dearer by very little bucks.
Do note that Nikon's system is undoubtedly more comprehensive and complete than the Pentax's one and Nikon's flash system is renowned to be the most accurate and versatile one, too, whereas Pentax's P-TTL has been reported from time to time rather frequently on the Internet for its inaccuracy and inconsistency. Although the K20D can be different but I have no high hope as long as exposure accuracy department is concerned for the Pentax DSLRs, judging from the past experiences of the Pentax DSLR users (and now the new samples published by the beta and production K20D so far). Besides, as long as the AF system of the K20D is yet the SAFOX VIII (at least as it is called), which is infamous for unsatisfactory low light performance and accuracy, I don't think choosing the K20D is a wise choice when one can actually get a far superior and better Nikon D300 at nearly the same price.
In fact, I have just tried a D300 yesterday (not at shop, one of my friends has purchased his new D300 so that I could try it out at the field), the mirror action is so gentle but yet crisp and I am really amazed with its lightning fast short shutter lag which is noticeably even shorter than my Canon 5D (around 78 ms as measured by CAPA Japan and the Imaging Resource, best timing) which is again noticeably faster than my MZ-S (which is again just faster than *any* Pentax AF DSLRs ever made!). So, I just wonder except the old Pentax DSLR user base who are particularly eager to replace their old Pentax DSLRs (which the users might be rather unsatisfied with something), for those who are new, WHO will really choose the K20D in view of the comparatively poorer price/performance ratio? So, here is my bet: Unless the price of the K20D goes down significantly, the product and Pentax won't succeed. Or, people just go to get the Samsung GX-20 which should be (much?) cheaper and with the original SilkyPix RAW software package (and better user interface than the Pentax Photo Lab), too.
http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=470500&extra=page%3D1&page=5
(Text in Traditional Chinese, use Babelfish to translate if needed. Btw, the captions in the posted test images are self-explanatory and are in English.)
The first thing to note is that the K20D image starts to appear grainy/noisy at ISO 800 and in my opinion ISO 1600 is already very marginally usable. But if you compare the K10D images which are shot at the same time for the same object with the same setup, the ISO 400 image is somewhat more or less the same as the ISO 800 image of the K20D, which means that there is a considerably obvious improvement in the noise performance of the K20D when it is compared to the K10D, especially considering that it has nearly 50% more pixels than the K10D. Having said that, it should be noted that the ISO 400 noise performance of the K10D is in fact sub-par, which is also quite some K10D users and I have been talking about for a while now.
The second thing is that the user reported that the (Auto) White Balance is far more accurate than the K10D, even under tungsten lighting. The reproduced color balance is more faithful to the original subjects as he could see so far (way better than the K10D, as reported). Well, it might be that it is really true or it is just that he is still enjoying his honey moon period with his new toy, anyway.
But the third thing which I can observe is the dark and gloomy pictures, which actually nearly becomes an unshakeable symbol or even icon for Pentax DSLRs, *can* *still* be seen. The K20D pictures look just a little bit brighter, though (but it still looks dark, muddy and dull).
Last but not least, since he purchased his K20D body (only) at near HK$11,000 (about US$1,400), which I would consider simply too expensive to consider objectively as the much more stronger (in specifications) and faster (for its true camera performance, e.g., AF and shutter lag, etc.) Nikon D300 is also selling just at a price which is dearer by very little bucks.
Do note that Nikon's system is undoubtedly more comprehensive and complete than the Pentax's one and Nikon's flash system is renowned to be the most accurate and versatile one, too, whereas Pentax's P-TTL has been reported from time to time rather frequently on the Internet for its inaccuracy and inconsistency. Although the K20D can be different but I have no high hope as long as exposure accuracy department is concerned for the Pentax DSLRs, judging from the past experiences of the Pentax DSLR users (and now the new samples published by the beta and production K20D so far). Besides, as long as the AF system of the K20D is yet the SAFOX VIII (at least as it is called), which is infamous for unsatisfactory low light performance and accuracy, I don't think choosing the K20D is a wise choice when one can actually get a far superior and better Nikon D300 at nearly the same price.
In fact, I have just tried a D300 yesterday (not at shop, one of my friends has purchased his new D300 so that I could try it out at the field), the mirror action is so gentle but yet crisp and I am really amazed with its lightning fast short shutter lag which is noticeably even shorter than my Canon 5D (around 78 ms as measured by CAPA Japan and the Imaging Resource, best timing) which is again noticeably faster than my MZ-S (which is again just faster than *any* Pentax AF DSLRs ever made!). So, I just wonder except the old Pentax DSLR user base who are particularly eager to replace their old Pentax DSLRs (which the users might be rather unsatisfied with something), for those who are new, WHO will really choose the K20D in view of the comparatively poorer price/performance ratio? So, here is my bet: Unless the price of the K20D goes down significantly, the product and Pentax won't succeed. Or, people just go to get the Samsung GX-20 which should be (much?) cheaper and with the original SilkyPix RAW software package (and better user interface than the Pentax Photo Lab), too.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
First K20D Production Camera Formal Test
PopPhoto has completed testing a production unit (yes, they mention it is!) of the K20D and the full test report has been published:-
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/5112/camera-test-pentax-k20d.html
So, for such a formal test, of course our main concern is on the various measurement results which are obtained under their controlled lab environment, in their professionally set-up lab. Here is the direct link to the K20D lab test results page:-
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/5112/camera-test-pentax-k20d-rugged-body-smart-controls-page3.html
In order to make the obtained results more meaningful, we need to interpret the results by comparing the results of other DSLRs in the "same class", i.e., the targeted market segment. As the K20D is priced somewhere near the Canon 40D, Nikon D300 and the Sony A700 (said also in the PopPhoto's article) and all are the latest offers from the four brands, it's just trivial and fair enough to compare them.
Specifications wise, putting aside the old 16-segment multi-pattern metering system in the K20D (which has the least number of segments in the industry) and that all other DSLRs has a more sophisticated AF system on paper, the K20D do have a similar specification close to the 40D and the D300.
In order to do a more systematic comparison, we need to have more controlled tested data of the other DSLRs above. Very fortunately, PopPhoto have already tested all of them in their previous issues, the direct links of the corresponding results pages are as follows:-
Canon 40D:
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4668/camera-test-canon-eos-40d-specifications-certified-test-results-page3.html
Nikon D300:
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4911/camera-test-nikon-d300-vital-statistics-test-results-page3.html
Sony A700:
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4724/camera-test-sony-alpha-700-vital-statistics-page3.html
Now, we can go on to compare the results aspect by aspect. I summarise the key performance aspect results above in the following tables for easy reading and our quick comparison:-
Table 1:- Noise
As we can see, noise wise the K20D is just loser here. At lower ISO speeds, it by no means can match the 40D and the D300 for their superior noise performance. At higher ISO speeds, it just always loses, even to the Sony A700 (which also loses to the Canon and Nikon).
Table 2:- AF Speed (in Second)
* Update (Feb 23): The timing figures are actually K10D ones and I have also corrected the figures above as PopPhoto have already updated their chart in the K20D test report. In conjunction, I have also made two minor changes in the second paragraph below accordingly. For more about the story, see the post made by Jack (the PopPhoto forum adminstrator) in the thread below:-
http://forums.popphoto.com/camera/board/message?board.id=11&thread.id=16705
Their main argument for using the K10D data is just that as far as they learnt from Pentax, the K10D and K20D share the same AF system and in order to avoid further "confusion", they opted to publish the K10D timing results after carried out some tests for verification. Anyway, I myself am not convinced with this "reasoning", though.
Well, as many of the Pentax DSLR users, especially for those who have compared their DSLRs of other brands side by side when they were using their Pentax DSLRs at lower light environments (including me), the lower light AF performance is just pathetic for *any* Pentax DSLRs, the K20D is of no exception, as it has been verified from the above same lab environment, again.
It should be noted that at EV -1, the K20D was simply nearly unable to focus at a rather lengthy time of 2.33s which is in fact impractical to use for the AF. Actually, no other DSLRs would ever require more than 1.37s to focus even at EV -2 and EV -3 where at such a dim lighting level there is simply no figure obtainable for the K20D as it is very probably that the K20D had given up already to do the AF job at EV -2.
Not even to say actually the AF systems of Canon, Nikon and Sony all are designed to have the f/2.8 AF sensors which cater for faster lenses for better AF accuracy when used with those lenses, mostly primes, which Pentax simply lacks such a design.
Table 3:- Other Measurements
The K20D seems to have high resolution on a par with the D300. However, at higher ISO, it fails to keep the high resolution figures which the D300 has been able to maintain. But since the K20D has more pixels than the D300, the results are somehow unexpected.
As for the color accuracy, the 40D and D300 both do better than the K20D whilst the A700 is worst.
However, for the preservation of highlight and shadows details (also commonly referred to the Dynamic Range or simply DR), the K20D comes last. The K20D has the most accurate contrast, though. Do note that normally a lower contrast would normally result for a wider DR. It is therefore the Nikon and the Sony should have the potential to yield an even wider DR range if the contrast is tuned down a bit.
Table 4:- Overall Image Quality (IQ) Grading
Well, I think the last grading is redundant, after we have gone through the results of all the above key performance aspects measured. :-)
Anyway, after reading all these, there is yet only one question comes into my mind: Could and should Pentax do better? Could they?? Actually, I really just start to puzzle.. ( but I still know that *Pentax* MZ cameras' AF are better - at least faster at low light! :-( )
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/5112/camera-test-pentax-k20d.html
So, for such a formal test, of course our main concern is on the various measurement results which are obtained under their controlled lab environment, in their professionally set-up lab. Here is the direct link to the K20D lab test results page:-
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/5112/camera-test-pentax-k20d-rugged-body-smart-controls-page3.html
In order to make the obtained results more meaningful, we need to interpret the results by comparing the results of other DSLRs in the "same class", i.e., the targeted market segment. As the K20D is priced somewhere near the Canon 40D, Nikon D300 and the Sony A700 (said also in the PopPhoto's article) and all are the latest offers from the four brands, it's just trivial and fair enough to compare them.
Specifications wise, putting aside the old 16-segment multi-pattern metering system in the K20D (which has the least number of segments in the industry) and that all other DSLRs has a more sophisticated AF system on paper, the K20D do have a similar specification close to the 40D and the D300.
In order to do a more systematic comparison, we need to have more controlled tested data of the other DSLRs above. Very fortunately, PopPhoto have already tested all of them in their previous issues, the direct links of the corresponding results pages are as follows:-
Canon 40D:
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4668/camera-test-canon-eos-40d-specifications-certified-test-results-page3.html
Nikon D300:
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4911/camera-test-nikon-d300-vital-statistics-test-results-page3.html
Sony A700:
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4724/camera-test-sony-alpha-700-vital-statistics-page3.html
Now, we can go on to compare the results aspect by aspect. I summarise the key performance aspect results above in the following tables for easy reading and our quick comparison:-
Table 1:- Noise
| Camera | ISO 100 | 200 | 400 | 800 | 1600 | 3200 | 6400 |
| Pentax K20D | 1.22 (Very Low) | 1.49 (Very Low) | 1.76 (Low) | 1.64 (Low) | 2.6 (Moderate) | 3.8 (Unaccepatable) | 6.04 (Unaccepatable) |
| Canon 40D | 0.8 (Extremely Low) | 0.95 (Extremely Low) | 1.15 (Very Low) | 1.49 (Very Low) | 2.0 (Moderately Low) | 2.9 (Moderate) | N/A |
| Nikon D300 | N/A | 1.1 (Extremely Low) | 1.2 (Very Low) | 1.1 (Extremely Low) | 1.4 (Very Low) | 1.95 (Low) | 2.83 (Moderate) |
| Sony A700 | 1.25 (Very Low) | 1.3 (Very Low) | 1.6 (Low) | 1.7 (Low) | 2.5 (Moderate) | 2.7 (Moderate) | 3.1 (Unaccepatable) |
As we can see, noise wise the K20D is just loser here. At lower ISO speeds, it by no means can match the 40D and the D300 for their superior noise performance. At higher ISO speeds, it just always loses, even to the Sony A700 (which also loses to the Canon and Nikon).
Table 2:- AF Speed (in Second)
| Camera | EV 12 (at ISO 100) | 10 | 8 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 0 | -1 | -2 | -3 |
| Pentax K20D* | 0.37 | 0.44 | 0.43 | 0.54 | 0.97 | 1.17 | 1.22 | 1.67 | 2.33 | - | - |
| Canon 40D | 0.38 | 0.40 | 0.46 | 0.49 | 0.54 | 0.58 | 0.61 | 0.84 | 0.98 | 1.20 | - |
| Nikon D300 | 0.32 | 0.33 | 0.41 | 0.51 | 0.67 | 0.78 | 0.90 | 0.93 | 0.95 | 0.98 | - |
| Sony A700 | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.31 | 0.36 | 0.36 | 0.89 | 0.85 | 1.18 | 1.16 | - | 1.37 |
* Update (Feb 23): The timing figures are actually K10D ones and I have also corrected the figures above as PopPhoto have already updated their chart in the K20D test report. In conjunction, I have also made two minor changes in the second paragraph below accordingly. For more about the story, see the post made by Jack (the PopPhoto forum adminstrator) in the thread below:-
http://forums.popphoto.com/camera/board/message?board.id=11&thread.id=16705
Their main argument for using the K10D data is just that as far as they learnt from Pentax, the K10D and K20D share the same AF system and in order to avoid further "confusion", they opted to publish the K10D timing results after carried out some tests for verification. Anyway, I myself am not convinced with this "reasoning", though.
Well, as many of the Pentax DSLR users, especially for those who have compared their DSLRs of other brands side by side when they were using their Pentax DSLRs at lower light environments (including me), the lower light AF performance is just pathetic for *any* Pentax DSLRs, the K20D is of no exception, as it has been verified from the above same lab environment, again.
It should be noted that at EV -1, the K20D was simply nearly unable to focus at a rather lengthy time of 2.33s which is in fact impractical to use for the AF. Actually, no other DSLRs would ever require more than 1.37s to focus even at EV -2 and EV -3 where at such a dim lighting level there is simply no figure obtainable for the K20D as it is very probably that the K20D had given up already to do the AF job at EV -2.
Not even to say actually the AF systems of Canon, Nikon and Sony all are designed to have the f/2.8 AF sensors which cater for faster lenses for better AF accuracy when used with those lenses, mostly primes, which Pentax simply lacks such a design.
Table 3:- Other Measurements
| Camera | Resolution (lines) | Color Accuracy (Average Delta E) | Highlight/Shadow Details | Contrast |
| Pentax K20D | 2350 at ISO 100-400 | 7.98 (Excellent) | High | Normal |
| Canon 40D | 2100 at ISO 100-1600 | 7.7 (Excellent) | Very High | Slightly Low |
| Nikon D300 | 2350 at ISO 200-6400 | 7.19 (Excellent) | Extremely High | Slightly High |
| Sony A700 | 2280 at ISO 100 | 8.9 (Extremely High) | Very High | Slightly High |
The K20D seems to have high resolution on a par with the D300. However, at higher ISO, it fails to keep the high resolution figures which the D300 has been able to maintain. But since the K20D has more pixels than the D300, the results are somehow unexpected.
As for the color accuracy, the 40D and D300 both do better than the K20D whilst the A700 is worst.
However, for the preservation of highlight and shadows details (also commonly referred to the Dynamic Range or simply DR), the K20D comes last. The K20D has the most accurate contrast, though. Do note that normally a lower contrast would normally result for a wider DR. It is therefore the Nikon and the Sony should have the potential to yield an even wider DR range if the contrast is tuned down a bit.
Table 4:- Overall Image Quality (IQ) Grading
| Camera | IQ at ISO 100 | IQ at ISO 200-800 | IQ at 1600 | IQ at 3200 | IQ at 6400 |
| Pentax K20D | Excellent | Excellent | Excellent | Extremely High | Not Rated |
| Canon 40D | Excellent | Excellent | Excellent | Extremely High | Not Applicable |
| Nikon D300 | Not Applicable | Excellent | Excellent | Excellent | Extremely High |
| Sony A700 | Excellent | Excellent | Extremely High | Extremely High | Not Applicable |
Well, I think the last grading is redundant, after we have gone through the results of all the above key performance aspects measured. :-)
Anyway, after reading all these, there is yet only one question comes into my mind: Could and should Pentax do better? Could they?? Actually, I really just start to puzzle.. ( but I still know that *Pentax* MZ cameras' AF are better - at least faster at low light! :-( )
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Some More Dubai Images ;-)
Having seen a few of the Dubai images posted on the Net recently, which were all created with the new Pentax DSLR as told (only by the K20D for what I can see so far), I am not overally impressed with some of the sample pics owing to quite some good reasons, including particularly the gloomy appearance and/or the colour response of many of them, unfortunately.
Here are a few of the sample picture page links if you are interested but have not yet visited those "review" sites before:-
1. http://www.trustedreviews.com/digital-cameras/review/2008/01/25/Pentax-K20D-Hands-On-Preview/p5
2. http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Pentax-K20D-DSLR
Well, as for the gloomy thing, I have already accepted the fact that as long as Pentax won't upgrade their "long-lasting" 16-segment multi-segment "advanced" and "sophisticated" metering system, it will be with us forever! However, for the new taste, feel and look of the colour response, I believe it would be just the magical result of the special chemical reaction of the new Samsung APS-C CMOS sensor used in conjunction with the latest Pentax highest grade digital Star lenses! ;-)
Btw, here is another Japanese review page which I found the pictures taken are looking (much) better (not at Dubai, but at their Japan motherland), despite that those pictures were also taken with a "beta" K20D (maybe the K20D would perform much better in Japan home than in Dubai? ;-D):-
http://photo-cafe.jp/scoop/archives/2008/01/k20d_beta.html
Still, I DO like the colour response of those pictures made with the cheapo 18-55 kit lens more than the DA* ones.
Nevertheless, all the above Dubai pictures were posted just in recent days only after the Non Disclosure Agreement (NDA) and its embargo ended on January 24, although it is believed that the images were taken during the days around when a Pentax's "secret" press conference was held at Dubai earlier this month, and that all those cameras used were on-loan demo units from Pentax. So, in the end, no one will face any legal consequence as no one dared to break the NDAs they had signed.
Well, well, well.. Now the key point and main concern must be: Do you want to view, inspect, pixel peep or even measur(e)bate more Dubai images?? Below are some of mine!! Just look yourself (if you can guess which camera I used to take the photos, I shall be glad! K20D? K200D, or ? ?):-
(Click to Enlarge)
Now, when you read here, have you become excited and finished downloading at least a few of them and have an intention to start some kinds of "inspection" and "comparison", or even did it already? If yes, then my big Congrats to you! You have the potential, tendency and pre-requisite to become a pixel peeper or even a measurbator ;-D (Just kidding, stay calm - "no offense intended"!)
So, which camera then? Just tell you and please don't tell other people even after you've known it: It's a ...
MZ-S! "Just"!!
Anyway, with my old trustworthy MZ-S, I could not and still cannot see gloomy pictures most of the time, no matter what films I used, including picky slides which have rather narrow exposure latitudes. And, the camera has always been so responsive in AF, night and day, and the shutter lag is less noticeable (than *any* Pentax DSLRs I have used). Moreover, the focus points achieved were usually very accurate, no matter what lens was used and under different light sources and lighting conditions. The TTL flash is far more accurate, too! (It's not the P-TTL anyway - I used the built-in flash for that dark environment picture). Pictures grainy? Yes, but those were scanned from negative films with an entry level historical (dead) Minolta film scanner anyway..
Here are a few of the sample picture page links if you are interested but have not yet visited those "review" sites before:-
1. http://www.trustedreviews.com/digital-cameras/review/2008/01/25/Pentax-K20D-Hands-On-Preview/p5
2. http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Pentax-K20D-DSLR
Well, as for the gloomy thing, I have already accepted the fact that as long as Pentax won't upgrade their "long-lasting" 16-segment multi-segment "advanced" and "sophisticated" metering system, it will be with us forever! However, for the new taste, feel and look of the colour response, I believe it would be just the magical result of the special chemical reaction of the new Samsung APS-C CMOS sensor used in conjunction with the latest Pentax highest grade digital Star lenses! ;-)
Btw, here is another Japanese review page which I found the pictures taken are looking (much) better (not at Dubai, but at their Japan motherland), despite that those pictures were also taken with a "beta" K20D (maybe the K20D would perform much better in Japan home than in Dubai? ;-D):-
http://photo-cafe.jp/scoop/archives/2008/01/k20d_beta.html
Still, I DO like the colour response of those pictures made with the cheapo 18-55 kit lens more than the DA* ones.
Nevertheless, all the above Dubai pictures were posted just in recent days only after the Non Disclosure Agreement (NDA) and its embargo ended on January 24, although it is believed that the images were taken during the days around when a Pentax's "secret" press conference was held at Dubai earlier this month, and that all those cameras used were on-loan demo units from Pentax. So, in the end, no one will face any legal consequence as no one dared to break the NDAs they had signed.
Well, well, well.. Now the key point and main concern must be: Do you want to view, inspect, pixel peep or even measur(e)bate more Dubai images?? Below are some of mine!! Just look yourself (if you can guess which camera I used to take the photos, I shall be glad! K20D? K200D, or ? ?):-
(Click to Enlarge)
Now, when you read here, have you become excited and finished downloading at least a few of them and have an intention to start some kinds of "inspection" and "comparison", or even did it already? If yes, then my big Congrats to you! You have the potential, tendency and pre-requisite to become a pixel peeper or even a measurbator ;-D (Just kidding, stay calm - "no offense intended"!)
So, which camera then? Just tell you and please don't tell other people even after you've known it: It's a ...
MZ-S! "Just"!!
Anyway, with my old trustworthy MZ-S, I could not and still cannot see gloomy pictures most of the time, no matter what films I used, including picky slides which have rather narrow exposure latitudes. And, the camera has always been so responsive in AF, night and day, and the shutter lag is less noticeable (than *any* Pentax DSLRs I have used). Moreover, the focus points achieved were usually very accurate, no matter what lens was used and under different light sources and lighting conditions. The TTL flash is far more accurate, too! (It's not the P-TTL anyway - I used the built-in flash for that dark environment picture). Pictures grainy? Yes, but those were scanned from negative films with an entry level historical (dead) Minolta film scanner anyway..
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
K20D Specifications Leaked
Right before the widely rumoured embargo removal date of January 24, the Russian Pentax distributor has already published the "official" specifications of the K20D in their website, linked below:-
http://www.pentar.ru/catalog/product/qm-productId-eq-1255315861415769-am-page-eq-tech.htm
So, despite all the hypes, unsubstantiated imaginations or even hoaxes which have been floating around on the net in recent one to two months, the K20D is just essentially a K10D with a new Samsung (14.6M) sensor with LiveView capability, which is indeed rather disappointed afterall. Unless the specs still don't tell us the "secret weapons" (if any), we get no new stuff and enhancement at all in this "new" body, say:-
1. AF system is the same, i.e., SAFOX VIII, which is outdated and inferior in speed, low light sensitivity, accuracy and continuous tracking performance etc.;
2. Multi-segment metering is yet the dinosaur age old film *ist SLR type and design, which is again the most unsophisticated, low IQ and inaccurate metering in the DSLR field, amongst all other DSLR systems;
3. RAW is still 12-bit;
4. Continuous shooting rate and buffer size is the same, i.e., 3 frames per second and up to 9 RAW files maximum in a stream. The image size is now increased, though;
5. LCD monitor is of low resolution at 230k pixels (counting all R, G and B ones?) and of a small size less than 3" (just 2.7" - not much bigger than the 2.5" mon which the Pentax *ist DL had a few years ago, which was the biggest at its time). I just wish to ask: how difficult to include an at least 3" LCD monitor? Well, unless this LCD is twistable and rotatable, it just doesn't make any sense at all.
So, does the almost standard DSLR feature of LiveView but the ever highest pixel count packed in a rather small APS-C sensor can make a miracle to save Pentax and Samsung or even help them to get more market share? Probably Nope if you ask me! Frankly, who cares about the extra pixel count if all other more important and most basic features plus camera performance aspects are falling behind? (I have been hoping Pentax could improve but I'm afraid many of us will be disappointed again! Very likely..)
BTW, all the above are indeed under expectation since the feature list of the Samsung GX-20 was leaked a few days ago. I just wish to repeat that unless there are still some "secret weapons" which have not been mentioned yet (possibly no more major stuff anyway - as they should be there in the specs if any), the K20D is really a huge disappointment to many of us. Anyway, we should know within 24 hours if the embargo removal date is true, and if an announcement will be made first in Japan or in the Pacific region.
Lastly, for existing newer Pentax DSLR users, who will actually be much willing to invest in such an "upgrade" if the specs are true and for such a "new" body, especially for the current K body owners? In the Pentax land, WHEN shall we be able to see and get a true upper-market DSLR with more updated and advanced features and most importantly, better camera reliability and performance which the DSLR market leaders, namely Canon and Nikon, have?? Why CAN'T Pentax upkeep their DSLRs with a more updated design particularly for the designs of AE and AF systems used in their DSLRs??? Putting aside their limited capabilities and resources in R&D, a trivial reason comes to my mind immediately, as usual and again, is: "They simply don't listen"!
With the lack of true determination which I could never see with Pentax (and now Hoya), again the K20D yet again just look like another primitive entry level DSLR model in the market. Sad.
Update (January 24): As we all know, Pentax have made the official announcement for the K20D and the K200D today. Despite that there have been a lot of false information, imaginations, untrue rumours or even hoaxes out there during the months about the cameras, I have been able to successfully filter out all these junks and reported only the correct information about the two new bodies, here. :-)
But then it should be noted that Canon have also announced the EOS 450D/XSi today, which just have all the new features which I wished (and imagined) to see with the K20D or the K200D (but neither both have most of these newly offered updated features and enhancements of the 450D):-
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012403canoneos450d.asp
So, how are the K20D and the K200D compared to the cheaply priced "entry level" Canon 450D actually? Here are some of the listed new features of the 450D (and how the more expensive K20D and similar priced K200D compares):-
Now, the last hope relies on the final Image Quality of the cameras, let's wait and see until the true test reports can see the light and we can see and compare more samples from all the new DSLRs (brand regardless). Yet very fortunately, the initial sample of the K20D shows to be quite good in terms of noise levels and the amount of retained image details, IMO, even at ISO 3200, according to the PopPhoto's initial trial. So, just go there to look yourself! But do also note from the test that the White Balance of the K20D has been found to be not so faithful and accurate as the PopPhoto testers needed to "warm up the pics" for a number of the limited test samples already. Anyway, time will tell and the true end-users will report and tell (not just the brand fanboys!). I shall keep on reporting those user reports later on when they appear.
http://www.pentar.ru/catalog/product/qm-productId-eq-1255315861415769-am-page-eq-tech.htm
So, despite all the hypes, unsubstantiated imaginations or even hoaxes which have been floating around on the net in recent one to two months, the K20D is just essentially a K10D with a new Samsung (14.6M) sensor with LiveView capability, which is indeed rather disappointed afterall. Unless the specs still don't tell us the "secret weapons" (if any), we get no new stuff and enhancement at all in this "new" body, say:-
1. AF system is the same, i.e., SAFOX VIII, which is outdated and inferior in speed, low light sensitivity, accuracy and continuous tracking performance etc.;
2. Multi-segment metering is yet the dinosaur age old film *ist SLR type and design, which is again the most unsophisticated, low IQ and inaccurate metering in the DSLR field, amongst all other DSLR systems;
3. RAW is still 12-bit;
4. Continuous shooting rate and buffer size is the same, i.e., 3 frames per second and up to 9 RAW files maximum in a stream. The image size is now increased, though;
5. LCD monitor is of low resolution at 230k pixels (counting all R, G and B ones?) and of a small size less than 3" (just 2.7" - not much bigger than the 2.5" mon which the Pentax *ist DL had a few years ago, which was the biggest at its time). I just wish to ask: how difficult to include an at least 3" LCD monitor? Well, unless this LCD is twistable and rotatable, it just doesn't make any sense at all.
So, does the almost standard DSLR feature of LiveView but the ever highest pixel count packed in a rather small APS-C sensor can make a miracle to save Pentax and Samsung or even help them to get more market share? Probably Nope if you ask me! Frankly, who cares about the extra pixel count if all other more important and most basic features plus camera performance aspects are falling behind? (I have been hoping Pentax could improve but I'm afraid many of us will be disappointed again! Very likely..)
BTW, all the above are indeed under expectation since the feature list of the Samsung GX-20 was leaked a few days ago. I just wish to repeat that unless there are still some "secret weapons" which have not been mentioned yet (possibly no more major stuff anyway - as they should be there in the specs if any), the K20D is really a huge disappointment to many of us. Anyway, we should know within 24 hours if the embargo removal date is true, and if an announcement will be made first in Japan or in the Pacific region.
Lastly, for existing newer Pentax DSLR users, who will actually be much willing to invest in such an "upgrade" if the specs are true and for such a "new" body, especially for the current K body owners? In the Pentax land, WHEN shall we be able to see and get a true upper-market DSLR with more updated and advanced features and most importantly, better camera reliability and performance which the DSLR market leaders, namely Canon and Nikon, have?? Why CAN'T Pentax upkeep their DSLRs with a more updated design particularly for the designs of AE and AF systems used in their DSLRs??? Putting aside their limited capabilities and resources in R&D, a trivial reason comes to my mind immediately, as usual and again, is: "They simply don't listen"!
With the lack of true determination which I could never see with Pentax (and now Hoya), again the K20D yet again just look like another primitive entry level DSLR model in the market. Sad.
Update (January 24): As we all know, Pentax have made the official announcement for the K20D and the K200D today. Despite that there have been a lot of false information, imaginations, untrue rumours or even hoaxes out there during the months about the cameras, I have been able to successfully filter out all these junks and reported only the correct information about the two new bodies, here. :-)
But then it should be noted that Canon have also announced the EOS 450D/XSi today, which just have all the new features which I wished (and imagined) to see with the K20D or the K200D (but neither both have most of these newly offered updated features and enhancements of the 450D):-
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012403canoneos450d.asp
So, how are the K20D and the K200D compared to the cheaply priced "entry level" Canon 450D actually? Here are some of the listed new features of the 450D (and how the more expensive K20D and similar priced K200D compares):-
The EOS 450D features:
- 12.2 Megapixel CMOS sensor (K200D has less pixels whilst the K20D has more)
- Canon’s EOS Integrated Cleaning System (It is an ultrasonic one which has been proven to be more effective whilst the Pentax or the Sony's "shaking off the dust by the sensor" itself is just a joke! The new Pentax software alert function is another big joke. How are the users be able to do in the *field* when the dust particles are detected??)
- 3.5 frames per second (faster than both K20D and the K200D as specified)
- 3.0” LCD with LiveView shooting (larger than both K20D and the K200D)
- "Quick AF" (flip the mirror up, thus quit LiveView temporarily, and do the AF) and "Live AF" (CMOS image contrast detection AF) in the LiveView mode (only the former method is available for the K20D plus it is yet problematic to use)
- 9-point wide-area AF system with f/2.8 cross-type centre point (Pentax have never produced any DSLR which is optimised for faster lenses for better focusing accuracy! Sad.)
- Picture Style image processing parameters (Yes, now that both K20D and K200D have that, but it's just a setting profile set.)
- DIGIC III image processor (Well, here is the Name of "PRIME")
- 14-bit per colour RAW (Both K20D and K200D stay at the 12-bit level)
- Digital Photo Professional RAW processing software (Now, we have the Photo Lab 3.5)
- Compact and Lightweight body (the K20D is heavy and bulky obviously but the K200D is still considerably larger and heavier than the 450D)
- Fully compatible with all Canon EF and EF-S lenses and EX-series Speedlites (No true compatibility with traditional K-mount lenses nor there are more choices to choose P-TTL compatible flashes which are rare)
Now, the last hope relies on the final Image Quality of the cameras, let's wait and see until the true test reports can see the light and we can see and compare more samples from all the new DSLRs (brand regardless). Yet very fortunately, the initial sample of the K20D shows to be quite good in terms of noise levels and the amount of retained image details, IMO, even at ISO 3200, according to the PopPhoto's initial trial. So, just go there to look yourself! But do also note from the test that the White Balance of the K20D has been found to be not so faithful and accurate as the PopPhoto testers needed to "warm up the pics" for a number of the limited test samples already. Anyway, time will tell and the true end-users will report and tell (not just the brand fanboys!). I shall keep on reporting those user reports later on when they appear.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Samsung GX-20 Information Leaked
Yesterday, the GX-20 has been surfaced in the Internet with its information leaked at two Norwegian websites where brief specifications of the new body with a photo of it have been published:-
http://www.aronsen.no/default.asp?ArtID=428
http://www.akam.no/artikler/samsung_gx-20/47186
However, at the time when I am writing this blog article, all the above once published GX-20 information have already been removed, at both sites. Still, you can have a look on the appearance of the GX-20 at the PentaxLife Blog as follows:-
http://pentaxlife.com/samsung-gx20-unveiled
Well, since these have been removed so fast, this makes me believe more that these are really true information which have been leaked.
So, what are new then?
- 14.6MP CMOS Sensor (APS-C? Very likely, I bet);
- ISO Sensitivity up to 3200;
- Double Dust Removal System (Useless sensor shaking and What New Measure? By Software?);
- 2.7" LCD Monitor (No resolution is mentioned, so most likely to be typical low resolution one, probably something around 210,000 to 230,000 in QVGA quality);
- LiveView Function.
As for old features, it keeps the weather sealing and the SR (Shake Reduction) system (and of course).
So, this body is actually not much stronger than the GX-10 / K10D which it replaces by judging from the above features listed. In contrast, the really high (highest ever actually) pixel count, which is nearly 50% more than the K10D, packed in a small APS-C (very possibly) sized sensor is something that really worrisome for higher ISO noise performance. Nonetheless, since the highest ISO speed which is now available is ISO 3200, it is still possible that the noise control of the GX-20 / K20D has been vastly improved, or it is just that the user will yet get either very noisy pictures there or with cleaner pictures at the expense of losing image details after noise reduction is applied. Otherwise, if the latter cases won't happen, then Pentax/Samsung have created a miracle which is ground breaking when they can overcome the technology barrier or even breaking the law of Physics for being the first one who could do that! Just imagine!
As for the 2.7" LCD, my wishful thinking is that it is a swivel and twistable one, otherwise, with the size of the GX-10 / K10D (assuming that the GX-20 / K20D is similar in size), there should be sufficient room at the camera back to accommodate a 3" LCD which can be a VGA resolution one then, which is much better indeed. Despite that now on the market all VGA resolution LCD monitors of DSLRs are of 3", I still imagine (again) this 2.7" LCD is a VGA one, although it is unlikely. :-)
http://www.aronsen.no/default.asp?ArtID=428
http://www.akam.no/artikler/samsung_gx-20/47186
However, at the time when I am writing this blog article, all the above once published GX-20 information have already been removed, at both sites. Still, you can have a look on the appearance of the GX-20 at the PentaxLife Blog as follows:-
http://pentaxlife.com/samsung-gx20-unveiled
Well, since these have been removed so fast, this makes me believe more that these are really true information which have been leaked.
So, what are new then?
- 14.6MP CMOS Sensor (APS-C? Very likely, I bet);
- ISO Sensitivity up to 3200;
- Double Dust Removal System (Useless sensor shaking and What New Measure? By Software?);
- 2.7" LCD Monitor (No resolution is mentioned, so most likely to be typical low resolution one, probably something around 210,000 to 230,000 in QVGA quality);
- LiveView Function.
As for old features, it keeps the weather sealing and the SR (Shake Reduction) system (and of course).
So, this body is actually not much stronger than the GX-10 / K10D which it replaces by judging from the above features listed. In contrast, the really high (highest ever actually) pixel count, which is nearly 50% more than the K10D, packed in a small APS-C (very possibly) sized sensor is something that really worrisome for higher ISO noise performance. Nonetheless, since the highest ISO speed which is now available is ISO 3200, it is still possible that the noise control of the GX-20 / K20D has been vastly improved, or it is just that the user will yet get either very noisy pictures there or with cleaner pictures at the expense of losing image details after noise reduction is applied. Otherwise, if the latter cases won't happen, then Pentax/Samsung have created a miracle which is ground breaking when they can overcome the technology barrier or even breaking the law of Physics for being the first one who could do that! Just imagine!
As for the 2.7" LCD, my wishful thinking is that it is a swivel and twistable one, otherwise, with the size of the GX-10 / K10D (assuming that the GX-20 / K20D is similar in size), there should be sufficient room at the camera back to accommodate a 3" LCD which can be a VGA resolution one then, which is much better indeed. Despite that now on the market all VGA resolution LCD monitors of DSLRs are of 3", I still imagine (again) this 2.7" LCD is a VGA one, although it is unlikely. :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)