What I mean is this. My k-x has excellent low noise at high Iso but I seem to be getting lower shutter speeds/wider apertures than I would expect for given lighting. This may be a subjective mis-conception because I have not done a controlled test yet. Take this shot by a canon user at 500 Iso, f7.1 and 1/2500 sec. Now it was shot in the UK in January and at best in bright sunshine in a wood. I'm sure at 300mm in those conditions I'd be nearer 1/250 sec, f5.6 for that Iso (Guess obviously, but I don't get that if I point the camera at the sky!)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/danieltrim/4244183828/in/photostream/

So, are we comparing like with like between cameras in the same conditions in terms of exposure (and noise, by inference)?
Dave

Thanks for the replies. It is pretty much as I thought and will just have to experiment with my new K-x to find out what is truly the max Iso vs noise level I am prepared to accept in the real world. I tend to shoot AV on max aperture and have previously tried to not go above Iso 400 but so far it looks like I might get away with iso 1600 which might get me the shutter speed on a cloudy day. Just have to see how good the Pentax 55-300mm is compared to my previous Tamron 70-300 on the k-m.
This was Iso1200, f5.6, 1/180th , hand held.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dcweather/4219784254/
Dave

In this set of conditions what is likely to give best IQ especially sharpness. Pentax k-x, 55-300mm DAL ED lens at max zoom. I want to take a pic of a bird so I need, say 1/350th of sec shutter speed. Let's say for the given light I could either shoot at f5.6 (widest available) and ISO 400 or f8 and ISO 800. etc Which is likely to give best results. Or, put another way, in general is it best to get off the widest aperture in max telephoto zoom even if it means raising ISO by one stop?

I think it's reasonable to take some precautions against fraud but it is just long-winded. I've always used BACS in UK as do most people and had to google to find where my IBAN code was, but that's fair enough if it's a standard European system. The receipt thing worries me as it is my proof of purchase (do they send it back?) so I am scanning it first and will also send recorded.Cheers, Dave

Apologies if this should be elsewhere. Is it me or does anyone else think this scheme is made as complicated as possible to put people off!
1. You have to send original receipt not copy which could get lost in the post especially this time of year.
2. Payment method by obscure IBAN number which lots of people won't have to hand
3. Cut bar codes off box - even though entering it on the form defaults to your purchase.
4. Up to 12 weeks for payment.
...... and so on.

Thanks for the information. Being new I hadn't realised it was a a bit of a can of worms! Most interesting all the same.
Dave

If someone could explain the theory of this I would be grateful. After all if I have very steady hands and shooting at a high shutter speed how does the camera know it's not on a tripod and SR would be on as default. A supplementary but related camera shake question - I don't think my K-m has a mirror up mode to reduce by vibration but I gather this occurs in timer mode (remote timer as well?)
Dave

What is odd is that the only colour that is used that isn't a gimmick is camouflage and they don't do one in that. You see nature photographers doing all sorts of nasty things to their beloved Nikons and Canons to camouflage them. Olive green is the closest I guess. Missed a trick there, Pentax.
Dave

I would have thought the choice would be quite straightforward really. The k20D is considered more semi-pro and you know pretty much what you will get. The k-x will be slightly cheaper to buy, smaller, lighter, have video and better higk ISO performance. If they are important factors then get the K-X if not the established K20D is the one.
Dave