It's definately a routing issue. I just switched to using my mobile phone as a modem with my laptop & the site was back to normal.

It seems to be just this website & I'm on sky's isp too. Odd.

You know if this forum was run by Nikon it'd lock on much quicker
I'll get my coat !

Well at the moment it sure does look like it's been raining cats & dogs !

I had the same thing with the camera accessories section. It's taking the #~%$ big time. They insist you have to use paypal & cannot charge postage, by the time you pay ebay & paypal fees & then post your item you'll end up at a loss. I was thinking of putting a clause in my description that "free delivery" only applied to within 200 yards of my home.

I think you'll find that's an ebay ruling & as ebay own paypal they want to ensure people aren't discouraged from using it.
They've already fleeced you but then want to draw blood by charging you a little more.

Absolutely, those who aren't confident enough to make up their own mind can easily be swayed.

An impartial & controlled comparison can help a little I think as you could just as easily be swayed by comparing different photographers "real life" photos & come to the wrong conclusion as it's the photographers skill rather than the equipment that will shine through.


Back to topic & noise... I'm one of those who has sold up & is about to change manufacturers, for a number of factors, one of which is noise. I personally do not like the appearance of digital chroma noise & also do not like the fact that when trying to reduce its effect you end up reducing detail also. Plus I also PP quite hard & this tends to worsen the appearance of any inherent noise.
It's a pitfall of the megapixel race. I rarely print above A4 so 6 megapixel would be quite adequate for that application & a modern aps-c sized cmos sensor of that ilk would result in much cleaner images. Unfortunately these do not come in a decent body so I'm forced to look at a body with twice the sensor size to give me the same clean files.

Now I only took up photography last November & chose Pentax for the value for money it provided at the time - I didn't know whether I'd really enjoy it as much as I found I have & didn't know if I'd produce any pleasing (at least to me) photographs. Now that I've found I'm capable of producing images I like & that I enjoy the pastime I'm happy to sink more cash into it. With the value advantage of Pentax all but lost & the K-7 not adding a great deal to the party (for my needs) I've come to the point where I no longer wish to invest money in the K system.

I don't regret choosing Pentax at all, the IQ of the K20d is awesome & I have nowhere near reached it's limits, I am after all a newcomer & constantly learning. If I wanted to take static shots in good light then I can think of no better alternative. But an area I wan't to explore is lower light photography & handheld at that which means upping the iso & introducing more noise (which remember I personally do not appreciate even knowing it is a necessary evil)

I could be making an expensive switch for no benefit in the end which would be a mistake (in monetary terms) I do not have the experience yet to know how I will fair. But when I've spent some time learning the new body & trying the type of photography I aspire to I'll know for sure. Feet first is the best way to learn I feel & I'll certainly feed back my findings good or bad.

Never say never, when usually applies.

Personally I haven't looked at the K-7 vs K20d comparisons at all, whether they be in peoples kitchens, of brick walls or resolution charts. It would be difficult to envisage IQ being vastly different due to the lack of advancement on that side of things. For those that shoot jpeg however noise control could have been altered significantly through camera firmware so I'm sure a comparison could be of interest to those.

I have seen home-grown comparisons which I have appreciated in the past, I'm not going to bother trying to find one now to humour you in picking up technicalities, but if done well with plenty of constants involved they can actually be useful. Maybe you can't see the point & that's your perogative entirely which I respect. I was just struck by the negativity escalating from a innocuous opening post.

I'm going to have a Cider & listen to some heavy metal to soothe my grumpy mood now.

Come on Bob,
Is it so hard to see at who George is referring to? He is talking about Depressingreview (and the pixel peeping inhabitants) and idiots like Rice High. No one at this forum is being slagged.

And as a side note, it is advisable to quote a complete text and not just a small part.

Because this:
sound rather very different compared to this:
You can ofcourse, as a viable alternative always read back every post to make sure you place every remark in the right context.
To keep matters in perspective, right?

Just my two cnts,

Martin.[/quote]I simply cut down the quote to simplify the thread as posts like this one with quote marks around all and sundry just get confusing. I wont bother pointing out the obvious & more subtle but somewhat sideways personal digs being issued out, but for the record I did write "indescriminately".

I'm an easy going bloke & usually don't lower myself to forum arguments as you normally get dragged down to a level & beaten with experience, but I'm in a grumpy mood & just don't fancy swallowing opinion as ipso facto this evening. It's about time I got into a soon-to-be-moderated-under-the-rug type thread anyway. Surely I can make noise in a thread about noise. Although we all know this results in feedback & thanks for yours Martin

Reading back to ascertain context isn't appealing either I never was any good at revision.

Hah ! Of course indescriminately slagging people off on a public forum is much better use of time than performing a few home-grown comparisons. Strangely, some people may actually appreciate the effort of the latter.
Shouldn't you be out "shooting" or is a 400mm & 2x TC still not enough reach to take a usable photo from such a high horse ?

I can't say I've used this plugin a great deal, but I don't think it's meant to be a "photography" plugin but rather for graphic design usage. Photography & graphic design have gone hand in hand for years, there's more to be explored from photography than photographs.