Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/02/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Digital low-light (Just for the guys, Tina and Karen skip this one :) ) (Both EI 6400) http://folk.uio.no/danielr/havstrofen2004/pages/DSC_3166.htm http://folk.uio.no/danielr/midnattscupen/pages/DSC_2331.htm But you can do it with film too (you just don't get many keepers): (Fuji Press 1600) http://folk.uio.no/danielr/Spirit-uppvisning/pages/v11-0001.htm Digital EI 1600 (window lighting) http://www.dlridings.com/paw2003/33.html Daniel On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, sam wrote: > Are you suggesting that had he used the lastest Canon digital it would > have smoked the 4x5? I believe the point he was making was that for a > few hundred dollars one could get unsurpassed image quality. This whole > digital thing has been framed in relation to 35mm film cameras. Why? If > the issue is image quality why would one not go medium format? Or large > format? The issue is not about image quality and never was. The issure > is about toys. > > Sam S > > > Eric Welch wrote: > > > Well, duh. Could it be that the latter site is matching a 4x5 camera > > against an ancient (by digital standards) Nikon D100 that has CCD (and > > thus more noise at high speeds) than the CMOS chips Canons have? > > > > On the other site, I didn't see any mention of a digital vs film debate. > > > > Eric > > Carlsbad, CA > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html