Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]B. D. offered: >>Subject: Re: Noisy digital shadows - <<<<< > I came to the conclusion long ago > - and this brings us back to the beginning of this refreshingly calm and > informative discussion ;-) - that one of the tradeoffs in the film/digital > equation, and one of the reasons that I've gone with digital, is that > digital tends to capture more information in low light than does film. I > won't be surprised if one of our computer technical gurus tells me I'm > wrong, but I don't think I am.<<<<< Hi B. D., One of several things for me with digital is what it "see's" and loads to card compared to film. If I'm in awe of digital it's when I can go about shooting hand held photographs at night and come back with light where I felt there wasn't any with my naked eye ball. Printable and beautiful images time after time. Like you I expect to be told 3200 slide film is just as sensitive as 3200 on a 20D. Fair enough if "electronically." But visibly? Horse pucks, I'll take 3200 digital any day over any 3200 film for deep sensitivity to light. If that's the way to put it. Quite frankly it's like one of those things of not needing to know how a 747 stays in the air at 500 MPH, it's appreciating it does. Who cares why or how! So it's the same as the digital camera capable of recording beautiful images at 3200. How? hell who cares, it just does it! But it sure gathers light where I'd swear at times you can't see it with the naked eye. :-) ted Ted Grant Photography Limited 1817 Feltham Road Victoria BC V8N 2A4 250-477-2156