«

Eric Gill <> wrote in
news:Xns954B83ACA57B7ericvgillyahoocom@24.93.44.11 9:

<snip>
> The Canon Japan site had shot info - all are at 100 ISO, using the
> 50mm f/1.4 prime. Two are in studio. The tower shot is certainly
> low light, but towers usually don't move very quickly and they
> almost certainly used a tripod.
<snip>

I didn’t double check but the posted Portrait was ISO 200 I believe.

--
Scott

In article <Xns954BAACC8B8F2shadowfaax@216.196.97.136>,
Shadowfax <> wrote:

> Eric Gill <> wrote in
> news:Xns954B83ACA57B7ericvgillyahoocom@24.93.44.11 9:
>
> <snip>
> > The Canon Japan site had shot info - all are at 100 ISO, using the
> > 50mm f/1.4 prime. Two are in studio. The tower shot is certainly
> > low light, but towers usually don't move very quickly and they
> > almost certainly used a tripod.
> <snip>
>
> I didn’t double check but the posted Portrait was ISO 200 I believe.

I am considering a film scanner. Is there any reason to choose on the
basis of inclusion of "Digital ICE" with the Nikon vs the Minolta? On
other bases, the Minolta seems to be the better buy.

--
It is an aspect of maturity to deal rationally with inconsistencies

"clw" <> wrote in message news:clw->
Shadowfax <> wrote:
> > Eric Gill <> wrote in
> > <snip>
> > > The Canon Japan site had shot info - all are at 100 ISO, using the
> > > 50mm f/1.4 prime. Two are in studio. The tower shot is certainly
> > > low light, but towers usually don't move very quickly and they
> > > almost certainly used a tripod.
> > <snip>
> >
> > I didn't double check but the posted Portrait was ISO 200 I believe.
>
> I am considering a film scanner. Is there any reason to choose on the
> basis of inclusion of "Digital ICE" with the Nikon vs the Minolta? On
> other bases, the Minolta seems to be the better buy.

Don't even think about buying a film scanner that doesn't have ICE.

FWIW, both Minolta and Nikon make a large number of models. And some Minolta
models include ICE.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan