The importance of high ISO performance

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by acl, Aug 24, 2007.

  1. acl

    acl Guest

    >From here:
    http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1187901361.html
    A quote:
    "...the difference between its [1D mkiii's] images and those from the
    D3 was anything but subtle."

    I'm waiting to see the reaction of those who have been going on about
    the crushing advantage of Canon's cameras (since this aspect of image
    quality is apparently what determines a camera's worth...).

    Actually I don't believe there can be that much difference, if any.
    They were probably shown well-processed prints (and were in the mood
    anyway...). We'll see, I guess. Interesting times for geeks/
    photographers.
     
    acl, Aug 24, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. acl

    acl Guest

    On Aug 24, 3:51 am, acl <> wrote:
    > >From here:

    >
    > http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1187901361.html
    > A quote:
    > "...the difference between its [1D mkiii's] images and those from the
    > D3 was anything but subtle."


    ....I probably should have pointed out that it's referring to ISO 3200
    and 6400 prints.
     
    acl, Aug 24, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. acl

    Dave Cohen Guest

    acl wrote:
    > On Aug 24, 3:51 am, acl <> wrote:
    >> >From here:

    >>
    >> http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1187901361.html
    >> A quote:
    >> "...the difference between its [1D mkiii's] images and those from the
    >> D3 was anything but subtle."

    >
    > ...I probably should have pointed out that it's referring to ISO 3200
    > and 6400 prints.
    >


    Thanks, I'll bear that in mind when I get a sudden urge for iso 6400
    prints and have a few thousand bucks to spare.
    Dave Cohen
     
    Dave Cohen, Aug 25, 2007
    #3
  4. acl

    acl Guest

    On Aug 25, 3:15 am, Dave Cohen <> wrote:
    > acl wrote:
    > > On Aug 24, 3:51 am, acl <> wrote:
    > >> >From here:

    >
    > >>http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1187901361.html
    > >> A quote:
    > >> "...the difference between its [1D mkiii's] images and those from the
    > >> D3 was anything but subtle."

    >
    > > ...I probably should have pointed out that it's referring to ISO 3200
    > > and 6400 prints.

    >
    > Thanks, I'll bear that in mind when I get a sudden urge for iso 6400
    > prints and have a few thousand bucks to spare.
    > Dave Cohen


    Err... OK, here's what the point was: whenever there was a
    "discussion" here and someone asked whether to get the Nikon D* or the
    Canon *D, there usually were a few people who basically dismissed
    everything except high ISO performance (since Canons and large sensors
    in general had an overwhelming/crushing advantage, according to them).
    This, even if the person asking asked about the lowest models (since
    they may wish to upgrade, I believe is the logic).

    So I'm curious to see what the new overwhelming advantage will be now
    for their chosen brand. Possibly that the D300 apparently slows down
    when shooting at 14 bit.
     
    acl, Aug 25, 2007
    #4
  5. acl

    frederick Guest

    acl wrote:
    > On Aug 25, 3:15 am, Dave Cohen <> wrote:
    >> acl wrote:
    >>> On Aug 24, 3:51 am, acl <> wrote:
    >>>> >From here:
    >>>> http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1187901361.html
    >>>> A quote:
    >>>> "...the difference between its [1D mkiii's] images and those from the
    >>>> D3 was anything but subtle."
    >>> ...I probably should have pointed out that it's referring to ISO 3200
    >>> and 6400 prints.

    >> Thanks, I'll bear that in mind when I get a sudden urge for iso 6400
    >> prints and have a few thousand bucks to spare.
    >> Dave Cohen

    >
    > Err... OK, here's what the point was: whenever there was a
    > "discussion" here and someone asked whether to get the Nikon D* or the
    > Canon *D, there usually were a few people who basically dismissed
    > everything except high ISO performance (since Canons and large sensors
    > in general had an overwhelming/crushing advantage, according to them).
    > This, even if the person asking asked about the lowest models (since
    > they may wish to upgrade, I believe is the logic).
    >
    > So I'm curious to see what the new overwhelming advantage will be now
    > for their chosen brand. Possibly that the D300 apparently slows down
    > when shooting at 14 bit.
    >


    Probable Nikon whines:

    No fast, new design, ultrasonic motor, normal / wide / short
    telephoto fixed focal length lenses.
    New super-telephoto lens prices.
    Battery life from single EN EL3 when focusing with live view
    on and a VR lens fitted, but no grip.
    No easy way to fit filter on 14-24.
    No iso100 except Lo 1 mode.
    Have to buy Capture NX to use auto lateral CA correction if
    shooting raw.
    There will be more...
     
    frederick, Aug 25, 2007
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    442
  2. Silverstrand

    Abstraction Layers And Their Importance

    Silverstrand, Jan 31, 2006, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    702
    Silverstrand
    Jan 31, 2006
  3. amruta

    importance of CCNA exam

    amruta, Feb 24, 2006, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,522
    amruta
    Feb 24, 2006
  4. chicagofan

    Importance of *missing* Optical Out ?

    chicagofan, Feb 27, 2005, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    697
    Gary A. Edelstein
    Mar 3, 2005
  5. Siddhartha Jain

    Nikon D2X and Canon 5D high ISO performance

    Siddhartha Jain, Nov 4, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    108
    Views:
    2,305
    =?iso-8859-1?B?SmFuIEL2aG1l?=
    Nov 10, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page