Used Sigma SD-9 body

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Mike Tuthill, Feb 1, 2004.

  1. George Preddy, Feb 7, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Mike Tuthill

    Azzz1588 Guest

    e=UTF-8&selm=bvi2u3%24hbn%241%40news1.kornet.net&rnum=1



    Funny, Paul dosnt claim anything abnout Sigma cameras on his
    website at all And he sure as hell didnt use them for his books !!!!!!!!!!!

    So whats your point ???























    "Only a Gentleman can insult me, and a true Gentleman never will..."
     
    Azzz1588, Feb 7, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Mike Tuthill

    Lionel Guest

    Then you won't have any trouble posting a link to one of them, will you?

    Of course you can't post such a link, because you're lying. You've never
    posted a link to one, because there aren't any. The closest you've
    gotten was when you posted a link to an ISO 100 tripod shot in a
    warehouse (lit by about a dozen bare lightbulbs) that had been
    post-processed with NeatImage!

    Poor little 'George'. You bought a toy camera, you don't know how to
    take a decent photo, so you have to link to other peoples' shots, & all
    but about 2 other equally deluded nutcases think you're a pathetic fool.
    Man, it must really suck to be you.
     
    Lionel, Feb 9, 2004
  4. George Preddy, Feb 9, 2004
  5. Mike Tuthill

    Bill M Guest

    He asked for high ISO SD9 shots, not high ISO SD10 shots...still
    having that reading comprehension problem, eh?
     
    Bill M, Feb 9, 2004
  6. IOWs, that shot is so much better than Canon's severely noisey ISO 800
    (digital looking noise too) that you don't want to deal with it. The SD10
    and SD9 are about a stop apart. The 9 sometimes requires a stop push to
    make up the difference. Non-RAW shooters won't be able to understand how
    that works, so it's not possible to discuss here.
     
    George Preddy, Feb 9, 2004
  7. Mike Tuthill

    Lionel Guest

    I asked you to post a *night* shot at high ISO, George, remember?

    I must admit that I've got to admire the way you avoid the SD9 'plastic
    scenery' problem by posting a shot of a plastic subject.
     
    Lionel, Feb 9, 2004
  8. Mike Tuthill

    Bill M Guest

    IOW...post what he asked for, a high ISO SD9 shot ...the differences
    between the SD9 & SD10 make a difference.
     
    Bill M, Feb 9, 2004
  9. Mike Tuthill

    Lionel Guest

    You mean 'noise' like this?:
    <http://lo.ve.ly/gallery/RoyalMelbourneZoo20040116/CRW_5836_std?full=1>
    Oh yeah, there's *lots* of noise in that shot...

    (BTW, those spots on the middle, lefthand side are dust on the sensor.
    I'd didn't discover that the sensor needed claening until I got home.)
    I shoot *all* my photos in RAW mode, moron. When are you going to
    produce an SD9 night shot at high ISO, fraud? Or are you just going to
    fake up some more SD10 & NeatImage-processed shots like you did the last
    few times I called you on your bullshit 'low noise SD9' claims?
     
    Lionel, Feb 9, 2004
  10. Mike Tuthill

    Lionel Guest

    He won't do it because he can't. So far he's faked up images instead.
    The first was a 100 ISO SD9 shot taken on a tripod in a warehouse (by
    someone else, of course) that had been post-processed with the NeatImage
    noise reduction program, the other was the daylight shot from an SD10
    that you've already seen. (Which conveniently consists of a subject made
    of plastic, which conceals the Foveon+Sigma tendancy to make
    *everything* look like it's made of plastic.)
     
    Lionel, Feb 9, 2004
  11. George Preddy, Feb 9, 2004
  12. If you read messages here you should filter out anything that contains both
    the words "Sigma" and "pixel". All those messages contain either lies or
    unnecessary discussions.

    -Michael
     
    Michael Schnell, Feb 9, 2004
  13. No it wasn't, both versions were and still are posted. That image it blows
    a 10D off the face of the earth as many havve already said. But the 10D is
    probably the worst low light DSLR you can buy. It can't take a sharp ISO
    100 image, let alone 200+.
     
    George Preddy, Feb 9, 2004
  14. George Preddy, Feb 9, 2004
  15. Nice characterization of your post.
     
    George Preddy, Feb 9, 2004
  16. SNIP
    The title is SD-9 ISO 800. So that was a lie?
    This is an ISO 100 shot, postprocessing "pushed" two stops.
    This is an ISO 100 shot, postprocessing pushed 2.5 stops.
    The same image as your first link, the ISO 320 one, or was that
    postprocessing too? How about Neat Image, since you call everything
    unprocessed.
    Coming from you, that's credible....

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, Feb 9, 2004
  17. Mike Tuthill

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Yuck! The sky is mottled blue and purple. The brown of the
    support color is mottled with yellow, and the underside of
    the "Homespun Applesauce" is an interesting texture made of green
    and purple. And then there's the tan supports with the purple
    fringing on the highlights.

    Okay for a 4x6 print, but ...
     
    Ray Fischer, Feb 10, 2004
  18. Why does the sky look all pixelated?



    --
    mhm 31x9
    Smeeter #28, 29, or 30
    WSD #30
    Skep-ti-cult ID# 365-12149-907
    Alcatroll Labs Inc. (Division of Incendiary Devices)
    StArSHiNe_MoOnbEAm aT HoTMaIL DoT cOM
    http://www.geocities.com/tobydog9

    "Technology is getting better and that's fine but most of the time,
    all you need is a stick of gum, a pocketknife, and a smile."
    -- Robert Redford "Spy Game"

    "You can run but you'll just die tired and buttered."
    -- Ryannosaurus
     
    Starshine Moonbeam, Feb 11, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.