Think P&S's only suck at high ISO?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Bowser on 25 Sep 2009 15:47 "John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message news:8ganb5d4r07ntcfbrkp17ld85enosevc5f(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 23 Sep 2009 23:16:14 -0700 (PDT), Rich <rander3127(a)gmail.com> > wrote in > <d6aec1ff-02b2-4c61-9e0b-efb83095b857(a)d21g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>: > >>You can now buy a used DSLR in excellent condition for under $300 with >>a kit lens from various sources. I bought a Nikon D100 for $125 a >>month ago. What kind of clod would spend $200-$500 on a P&S if their >>goal was excellent image quality and not portability? > > Those of us with real experience and open minds. ;) Yeah, but some of us with open minds need to shoot football at night under horrid lighting at ISO 6400. And, to make it worse, a lot of people want to print those pix. Dammit all. > > -- > Best regards, > John > > Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, > it makes you a dSLR owner. > "The single most important component of a camera > is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
From: SMS on 25 Sep 2009 16:01 Rich wrote: > You can now buy a used DSLR in excellent condition for under $300 with > a kit lens from various sources. I bought a Nikon D100 for $125 a > month ago. What kind of clod would spend $200-$500 on a P&S if their > goal was excellent image quality and not portability? Those that would never consider buying a used electronic product that lacked any warranty. You also may find it hard to believe, but for many, if not most users, achieving the best possible image quality is not their most important consideration when selecting a camera. If it was, then there would be no market for non-DSLRs at all. That said, there are some reasons, beyond image quality, while a D-SLR is useful. I took my D-SLR to Las Vegas yesterday for the Interbike trade show. On the plus side, people kept thinking that I was part of the press contingent, but it was rather a pain to carry the D-SLR. The real reason I took it was because I needed the more powerful flash on the trade show floor, though I could have stuck the same flash on my old G2 instead of the D-SLR. Actually, as it turned out, what was really good was having the wide angle lens with me (10-22mm = 16-35mm). This enable me to get a lot of good photos that would not have been possible with my "walking around lens" a 28-105mm (45mm-168mm). This is why I was trying to buy a used 17-85mm IS earlier in the week, to no avail, but the 10-22mm non-IS worked out fine. With the G2, I could not have gotten such a wide angle, even with the adapter lens I have, and those adapter lenses are very marginal in quality.
From: Robert Coe on 25 Sep 2009 18:24 On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 03:26:09 +0200, Robert Spanjaard <spamtrap(a)arumes.com> wrote: : On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:28:08 -0400, Robert Coe wrote: : : > : >> I can't see the images right now, because pbase.com is down. But I : > : >> think you misread the subject. To be more precise: you missed the : : > >> "only" part. : > : > : > : > I've *got* to cut down on caffeine. : : > : The problem is, you never know. Maybe you need *more* caffeine. : > : > As I just told Bowse before reading your reply! Great minds think alike. : > (Or is it just great photographic minds?) : : Great minds use standard quote-characters, and read a discussion before : adding their own thoughts. Do they indeed? And if one doesn't, does that justify your sarcasm? You'll have to forgive me, but I started using a colon as a quoting character so long ago that I've forgotten why. It must have had something to do with an idiosyncracy of the newsreader I was using at the time. Or maybe I thought it made it easier to resolve nests of embedded quotations. FWIW, I didn't invent the concept; a colon was once more widely used as a quoting character than it is now. In any case, I hope you haven't felt obliged to read my articles if either their formatting or their content offends you. You can even killfile me, and I won't mind. Bob
From: John Navas on 26 Sep 2009 10:34 On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:47:52 -0400, "Bowser" <up(a)gone.now> wrote in <4abd1dbb$0$21092$ec3e2dad(a)unlimited.usenetmonster.com>: >"John Navas" <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote in message >news:8ganb5d4r07ntcfbrkp17ld85enosevc5f(a)4ax.com... >> Those of us with real experience and open minds. ;) > >Yeah, but some of us with open minds need to shoot football at night under >horrid lighting at ISO 6400. And, to make it worse, a lot of people want to >print those pix. Dammit all. I don't. "Different strokes for different folks." -- Best regards, John Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, it makes you a dSLR owner. "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
From: John Navas on 26 Sep 2009 10:36
On Fri, 25 Sep 2009 13:01:50 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in <4abd215f$0$1637$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net>: >... With the G2, I could not have gotten >such a wide angle, even with the adapter lens I have, and those adapter >lenses are very marginal in quality. Simply not true, as you might know if you'd ever actually used one. -- Best regards, John Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, it makes you a dSLR owner. "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams |