Re: [Leica] Digi Low Light

[Daniel Ridings <daniel.ridings@muspro.uio.no>]

Digital and low-light is something I really appreciate.

http://www.dlridings.com/paw2003/12.html

This shot (an earlier paw) was done at EI 1600 and most of the others (if
you click on the "here" link) were done, in Nikon's terms, "one step above
1600", that is, 3200. It would be difficult to do that sporting even
without digital. I did it with film (Fujicolor 1600) and I really can't
see the difference and when I do, digital is better. Film shots can be
seen at:

http://www.dlridings.com/paw2003/11.html and
http://www.dlridings.com/paw2003/10.html

Not to mention the work flow in getting about 70 pictures out to anxiously
waiting girls (with an attention span of about 6 hours ... after that,
these competitions are HISTORY).

Daniel


On Sun, 29 Jun 2003, Tina Manley wrote:

> At 10:15 AM 6/29/2003 -0600, you wrote:
> >Hi All,
> >
> >On Sunday, June 29, 2003, at 07:10 AM, Tina Manley wrote:
> >
> >>Digital is not there yet for low-light, but it's getting there.  I love
> >>the depth of field of the M lenses and doubt that can be duplicated in
> >>digital, but you never know!
> >
> >I would have agreed with Tina on this without reservation until my recent
> >acquisition of a Canon 10D, after playing with - er, evaluating - one
> >owned by friend Bill Nelsch.
> >
> >Its low light performance is, in a word, excellent. To my eyes it matches
> >film through ISO 800, and produces usable if pixelated images at ISO 1600.
> >At ISO 400 it is at least as good as film for my purposes, perhaps better.
>
>
> That's great news, Will!  I can't wait to try it out. Hope UPS gets here
> early tomorrow!
>
> Tina
>
>
> Tina Manley, ASMP
> www.tinamanley.com
>
> photos available from:
> www.pdiphotos.com
> www.workbookstock.com
> www.mira.com
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html