Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/08/27
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Matt, That is a relative matter. Chris is getting wonderful images(as posted) from his D2 at 1600 and up. My experience has been that the D200 at 1600 is either a little coarse or fine detail is lost. However, I am not using any software to take the noise out so that is not a fair test. With that said, the 5D at 3200 is really very good and the viewfinder is quite good although nowhere in the F1n class much less the SL; I can focus it easily at 17mm with an F4 lens. Even the 14 is focusable although finding exact focus is a touch slow. 0.02 Don don.dory@gmail.com On 8/27/06, Matt Powell <wooderson@gmail.com> wrote: > > As long as we're onto the Nikon Digital cameras, how is the D200 at > 1600 (I'd usually convert to B&W)? The small images I've seen on > flickr haven't given me a good idea of the quality, and fanboy digital > sites mostly look at color and have terrible samples anyway. > > I've decided to move up from my D70 to something with a decent > viewfinder, and it's either a D200 or a Canon 5d (which requires, of > course, more planning ahead of time). I've already got a couple of > lenses for both (my idea of a kit is a 20mm and a 50mm and maybe a > flash) so the system isn't an issue. > > I'd like the full-frame and great high-ISO performance of the Canon > (and Canon's 50/1.4 is much nicer than Nikon primes), but saving $1300 > would be a treat, unless I can figure out how to get rich selling > plasma. > > -- > MP > wooderson@gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >