On 21 Feb 2004, at 08:04, Stephen Scharf wrote:
> I have to agree with Winsor...you seem off your feed, Chris...
>
>
Nope, still have to check the aircraft's tech log for max all up
weight...
> Low light capability? Huh? Wha??? My 1D can shoot with an equivalent
> ISO of 1600; the new Mark II is rated to ISO 3200. The noise on the
> new Mark II is so *low* that pros at Rob Galbraith and
> SportsShooter.com are saying that images at ISO 1600 looks like ISO
> 400 and ISO 800 looks like ISO 100 on previous generation cameras.
> Furthermore, I'd like to see you change ISO from frame to frame on
> your OM-1 and have all the photos come out correctly.
>
>
Oh all right then... I should go and have a look at a DSLR. It's just
that the reviews seem universally to slate any electronic camera. This
could be bad for my wealth, except that I should find it difficult to
accumulate a series of bodies and lenses to do what my OM kit can do,
so I probably won't even try - at least for a while.
Thanks for your answer Stephen.
Chris
<|_:-)_|>
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
+44 (0)7092 251126
ftog at threeshoes.co.uk
http://www.threeshoes.co.uk
http://homepage.mac.com/zuiko
... a nascent photo library.
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmins@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|