I don't think these images say much of anything. They are extremely
small. If printed at 300 dpi they'd make roughly a wallet sized print.
Whatever noisy pixels might have been there were subsumed in the
resizing if not in the noise reduction before that. But it does show
that you can make a nice but quite small print.
Chuck Norcutt
Bob Whitmire wrote:
> It's very difficult to believe ISO 1600 is as clean as it looks in
> these shots. I hope some of our uber-tech gearheads can explain to me
> why what appears to be so clean actually isn't. Yeah, I zoomed and
> looked at the grill cover, and 1600 shows a good bit more noise than
> 100, but my guess still is that if I bought one of these camera and
> printed up an 11x14 shot at ISO 1600 I'd be more than a little bit
> disappointed.
>
> Still, I've been wrong before. And if I'm wrong this time, the 510,
> and the ever-promised E-Thing might be something to crow about.
>
> --Bob Whitmire
> www.bobwhitmire.com
>
>
>
> On May 15, 2007, at 7:12 PM, Phil wrote:
>
>> This guy has posted a series of shots with the new 410, he is a
>> regular on
>> the forum, the 1600 ISO shots
>> look pretty good to me
>>
>> Phil
>>
>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?
>> forum=1022&thread=23234806
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|