James, I can't help you with samples, but I have just been retouching a bunch of wedding shots made at 800 ISO and they are not too bad and relatively comparable to film shots in terms of grain and sharpness *if* your exposure is dead on. If not, the grain gets out of hand when you lighten the shots, and there is actually horizontal banding visible on a few of the shots after bringing them up in brightness. I'm going to do some further testing on this banding issue soon, I expect, if I can find the time to get around to it.
So, to sum up, if you can tightly control your exposure and you don't have to alter the contrast to lighten up the dark areas, you would be in relatively good shape with the D60, but film is still probably better for higher iso's like this. Mike > Sorry to rehash this topic. > > I've been shooting a show at the Palace of Fine Arts in San Francisco for > the past 2 years with ISO 800 film. Results have always been great. With > the cost of 4x6 prints from digital now so low, I was thinking of using a > D-60. I've tried to look for sample shots with a D60 at high ISOs (800 & > up) but haven't quite found any. How would high ISO images printed from > digital compare to their film counterpart? Lighting by the way is your > typical stage lights and absolutely no flash allowed. > > Appreciate any information. Thanks. > > James -- Michael Shupe M.J.Shupe Photography Michigan Tech University www.northernlightsgallery.com * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
