At 8:05 AM -0400 8/29/07, Austin Franklin wrote:
Henning,
As you are aware, I was talking about concurrent generations.
You provided an example that was not what I clearly stated I was comparing,
and claimed my comment was incorrect, and it was not. It appeared you
simply missed what I was comparing.
Talking
about different generations and drawing conclusions or
generalizations from that is pointless, as the technologies and
techniques are evolving too fast to make that meaningful.
To YOU my point may have been pointless, but it was a completely correct and
meaningful point, at least to me, who is considering a 1D vs 1Ds. The
larger pixels at lower ISOs typically have less noise, that's a fact. It's
something that is important to me, and possibly to others, and a valid point
to consider IMO.
Regards,
Austin
Austin, how can you live with yourself? Your right hand must be
constantly arguing with your left hand! Sheesh!
--
* Henning J. Wulff
/|\ Wulff Photography & Design
/###\ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
