I did a couple of shots when I handled a pre-production model. I never posted since I was asked not to.
But from those shots I was quite pleased. I use 3200 quite often when I shoot wedding ceremonies (b&w prints) and as such am quite used to the grain. I can understand why it is a custom function to use it as most people would shrink away from it and think the camera was broken. Just my two cents, and still trying to catch up, C�sar Panama City, Florida -- -----Original Message----- -- From: Bill Owens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 9:23 AM -- -- I've done a few test shots at ISO 3200 in the *istD. As you -- say, if you -- need the speed, the noise is not that objectionable, and -- really no worse -- than grain in film. -- -- Bill -- -- ----- Original Message ----- -- From: "Keith Whaley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 9:01 AM -- Subject: Re: *istD vs. Digital Rebel -- -- -- > -- > -- > Rob Brigham wrote: -- > > -- > [. . .] -- > -- > > BTW anyone wondering about the noise in my sample pics -- for this test - -- > > it was shot at 1600ISO!! I notice reducing the exposure -- in the RAW -- > > software actually made the noise a lot better too, -- something that again -- > > the jpg adjustments couldn't do - and not something I expected. -- > -- > Seems to me, anytime you feel you have to or want to -- resort to an ISO of -- > 1600, a little noise is a very minor price to pay, -- especially if there's -- > a relatively simple way to reduce it. -- > 1600 ISP with a digital... marvelous! <g> -- > -- > keith --
