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, César 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 --
