Thanks, Kevin,
Exactly what I was asking for.
I'm anxious to read an image comparison test between the D5 and Mark
II. (dpreview, maybe?) Throw in the D200 and all the more interesting.
I agree with your positive remarks re removable backs being the best of
current technologically.
Jack
--- Kevin Waterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This one time, at band camp, Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for summing up you reaction to a quick spin with the latest
> 16.7
> > Canon.
> > You took a quick turn at the point where you brought in the 'blad
> H1
> > and if you had an image comparison comment, I missed it. Does the
> 'blad
> > carry a 22mp back?
> > If you find a moment, I'd appreciate your impression of the
> relative
> > image performance between the two.
>
> Yes the H1 has a 22 megapixel 48.9mm x 36.7mm back. I find the idea
> of removable
> backs appealing in that the body can still be used for film, and when
> better
> technology becomes available it is relatively simple to change over
> to the new back.
>
> As far as image comparisons go, I cant be too accurate here as I have
> not had them
> side-by-side. At 100 ISO I doubt I could'nt pick it with the naked
> eye. At 800 and
> 1600 I think the blad starts to edge in front a little. But I don'nt
> know that it is
> a AUD $25,000.00 improvement.
>
> Kind regards
> Kevin
>
> --
> "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
>
> Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
>
>
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
