Ditto. The DS is in many ways a better camera than the D, although I
make do with the latter. I wouldn't be afraid to shoot weddings with
the D, if i weren't afraid to shoot weddings in general. Been there,
done that. Never again:-)).
Paul
(Although on second thought, never is a long time.)
On May 14, 2006, at 8:14 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I didn't see Cotty's post, but I gotta say, coming from a guy who
shoots
JPEG the remark is a bit disingenuous <vbg>. Anyway, the results from
the
Pentax "entry level" DSLR are the same as the results from the istD,
and,
one can argue, that the smaller RAW file sizes means that more pics
can be
put on a given size card, saving space and making shooting more
efficient.
There are a few folks here shooting weddings with a D, and, having
seen the
work from at least one list member, the results are quite good.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Paul Stenquist
I think it's you Cotty:-)). Seriously, he didn't nit pick. He offered
some suggestions that he'd like to see. Wedding photography isnt
exactly the top of the heap. An entry level DSLR is pretty much all
that's required.
Paul
On May 14, 2006, at 7:29 PM, Cotty wrote:
Forgive me for being a bit harsh Brian, but you professionally
photograph weddings using entry level DSLRs and nit pick ?
I dunno, maybe it's me.
