On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 01:46:04PM -0400, Miserere wrote: > > I agree with your conclusion, Dario. I have a large print (about 35x46 > cm) taken with a 6MP P&S; nobody ever guesses it wasn't taken with a > DSLR.
I've got an 8x10 in my portfolio of motorsports images taken using a Canon Powershot G1 (a 2000 3MP P&S camera). It was a panned action shot, too, so I was fighting the severe shutter lag that camera exhibited. Nobody has ever suggested this image isn't up to the quality of the other shots in the collection (some from film days, using the PZ-1p or MZ-S, and some from the *ist-D - there are even a couple taken with a Nikon D100 I borrowed while I was waiting for the *ist-D). That could just mean I take uniformly lousy pictures, of course ... A casual photographer, in general, is even less demanding than any of the participants on this list. As I've progressed from my MX to a K10D (and, soon, to a K-5) my wife has used a Kodak film P&S (126 format), a Nikon film APS body, a Casio Exiliim 4MP digital, and now an Olympus E-PL1. Despite this 'inferior' (sic) equipment she has come up with some pretty good images over the years. Our best Hawaiian cliche image (a palm tree silhouetted against the sunset clouds over the beach) is one of hers. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
