On Jan 12, 2011, at 8:46 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: > On 1/13/2011 6:05 AM, Larry Colen wrote: >> If I could pretend to afford it, I'd buy the kit and keep one set for >> myself. > > Suppose you could. Then you would have to /pretend/ you'd need one as it > seems to me that your kind of shooting does not /necessarily require/ one. I > know for certain that /mine/ does not.
You are quite right there. Though having one would allow me to do some Savagesque style photos of the desert night sky. I'd do a lot more night landscape photography but my gear is not quite up to the task. Having seen what a 645D can do at ISO 800-1600, it would be very fun to play with one when photographing musicians. It is interesting to see how it compares with the Nikon D3, though I suspect that you could throw some math at the raw file, process the 41 Mpix down to the D3s 12 Mpix, and gain some performance there. I describe the type of photography that I do as "photography that uses a camera". But, I have to admit that while a large percentage of the photos I've taken in the past few years would have benefited from the performance of a K-5, only a small percentage would have benefited any more with a 645D, and a large number of them would do better with a K-5 than with a 645D. But, while a Dodge van might do a carpenter a lot more good than a Porsche 911, that doesn't stop the carpenter from wanting the 911, any more than reality keeps me from wanting a 645D. -- Larry Colen [email protected] sent from i4est -- 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.
