Thanks Boris. I agree. The range is excellent when shooting RAW.
Paul
On Dec 22, 2006, at 12:53 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
Hi!
This doesn't prove a thing, other than shooting brightly lit buildings
against a black sky with the K10D isn't always a problem. This was
shot
at ISO 400, f4.5,
Hi!
This doesn't prove a thing, other than shooting brightly lit buildings
against a black sky with the K10D isn't always a problem. This was shot
at ISO 400, f4.5, 1/30th second. The DA 12-24/4 was at the 18mm
position. Shake reduction was on. No banding in this sky, even at a
pixel
This doesn't prove a thing, other than shooting brightly lit buildings
against a black sky with the K10D isn't always a problem. This was shot
at ISO 400, f4.5, 1/30th second. The DA 12-24/4 was at the 18mm
position. Shake reduction was on. No banding in this sky, even at a
pixel peeping 200%.
Beautiful performance and composition!
Jack
--- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This doesn't prove a thing, other than shooting brightly lit
buildings
against a black sky with the K10D isn't always a problem. This was
shot
at ISO 400, f4.5, 1/30th second. The DA 12-24/4 was at the
Thanks Jack. Excellent pun:-).
Paul
-- Original message --
From: Jack Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Beautiful performance and composition!
Jack
--- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This doesn't prove a thing, other than shooting brightly lit
buildings
Hello Paul,
Tuesday, December 19, 2006, 1:43:09 PM, you wrote:
PS This doesn't prove a thing, other than shooting brightly lit buildings
PS against a black sky with the K10D isn't always a problem.
I arrived at the same conclusion, it does not appear always. I took
only a few night shots so
Thanks Atilla,
Yes, it's full frame. Your suggested composition might be nicer. I may give it
a try one of these days. I'm always by this theater. I also should fix some of
the burned out lights with my cloning tool. I wouldn't want to be the guy who
has to replace those bulbs. They must lose a
7 matches
Mail list logo
