Canon VS Nikon - ISO questions

specialman said:
Word jousting has been pleasant. :) Think we've maybe stretched this one as far as it can go. :)
Click to expand...

Like wise ;)

It has shown how different people/users of different camera's achieve different results with different camera's.

Perhaps when I'm a bit more experienced I'll be able to understand the logics of it all a bit more.

Maybe it's proved (somehow) that the D200 is indeed a 'better camera'?
 
hashcake said:
I'm struggling to think when higher ISO levels would be required, but I can only assume that one important aspect is when the only option it to take the photos hand held rather than use a tripod?
Click to expand...

The biggest advantage of having a camera that performs better at high ISO speeds is that it gives you more choice. For example, you could be a landscape photographer and your preferred method of shooting might be at ISO 100, on a tripod, shutter relase cable and mirror lock up enabled, but what happens when you're walking with your kit and you come across a scene with amazing light? By the time you've set your kit up, the light's gone and you have to pack up again. However, if you can crank the ISO up enough to get a handholdable speed at f:11, you can shoot pretty much instantly.
 
awp said:
I was shooting in a school gym on Friday - really gloomy - up the D3 to 5000 ISO and shots looked great - better than I used to get at 400 on film!! :)
Click to expand...

I think most people who complain about noise levels have either forgotten or never knew just how bad high speed colour film was.The fact that you can shoot at ISO 800 with such quality is superb, never mind cranking it up to 6400 on the D3.
 
NorthernNikon said:
I think most people who complain about noise levels have either forgotten or never knew just how bad high speed colour film was.The fact that you can shoot at ISO 800 with such quality is superb, never mind cranking it up to 6400 on the D3.
Click to expand...


agreed :thumbs: - they just don't appreciate how fortunate we are today.
 
Any camera can be made to produce 'bad' results in the hands of someone who's not fully proficient...
Just because it's digital, doesn't mean there's no skill involved in eking out every ounce of quality that particular camera is capable of generating.

I remember working with the Sarajevo-based Reuters photographer Damir Sagolj in Iraq a few years back:

http://images.google.co.uk/images?h...esult_group&ct=title&resnum=1&ved=0CBAQsAQwAA

The images he was making on his EOS-1D Mk1 were so much better than mine shot at the same time that I was convinced his camera must be the cause and told him so "My Nikon's sensor is shi-ite - that's why yours are better... etc. etc." - he took my D1x off me and reproduced his shots almost exactly - it's all down to the skill of the man behind the lens...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top