Black Dog,
I'm not sure what you mean by 800 ISO looks "Gross". I had the XTi and even at 1600 ISO it was very reasonable after NR, even before NR it wasn't bad.
I see some of your comments quite strong like KR, everyone is entitled to an epinion but make sure you make that clear. If YOU think is looks bad for your aplication that's fine, but for someone who doesn't know any better might take your word for it.
John.
Amateurs worry about gear, pros about the pay, masters about the light, and I just take pictures!
Hmm… I didn’t say it always looked gross, I said that it started to look gross at 800 ISO. There is a difference. I have taken many usable images with my XTi at 800, 1600 and even a few at 3200 (with the 400plus firmware “hack”). But anywhere there is light falloff or if the overall image is even slightly underexposed, I believe the XTi produces noticeably more noise than the Nikons DSLRs contemporary to the XTi, full frame cameras or any Nikon or Canon APS-C body made since. That is my opinion based on my experience shooting more than 50,000 frames with an XTi.Originally Posted by FastGass
I don’t know what I may have written to have rubbed you the wrong way. Since you brought this up, I read through many of my posts on this forum. Nowhere could I find an example where I singled anyone out, called names, insulting or in any way personally attacked a forum member. My comments are about techniques, equipment (as above) and software – the kinds of things that are being discussed on this form all day long. As is also common on this forum, I sometimes have defended or clarified things I have written, but strictly limited to whatever topic is being kicked around, never in the form a personal attack.
On the other hand, twice now you have singled me out for personal criticism, comparing me to someone or something called KR. I don’t know who or what this is but I’m sure this was not meant as a compliment. I would ask that going forward you limit your comments directed toward me to photographic techniques, equipment or software.
Well spoken, Bill. If I ever have the slightest doubt about the technical advice that someone is giving, I would first look to see if they have a website, and check it out. In your case, a quick click on your signature line shows that you definitely know what you're talking about.
Jonathan Huyer
www.huyerperspectives.com
The other places that I have a problem was with the RAW issue (Ken Rockwell has a similar opinion) and with your other lens recomendations that were not a real big deal but when posted in a relatively short period of time it made me wonder if you were like one guy here that said IS was useless (Not even KR says that!). He started off with slightly off comments about gear/techniques untill he went off the wall. I may have overreacted a bit and did not imply that you attacked anyone. I really don't like trolls/village idiots on this forum! And now I know that you are definetly not one.
My apologies,
John.
Amateurs worry about gear, pros about the pay, masters about the light, and I just take pictures!
Looking at Black_Dog's website, and realizing the type of photography he does I would say his comments about ISO 800 might be legitimate. But any advice given on a forum should be weighed carefully no matter how well known the photographer may be. Everyone will recommend what they own and enjoy using, not what may be best for a particular individual. They will talk from their own experience. As an example if I asked for wildlife photography advice and didn't know the person giving advice I would check their website. I would give Jonathan Huyer's advice a more weight than Black_Dog's, if I were asking wedding advice I would give Black_Dog the edge.
As for trolls/village idiots it might be good for the forum to have a few join the forum occasionally and stir things up. As it is now there are just a hand full of people that post each day.
Reply With Quote
