Nikon D3S (12.1 Mpix, FF, very high ISO, HD video)
|
Nikon D3S (12.1 Mpix, FF, very high ISO, HD video)
On 2009-10-14 10:45:43 -0700, Alan Browne
said: Read all the gory details of this new body: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0910/09101402nikonD3s.asp Interesting. It seems to me the real benefit is going to be in high ISO performance and the addition of sensor cleaning. I am not drawn to the video in DSLR trend. Not being a pro or independantly wealthy I guess I am going to stick with my D300 for now. -- Regards, Savageduck |
Nikon D3S (12.1 Mpix, FF, very high ISO, HD video)
On 10/14/09 12:56 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2009-10-14 10:45:43 -0700, Alan Browne said: Read all the gory details of this new body: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0910/09101402nikonD3s.asp Interesting. It seems to me the real benefit is going to be in high ISO performance and the addition of sensor cleaning. I am not drawn to the video in DSLR trend. Not being a pro or independantly wealthy I guess I am going to stick with my D300 for now. That D300 is no slouch, either. |
Nikon D3S (12.1 Mpix, FF, very high ISO, HD video)
On 2009-10-14 11:04:56 -0700, "D. Peter Maus"
said: On 10/14/09 12:56 , Savageduck wrote: On 2009-10-14 10:45:43 -0700, Alan Browne said: Read all the gory details of this new body: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0910/09101402nikonD3s.asp Interesting. It seems to me the real benefit is going to be in high ISO performance and the addition of sensor cleaning. I am not drawn to the video in DSLR trend. Not being a pro or independantly wealthy I guess I am going to stick with my D300 for now. That D300 is no slouch, either. I'm happy with it, and I still have my D70 lifeboat. -- Regards, Savageduck |
Nikon D3S (12.1 Mpix, FF, very high ISO, HD video)
On 10/14/09 15:53 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2009-10-14 11:04:56 -0700, "D. Peter Maus" said: On 10/14/09 12:56 , Savageduck wrote: On 2009-10-14 10:45:43 -0700, Alan Browne said: Read all the gory details of this new body: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0910/09101402nikonD3s.asp Interesting. It seems to me the real benefit is going to be in high ISO performance and the addition of sensor cleaning. I am not drawn to the video in DSLR trend. Not being a pro or independantly wealthy I guess I am going to stick with my D300 for now. That D300 is no slouch, either. I'm happy with it, and I still have my D70 lifeboat. LOL! Yeah, I still shoot my D70 daily. If you like D300 see if you can get your hands on a D700 for a weekend. You'll never need another woman. |
Nikon D3S (12.1 Mpix, FF, very high ISO, HD video)
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
Read all the gory details of this new body: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0910/09101402nikonD3s.asp Why do Nikons seem to have a base ISO of 200? Is it a trade off of some kind? |
Nikon D3S (12.1 Mpix, FF, very high ISO, HD video)
D. Peter Maus wrote:
On 10/14/09 15:53 , Savageduck wrote: On 2009-10-14 11:04:56 -0700, "D. Peter Maus" said: On 10/14/09 12:56 , Savageduck wrote: On 2009-10-14 10:45:43 -0700, Alan Browne said: Read all the gory details of this new body: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0910/09101402nikonD3s.asp Interesting. It seems to me the real benefit is going to be in high ISO performance and the addition of sensor cleaning. I am not drawn to the video in DSLR trend. Not being a pro or independantly wealthy I guess I am going to stick with my D300 for now. That D300 is no slouch, either. I'm happy with it, and I still have my D70 lifeboat. LOL! Yeah, I still shoot my D70 daily. If you like D300 see if you can get your hands on a D700 for a weekend. You'll never need another woman. That explains a lot. Any hetro man who'd prefer a camera for a weekend over a woman is clearly nuts, asexual, castrated or well beyond the help of Viagra. |
Nikon D3S (12.1 Mpix, FF, very high ISO, HD video)
DRS wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message Read all the gory details of this new body: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0910/09101402nikonD3s.asp Why do Nikons seem to have a base ISO of 200? Is it a trade off of some kind? Who knows. Part of it may be their past and continuing reliance on Sony for sensors. Various measurements point to a sensor "natural" ISO somewhere around 150 or so for most Sony supplied sensors. This does not mean you can't go lower (albeit artificially), but there is little advantage to doing so (from a SNR POV). On the a900 (Sony) the recommended ISO is 200 (though it will go down to 100). I'd have to dig around, but the consensus is that the a900 is better at ISO 100 in some circumstances than others. I'd have to dig that up. Too lazy at present. I generally shoot it at 200. |
Nikon D3S (12.1 Mpix, FF, very high ISO, HD video)
On 10/14/09 16:14 , Alan Browne wrote:
D. Peter Maus wrote: On 10/14/09 15:53 , Savageduck wrote: On 2009-10-14 11:04:56 -0700, "D. Peter Maus" said: On 10/14/09 12:56 , Savageduck wrote: On 2009-10-14 10:45:43 -0700, Alan Browne said: Read all the gory details of this new body: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0910/09101402nikonD3s.asp Interesting. It seems to me the real benefit is going to be in high ISO performance and the addition of sensor cleaning. I am not drawn to the video in DSLR trend. Not being a pro or independantly wealthy I guess I am going to stick with my D300 for now. That D300 is no slouch, either. I'm happy with it, and I still have my D70 lifeboat. LOL! Yeah, I still shoot my D70 daily. If you like D300 see if you can get your hands on a D700 for a weekend. You'll never need another woman. That explains a lot. Any hetro man who'd prefer a camera for a weekend over a woman is clearly nuts, asexual, castrated or well beyond the help of Viagra. Thank God we have you to evaluate that for us. |
Nikon D3S (12.1 Mpix, FF, very high ISO, HD video)
In article , DRS
wrote: Why do Nikons seem to have a base ISO of 200? Is it a trade off of some kind? depends on the sensor. most of the ones nikon use start at 200 but there's a few that started at 100. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:48 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
PhotoBanter.com