On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 21:52:23 -0500, "RichA"
wrote:


"Ronald G." wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 17:19:35 -0500, "Charles"
wrote:


"Robert Sneddon" wrote in message
...
In message , SMS
writes

b) why the P&S makers even feel compelled to include the ability to
shoot at high ISO when they know how poorly their products will
perform.

Bad shot versus no shot at all. The pixel-peeping purists who infest
this august forum can't understand it, perhaps but nearly all the
pictures taken on any given day are not shot by would-be Ansell Adams
types, but are for the memories of the location and the time. A noisy
P&S picture is better than no picture at all, and few people are willing
to lug a heavy complex DSLR around with them when they are going out
somewhere not expressly to take pictures.

Camera enthusiasts are not necessarily photographers.


DSLR purchasers are not necessarily photographers. The vast majority of
them are
desperate talentless amateurs thinking they can become a pro by just
buying a
more expensive camera.

No, most of them are former P&S owners sick of noise turning up on 5x7
prints..

Silly. Everybody knows that a real pro considers noise to be a means
of artistic expression. Only rank amateurs rely on clean tack-sharp
images to hide their lack of talent. But their pictures give them
away because everything in them is twisted unto a u-turn from the
distortion from their noisy focal plan shutters.