Nikon D3S (12.1 Mpix, FF, very high ISO, HD video)

On 2009-10-14 14:07:08 -0700, "D. Peter Maus"
said:

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.

The D700 thing is something I have been thinking of for a while now.

You'll never need another woman.

Well I have been on my own for almost two years now, and even though I
have the social life of a stump, a little feminine companionship
wouldn't be too bad from time to time.

There is nothing more disturbing than a 60 year old in hormonal distress. :-)



--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 10/14/09 16:37 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2009-10-14 14:07:08 -0700, "D. Peter Maus"
said:

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.

The D700 thing is something I have been thinking of for a while now.

You'll never need another woman.

Well I have been on my own for almost two years now, and even though I
have the social life of a stump, a little feminine companionship
wouldn't be too bad from time to time.

There is nothing more disturbing than a 60 year old in hormonal
distress. :-)



I'm right behind you at 58.

D. Peter Maus wrote:
On 10/14/09 16:37 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2009-10-14 14:07:08 -0700, "D. Peter Maus"
said:

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.

The D700 thing is something I have been thinking of for a while now.

You'll never need another woman.

Well I have been on my own for almost two years now, and even though I
have the social life of a stump, a little feminine companionship
wouldn't be too bad from time to time.

There is nothing more disturbing than a 60 year old in hormonal
distress. :-)

I'm right behind you at 58.

I'm 'ahead' of you both at 65, but fortunately on weekends I enjoy the
company of a woman who likes what I do with
my equipment, and enjoys post processing almost as much as I do. We both
try to get it right in camera, and ususally do on the first shot. Post
processing is usually not strictly needed, but always seems to make an
image better with a bit of tweaking.

--

John McWilliams

John McWilliams wrote:
D. Peter Maus wrote:
On 10/14/09 16:37 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2009-10-14 14:07:08 -0700, "D. Peter Maus"
said:

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.

The D700 thing is something I have been thinking of for a while now.

You'll never need another woman.

Well I have been on my own for almost two years now, and even though I
have the social life of a stump, a little feminine companionship
wouldn't be too bad from time to time.

There is nothing more disturbing than a 60 year old in hormonal
distress. :-)

I'm right behind you at 58.

I'm 'ahead' of you both at 65, but fortunately on weekends I enjoy the
company of a woman who likes what I do with
my equipment, and enjoys post processing almost as much as I do. We both
try to get it right in camera, and ususally do on the first shot. Post
processing is usually not strictly needed, but always seems to make an
image better with a bit of tweaking.

I thought ladies liked 'pre-processing'.
But wtf do I know at 45 & single again for the last 5 years :-(

DRS wrote:

Why do Nikons seem to have a base ISO of 200?
Is it a trade off of some kind?

It allows a higher max ISO.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam

Paul Furman wrote:
John McWilliams wrote:
D. Peter Maus wrote:
On 10/14/09 16:37 , Savageduck wrote:
On 2009-10-14 14:07:08 -0700, "D. Peter Maus"
said:

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.

The D700 thing is something I have been thinking of for a while now.

You'll never need another woman.

Well I have been on my own for almost two years now, and even though I
have the social life of a stump, a little feminine companionship
wouldn't be too bad from time to time.

There is nothing more disturbing than a 60 year old in hormonal
distress. :-)

I'm right behind you at 58.

I'm 'ahead' of you both at 65, but fortunately on weekends I enjoy the
company of a woman who likes what I do with
my equipment, and enjoys post processing almost as much as I do. We
both try to get it right in camera, and ususally do on the first shot.
Post processing is usually not strictly needed, but always seems to
make an image better with a bit of tweaking.

I thought ladies liked 'pre-processing'.
But wtf do I know at 45 & single again for the last 5 years :-(

It's true that before the shot actually happens, good preparation leads
to superior results over a hastily composed frame or frantic release of
the shutter.

And it's a poor workman who blames his tools, but a number of P+S'ers
claim they get satisfying results from their small units.

--
john mcwilliams

Paul Furman wrote:
DRS wrote:

Why do Nikons seem to have a base ISO of 200? Is it a trade off of
some kind?

It allows a higher max ISO.

No relevance really.

"DRS" wrote in
. au:

Why do Nikons seem to have a base ISO of 200? Is it a trade off of some
kind?

The D3 uses a low silicon fill factor, and makes up for it with large
microlenses, which, of course, fill the wells faster. In order to meter at
ISO 100, the camera would have very little RAW highlight headroom, so ISOs
under 200 are only offered as special modes. Apparently, they use the low
fill factor to get more noiseless electronics at the photosites. This
keeps read noise down a bit, but increases shot noise a little, too.

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
Read all the gory details of this new body:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0910/09101402nikonD3s.asp

WTF are your cross-posting for again you pompous hypocrite?

**** off back to your snotty SLR group.

--
Charles E Hardwidge

Alan Browne wrote:
Paul Furman wrote:
DRS wrote:

Why do Nikons seem to have a base ISO of 200? Is it a trade off of
some kind?

It allows a higher max ISO.

No relevance really.

Is it just coincidence that low-ISO sensors on P&S start at lower ISOs?
I don't understand the details but the general principal seems to apply.

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam