20D or 5D

In message ,
pixby wrote:

The Nikon D2X produces "better" (and no I can't quantify that)

Then be honest; say you "like it better".
--


John P Sheehy

In message ,
David Littlewood wrote:

Even more extreme.

It's not really all that uncommon a situation where you can do that. I
have taken many pictures with the EC set to +2 with no blown highlights
resulting.

Of course, you have the issue of how to get this
right in the heat of the moment. I guess this is where prior experiment
and experience comes in....

It's simply a matter of estimating contrast. If you see a reflection,
for example, in glass backed by something white, shooting at 0 EC is a
huge mistake. If you can't compromise DOF or shutter speed by "exposing
to the right" at ISO 200, then go to ISO 800 and +2; you will have a
cleaner RAW capture than if you did ISO 200 and 0 EC. Same concept
applies in fog, or in a field right after sunset or under heavy clouds
when no sky is in the image, etc. Unfortunately, the cameras don't work
in paradigms to facilitate this; I would prefer an option that behaves
in such a way that when I set the camera to +1 EC, the ISO would double
as well. This would reduce f-stop and shutter speed compromises when
making EC decisions. The camera makers are asleep, spoonfeeding us
yesterday's paradigms; and lots of people have quantized, noisy images
because they trusted that the camera would give them a good exposure at
low ISOs; if they do try +2 EC, they lose DOF or shutter speed and back
off from the +EC electric fence..
--


John P Sheehy

In article ,
writes
In message ,
David Littlewood wrote:

Even more extreme.

It's not really all that uncommon a situation where you can do that. I
have taken many pictures with the EC set to +2 with no blown highlights
resulting.

Of course, you have the issue of how to get this
right in the heat of the moment. I guess this is where prior experiment
and experience comes in....

It's simply a matter of estimating contrast. If you see a reflection,
for example, in glass backed by something white, shooting at 0 EC is a
huge mistake. If you can't compromise DOF or shutter speed by "exposing
to the right" at ISO 200, then go to ISO 800 and +2; you will have a
cleaner RAW capture than if you did ISO 200 and 0 EC. Same concept
applies in fog, or in a field right after sunset or under heavy clouds
when no sky is in the image, etc. Unfortunately, the cameras don't work
in paradigms to facilitate this; I would prefer an option that behaves
in such a way that when I set the camera to +1 EC, the ISO would double
as well. This would reduce f-stop and shutter speed compromises when
making EC decisions. The camera makers are asleep, spoonfeeding us
yesterday's paradigms; and lots of people have quantized, noisy images
because they trusted that the camera would give them a good exposure at
low ISOs; if they do try +2 EC, they lose DOF or shutter speed and back
off from the +EC electric fence..

Thanks, John, very thought-provoking. I will try this out as soon as I
get the chance.

David
--
David Littlewood

pixby wrote:

The kill file grows, yet again.

Oh the terrible, terrible, pain of being killfiled by a proven idiot!

Stacey wrote:

What's comical is you also called me one and I don't even shoot with a
nikon! I guess anyone who doesn't use your BRAND and doesn;t blindly ignore
any problems your BRAND may have has to be a "Nikon nutcase"?

Like I told "pixby": if you don't like being called a Nikon Nutcase,
then you should stop acting like one. (I am not holding my breath.)

In article , wrote:
In message ,
David Littlewood wrote:

Even more extreme.

It's not really all that uncommon a situation where you can do that. I
have taken many pictures with the EC set to +2 with no blown highlights
resulting.

Of course, you have the issue of how to get this
right in the heat of the moment. I guess this is where prior experiment
and experience comes in....

It's simply a matter of estimating contrast. If you see a reflection,
for example, in glass backed by something white, shooting at 0 EC is a
huge mistake. If you can't compromise DOF or shutter speed by "exposing
to the right" at ISO 200, then go to ISO 800 and +2; you will have a
cleaner RAW capture than if you did ISO 200 and 0 EC. Same concept
applies in fog, or in a field right after sunset or under heavy clouds
when no sky is in the image, etc.

Your are talking about measurement errors. If you take a picture in fog,
afer sunset, etc. that includes a white piece of paper you still need a
camera that is capable of capturing 100% reflectance. If is only when you are
taking pictures of dull gray objects that you can leave out one or more stops
of head room.

I can't see the point of a setting that cannot record 100% reflectance.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency

Skip M wrote:


I was wondering about that 1/200 flash synch. Defeatured to distance it
from the 1 series?


Just like the EOS-3.

- Len

wrote:

In message ,
pixby wrote:

The Nikon D2X produces "better" (and no I can't quantify that)

Then be honest; say you "like it better".


Everything Doug tries to "quantify" seems to end up proving precisely
the opposite of Doug's opinion.

Perhaps you should hold your breath, 10 minutes should do.

wrote:

Like I told "pixby": if you don't like being called a Nikon Nutcase,
then you should stop acting like one. (I am not holding my breath.)

Paul Schilter top posts like a moron:

Perhaps you should hold your breath, 10 minutes should do.

Hey, you can drop dead too. No skin off my nose, luser.