Canon EOS 1Ds MkII Preview

Ken Weitzel wrote:


Guess I'm a little prejudiced, but I like my landscapes
with a little water in 'em. And I like my water to have
a few waves, couple of bubbles, maybe a whitecap or two...

Ken



Come on down to Texas! We got cans, tires, and rainbow-coloured toxic
swirls to really jazz things up. If you're reeel lucky, a body floats up.

--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten'
"If one dives and returns to the surface inarticulate with amazement and
with a deep realisation of the marvel of what he has seen and where he
has been, then he deserves to go again and again. If he is unmoved or
dissappointed, then there remains for him on earth only a longer or
shorter period of waiting for death." --William Beebe, "Half Mile Down"

David Chien wrote:

This is starting to edge into MF digital capabilities... with a
camera system that is lower cost than a back... definitely more
than enough for the most demanding magazines and probably more
than enough for high quality book printing.

If anyone has been paying attention to the high-MP digital camera
world, then they'd already know of the 100 megapixel+ digital camera
solutions offered by Betterlight.com & PhaseOne.com. Really, the Canon
was what these guys offered =years ago=, and doesn't even come close to
what 'pros' use nowadays (eg. Nordstroms, etc.) for their publications
and advertisements.

http://betterlight.com/products4X5.asp

the only problem other than file size is the 180 seconds exposure.
scanning backs do not work well with live subjects.

Alan Browne wrote:

jjs wrote:

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
news

The real problem with these scanning backs is they are limited to
landscapes and static shots.


Correction: limited to static shots.

To me a static shot is a "still life" composition in the studio.

A landscape is a different beast but for the most part (90%+) are still as a
subject.

leaves, waves, animals, people excepted...


--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Ken Weitzel wrote:



Alan Browne wrote:

jjs wrote:

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
news

The real problem with these scanning backs is they are limited to
landscapes and static shots.




Correction: limited to static shots.



To me a static shot is a "still life" composition in the studio.

A landscape is a different beast but for the most part (90%+) are
still as a subject.


Hi...

Guess I'm a little prejudiced, but I like my landscapes
with a little water in 'em. And I like my water to have
a few waves, couple of bubbles, maybe a whitecap or two...

Congrats for being in the 10% that have water .detail. being recorded. Maybe
it's 20% I'll grant...

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

"Brian C. Baird" wrote in message
.. .
[...]
No, not cultural. Resolution can be evaluated objectively using any
number of methods.

I don't know what you're on about, but you're not making any real
points.

Your 'points' have no merit, either. See how people SEE.

In article , says...
I don't know what you're on about, but you're not making any real
points.

Your 'points' have no merit, either. See how people SEE.

No, I make sense. You don't seem able to form coherent statements.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
jjs wrote:

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
news

The real problem with these scanning backs is they are limited to
landscapes and static shots.


Correction: limited to static shots.

To me a static shot is a "still life" composition in the studio.

A landscape is a different beast but for the most part (90%+) are still as
a subject.

Windless? Waveless? Clouds don't move in the sky? Animals, people all dead?

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
jjs wrote:

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
news

The real problem with these scanning backs is they are limited to
landscapes and static shots.


Correction: limited to static shots.

To me a static shot is a "still life" composition in the studio.

A landscape is a different beast but for the most part (90%+) are still as
a subject.

Windless? Waveless? Clouds don't move in the sky? Animals, people all dead?

jjs wrote:
"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...

jjs wrote:


"Alan Browne" wrote in message
news


The real problem with these scanning backs is they are limited to
landscapes and static shots.


Correction: limited to static shots.

To me a static shot is a "still life" composition in the studio.

A landscape is a different beast but for the most part (90%+) are still as
a subject.


Windless? Waveless? Clouds don't move in the sky? Animals, people all dead?


Sitting looking out the kitchen window with my wake up
coffee this morning... trees here are very well into
their change of color process...

Sincerely doubt that you could take a 10 second "scan"
without several leaves mysteriously disappearing from
the tree and magically re-appearing on the ground

Not to mention the durned geese doing whatever it is they
do when they circle incessantly gathering together
prior to leaving for warmer climes

Ken

"Ken Weitzel" wrote in message
news:%zf6d.553485$gE.109241@pd7tw3no...

Not to mention the durned geese doing whatever it is they
do when they circle incessantly gathering together
prior to leaving for warmer climes

I used to live on the top of the tallest bluff in the area and the geese
would fly just over the roof. At night. Loved the spookyness of the sounds
of honkinig and wings.

Back on-topic, IMHO a scanning back is a catalog photographers dream, but so
irrelevant to the rest of us.