Hey Noons, Has it Really Been 6 Months?

Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 31/05/2009 1:16 PM:

Has it really been 6 months since Noons was dissing on the new Canon
5D Mark II?

No, a bit more.

"It's a crap sensor," he said.
"I wouldn't have one if it was free," he said.
"Look at this boat pic ..... it's terrible," he said.

Exactly. Your point?


Well Loons, here's one I took today just for you.
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/113159283/original

Do you have one with proper detail? All I see there is a bunch of fat twerps
with painted faces.


[Note: This is a BIG photo. Actual size for your viewing pleasure.]

The others were big too...

A boat speeding down the river captured handheld from a couple of
hundred yards by one of those crappy Canon consumer lenses.

Prove it?

If those folks were wearing watches you'd know what time it is.

If those folks were wearing watches you wouldn't be able to see the dials...

I think I'll keep the Fab 5D2.

Taste is a very personal thing.

Noons wrote:
Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 31/05/2009 1:16 PM:

I think I'll keep the Fab 5D2.

Taste is a very personal thing.

Do post back should you acquire some.....


--
lsmft

Help stamp out gratuitous apostrophe's and exclamation point's!!!

Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 3/06/2009 4:11 AM:

Proper Detail? Like what? Please post some examples of what you
mean.
Speeding boat shots work the best.

One that is indeed taken at 200 yards. That one was taken at 100.
And the detail is missing. A big white boat is "detail" only in your fertile
imagination.

And no, the obnoxious noise in the grey background is NOT detail: it's just
noise. And at 100ISO. Tsktsk, poor show from the 5dm2, as expected..

John McWilliams wrote,on my timestamp of 3/06/2009 12:36 AM:

Do post back should you acquire some.....



When I want you to reply, poof, I'll ask for it specifically.
Meanwhile, shove it.

Noons wrote:
John McWilliams wrote,on my timestamp of 3/06/2009 12:36 AM:

Do post back should you acquire some.....

When I want you to reply, poof, I'll ask for it specifically.

Projection! Not that there's anything wrong with that....

Meanwhile, shove it.

Q.E.D.

--
lsmft

She grew on him like she was a colony of E. coli and he was
room-temperature Canadian beef.

Annika1980 wrote:
On Jun 3, 7:05 am, Noons wrote:
Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 3/06/2009 4:11 AM:

Proper Detail? Like what? Please post some examples of what you
mean.
Speeding boat shots work the best.
One that is indeed taken at 200 yards. That one was taken at 100.
And the detail is missing. A big white boat is "detail" only in your fertile
imagination.

And no, the obnoxious noise in the grey background is NOT detail: it's just
noise. And at 100ISO. Tsktsk, poor show from the 5dm2, as expected..

Detail would be the ability to see individual water droplets on the
boat like you can in my pic. Not to mention the ability to not blow
out the highlights like 99% of other cameras would do.

Oh BTW, you forgot to post your example.

Other cameras blow highlights?
News to me.

I own several Nikons and a couple of s5 Pro Fuji cameras and none of
them do. I'm selling the fujis because even the D90s don't blow
highlights when you use active D lighting control.

Maybe you mean 99% of P&S cameras? Hardly something to compare. A $250
camera against a $5000 one... But wait. That old Crapasonic you are so
jealous about wasn't so bad on this sort of scene. Nor are the
replacement models of Crapasonic I bought for it. You'd think a black
suit and white dress in mid day sun would do it, wouldn't you? Guess
what... It doesn't!

http://www.d-mac.info/pix/speeder.jpg
Go on... Just ask for the full size pic and you'll get it! Where's the
blown highlights? None. Noon in the middle of summer 32 degrees Celsius.

The gear for this shot?
Hmmm what do you think? OK a crappy old Canon 40D at the end of it's
service life and one of your favourite lenses... A Sigma 70 - 200 F/2.8,
EX,DG. LOL.

Now can you show us anything that might change my pleasure at having
dumped all my Canon gear on eBay and bought Nikon instead? How about
showing us an ISO 20,000 image from your 5D? Better still, Show us a
125,000 ISO image straight from the camera. You show me yours and I'll
show you mine.

Annika1980 wrote:
On Jun 3, 7:36 pm, DMac wrote:
http://www.d-mac.info/pix/speeder.jpg
Go on... Just ask for the full size pic and you'll get it! Where's the
blown highlights? None. Noon in the middle of summer 32 degrees Celsius.


Wow, never seen gray water before.
Although that pic is nothing special, it is one of the best you've
ever posted.
Perhaps you could get your ugly brides to jet ski?

While we're posting boat pics....
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/87464985/original


Nah... It's hard enough getting them to pay. Especially after I show
them your wedding photography of Lurch and whats-her-name. You still
doing portraits with a 10mm lens? LOL.

John McWilliams wrote,on my timestamp of 4/06/2009 1:07 AM:


Q.E.D.



yawn-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z

John McWilliams wrote,on my timestamp of 4/06/2009 1:07 AM:


Q.E.D.


yaaaaaawn-z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z

Annika1980 wrote,on my timestamp of 3/06/2009 11:47 PM:


Detail would be the ability to see individual water droplets on the
boat like you can in my pic.

Full of bull****, as usual. Like I said: do not confuse the immense noise of
that image with "detail". The two things could not be more opposed.

Not to mention the ability to not blow
out the highlights like 99% of other cameras would do.

Ther is not a single highlight in your image, moron.
How can you claim you haven't blown them? Do you even know what a highlight is?

Oh BTW, you forgot to post your example.

I posted mine years ago. Long before you even had a 5d2, or any other camera
for that matter.
That's what happens when folks use serious gear, not the latest fad.