Moose grunted:
> Keep telling yourself that and eventually it will be true.
I knew I'd get a rise out of you on that comment. :)
> The 1D III is simply not the same type of camera, with a smaller
> sensor and bigger, more expensive body that excel at high frame
> rate uses.
The 1D3 will definitely be the cat's meow until fall when the 6D and
1DsM3 are introduced. At that point we'll hear howls of protest on
how out-of-date the 1D3 is... Seriously, the 1D3 is a very tempting
camera for those of us who shoot events involving people and
movement. The size/weight is a non-issue as any decent DSLR with
battery-grip (including my E-1) is a whale.
> As to obsolete, your tongue must be firmly in cheek. The guy who
> continues to use and extol the advantages of the E-1 and A1...
Of course. And I still shoot with an OM-2S and IS-3. I might as
will be coating my own glass plates.
> Just because resolution and modest high iso noise performance
> is not an issue in your event work doesn't mean it isn't important
> to other people's work. Bob Whitmire, for example, has run right
> up against the E-1's technical limitations in his different mode
> of selling his images.
We all run up against the E-1's technical limitations. I'd be a fool
to say that I never do. But we have to keep things in perspective.
As my wife constantly reminds me: "Do you WANT it or do you NEED
it?" And the real burner: "How much additional money will that bring
in?"
> Oh bosh! You, of all people, know how important it is to match
> equipment to use and to test equipment throughly so you know what
> it can and can't do. Pixel peeping is one useful way to do that.
Very true, however, the vast majority of pixel-peepers have turned
buying equipment into a hobby. They take pictures of their cats.
Pros used to run an EOS-1(x) body for a minimum of five years with
8-10 being the average turnover on that level of equipment. Now,
they're replacing them every 12-18 months. Are the pictures any
better? Technically maybe, but the income doesn't support the
expenditure.
> How is it any different than shooting resolution test targets
> (which I know you have done) and viewing he results with a
> microscope or on highly enlarged prints? It's the same game of
> finding the limits.
Yes, but for what purpose? Self-gratification or a real-application?
AG
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|