back alley
IMAGES
this was shot at 6400...
when i started to think about shooting digital one of the factors that were not a part of my thinking was high iso...i had kept my film shooting at mostly 400 except for when using my mamiya 6 and i shot delta 3200 at 1000 in that. but shooting at 1600/3200 never really entered into my thinking...but now, with the fujis in hand i find myself shooting occasionally at 6400 in order to keep the shutter speed at something that will help me produce a sharper image and amazingly the quality of the image is still there...
this is a surprise for me, a pleasant one, but a surprise none the less...
anyone else been surprised at what technology has brought to your image making?
when i started to think about shooting digital one of the factors that were not a part of my thinking was high iso...i had kept my film shooting at mostly 400 except for when using my mamiya 6 and i shot delta 3200 at 1000 in that. but shooting at 1600/3200 never really entered into my thinking...but now, with the fujis in hand i find myself shooting occasionally at 6400 in order to keep the shutter speed at something that will help me produce a sharper image and amazingly the quality of the image is still there...
this is a surprise for me, a pleasant one, but a surprise none the less...
anyone else been surprised at what technology has brought to your image making?
VictorM.
Well-known
The high ISO capabilities of recent digital cameras is probably their most attractive feature. This picture looks good on the screen-will it look as good printed as 8X10? Larger?
Spanik
Well-known
Well, high iso of digital camera's was already better than film years ago. And something I miss with film.
Also surprised about the possibilities of auto-focus. You can have more than 50 points it can focus on but it will never focus on the one you really want. The first thing I do with an AF camera is limit the auto-focus to a single center point.
And things like face recognition also is impressive. Years ago that would have needed a bl**dy mainframe.
Also surprised about the possibilities of auto-focus. You can have more than 50 points it can focus on but it will never focus on the one you really want. The first thing I do with an AF camera is limit the auto-focus to a single center point.
And things like face recognition also is impressive. Years ago that would have needed a bl**dy mainframe.
dct
perpetual amateur
I still use also film for 1600 and 3200 ISO occasionally. Never tried ISO 6400. With my Fuji X100 I also use ISO 3200 as maximum for ISO auto.
Today's digital results are really impressive!
Today's digital results are really impressive!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
These things are bloody marvels. I can't love my D700 but I am still in awe of it's high ISO capabilities ... and it's three years old! Apparently the current Nikon wonder, the D4, can produce these types of results (or better) at 12800.
I think the high ISO war has leveled out a bit now ... a bit like the megapixel pissing contest of a few years ago. They are plenty good enough and now what we need is better dynamic range at these settings. As impressive as that image is there is not much detail in the highlights!
I think the high ISO war has leveled out a bit now ... a bit like the megapixel pissing contest of a few years ago. They are plenty good enough and now what we need is better dynamic range at these settings. As impressive as that image is there is not much detail in the highlights!
Vickko
Veteran
Yep.
And being able to adjust a photo with Lightroom, stuff that would have caused my brain to explode if done in a darkroom with chemicals, dodging, burning, different development times....
And don't even talk to me about split contrast masks.
Digital certainly is here to stay. Good tool to have.
But like the old tools too, when the old tools are sufficient.
And being able to adjust a photo with Lightroom, stuff that would have caused my brain to explode if done in a darkroom with chemicals, dodging, burning, different development times....
And don't even talk to me about split contrast masks.
Digital certainly is here to stay. Good tool to have.
But like the old tools too, when the old tools are sufficient.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I've been involved with digital imaging technologies for too long (since 1984) for much to surprise me about the technology.
Frankly, any high end camera with a DSLR class sensor since the 2004-2006 generation has been good enough to be better than most photographers' needs. New features, like the ability to see in the dark with stratospheric ISO sensitivity, or integrate video capture, or present an electronic TTL view that is useful, have broadened newer cameras sale-ability but haven't really done much to improve upon what I really want (responsiveness, simplicity, and, yes, responsiveness again, in a compact and lightweight package).
The only surprising thing to me is how badly Kodak and some of the other once-were greats in the industry mis-judged how quickly digital cameras would become the mainstream. In the late 1990s, they thought they had another 20 years... That was laughable to anyone who was involved in the computer and high tech industry, like I have been.
Things continue to improve. I just hope the pell-mell rush to spur sales with more and more features sometime soon gives way to more deep, incremental development to make better cameras that answer real needs more than cameras that increase needs.
G
Frankly, any high end camera with a DSLR class sensor since the 2004-2006 generation has been good enough to be better than most photographers' needs. New features, like the ability to see in the dark with stratospheric ISO sensitivity, or integrate video capture, or present an electronic TTL view that is useful, have broadened newer cameras sale-ability but haven't really done much to improve upon what I really want (responsiveness, simplicity, and, yes, responsiveness again, in a compact and lightweight package).
The only surprising thing to me is how badly Kodak and some of the other once-were greats in the industry mis-judged how quickly digital cameras would become the mainstream. In the late 1990s, they thought they had another 20 years... That was laughable to anyone who was involved in the computer and high tech industry, like I have been.
Things continue to improve. I just hope the pell-mell rush to spur sales with more and more features sometime soon gives way to more deep, incremental development to make better cameras that answer real needs more than cameras that increase needs.
G
Ranchu
Veteran
I was surprised that most expensive, fast, 'professional' lenses aren't as good as many common, cheap, slow lenses.
jky
Well-known
1) high iso performance
2) face detection.... Yes, that's right - I said face detection.
2) face detection.... Yes, that's right - I said face detection.
Sid836
Well-known
Things pop out so frequently that nothing more can surprise me. This is good because I can focus on what I really need and avoid being distracted by any "surprises".
btgc
Veteran
Superia 800 at 100% mag still looks to me nicer than ISO800 files from IstD (2003)
GaryLH
Veteran
So many old well known Japanese camera makers are no more or changed
- Konica to Minolta to Sony
- Ricoh/Pentax even though Ricoh bought them, it looks like very few of the Ricoh line us staying
Feveon technology taking off w/ the Merrill line
X-tran sensor
Someone not Leica went back to basics w/ real aperture, shutter speed dial and exposure comp - thanks fuji.
Even small p&s sensor have decent high risk
A full frame sensor in a p&s body rx1
1 inch sensory
Leica does video
Hasselblad digital p&s stupidity
Leica monochrome
Sigma lenses are better than I remembered in past, example 30 f2.8 for nex, m43 and dp2m
Iso 3200 for digital becoming a norm soon
Face detection finally works
hdr in camera support
Sweep Panaramics
Some were expected but some were surprises at the time.
Gary
- Konica to Minolta to Sony
- Ricoh/Pentax even though Ricoh bought them, it looks like very few of the Ricoh line us staying
Feveon technology taking off w/ the Merrill line
X-tran sensor
Someone not Leica went back to basics w/ real aperture, shutter speed dial and exposure comp - thanks fuji.
Even small p&s sensor have decent high risk
A full frame sensor in a p&s body rx1
1 inch sensory
Leica does video
Hasselblad digital p&s stupidity
Leica monochrome
Sigma lenses are better than I remembered in past, example 30 f2.8 for nex, m43 and dp2m
Iso 3200 for digital becoming a norm soon
Face detection finally works
hdr in camera support
Sweep Panaramics
Some were expected but some were surprises at the time.
Gary