Recent Comments:
More pics of Sony's new Alpha DSLRs surface {Engadget}
May 18th 2007 10:27AM Well, I wouldn't like to get into the endless "photographers make pictures, not cameras" Rockwellesque-style argument, it's just that your sensor matters, too. Clean ISO 1600 is a GREAT feature, I'd rather have this, not the stabilizer.
And last time I checked, 5D was something like 2700-2800, not 4k.
P.S. Good luck to Sony, I wish they bring the competition to the full-frame market.
More pics of Sony's new Alpha DSLRs surface {Engadget}
May 18th 2007 10:22AM Yes, but the loud clunk of the mirror/shutter will give you away instantly ;)
More pics of Sony's new Alpha DSLRs surface {Engadget}
May 18th 2007 5:46AM Not quite so, Canon makes great CMOS sensors, and as for the differences in resolution - I'd attribute those to stronger AA-filter in the Canons (which has it's upsides and downsides - MUCH lower risk of moire at the expense of some loss of sharpness)
Take a look at these crops (Sony Alpha A-100, Nikon D80, Canon 400D @ ISO 1600) -
http://videomax.ru/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=25875
I'd go with 400d if i had to choose between these three (but I'm much happier with my 20D anyway :) )
More pics of Sony's new Alpha DSLRs surface {Engadget}
May 18th 2007 5:39AM The problem with A-100 (as opposed to Minolta DSLRs) is that it's NOISY. Okay, so is Nikon D80 (a bit less, though). 400D is the best of the crop (pun intended), but I'm not a fan of APS-C cameras with 10 megapixels.
8 is more then enough, IMHO, if you REALLY need more (landscapes, extra-large prints), why not look at the full-frame cameras (Canon EOS 5D springs to mind - it is THE ultimate low-light DSLR in my opinion, plus it's hard to beat in terms of real resolution). Or, good'ol medium format.
More pics of Sony's new Alpha DSLRs surface {Engadget}
May 18th 2007 5:32AM Or, better yet, upgrade to Canon EOS 5D, now THAT'S an unbeatable low-light monster ;)
