Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon

In article ,
says...
Let me reverse that question... why haven't you bought ME a pint?

Er, you must have been in the toilet when it was my round. Yeah, that's the
ticket.

Liar, you're just cheap because you're saving up to buy that magical
Leica rangefinder that will let you take 1/8th hand held shots in
complete darkness while you juggle penguins.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:35:26 -0700, Bill Funk wrote:

You're the big mouth who said he can shoot handheld with an SLR at 1/8
sec (which we now learn is via IS), so go and shoot a performer under
low lights with it. Remember to shoot wide open and lets see how your
shots compare to those taken with a Leica M.

Ok, now I'm interested.
How is 1/8 sec. different in a Leica M?
Why did you feel it necessary to add the "wide open" bit?
I thought 1/8 sec. would be the same no matter what camera was used.

I think the point about 1/8 sec. is that SLRs have to contend with
mirror flap, which has little adverse effect at very long and very
short shutter speeds. So at 1/8 sec. you might assume as slight
advantage for rangefinder cameras. All of 'em, not just Leicas. I
have a good idea why "wide open" was added, but I'll yeild the floor
and let the next guy in line provide an explanation.


Leitz lenses are designed to be extremely sharp when shot wide open. The
same can't be said for a lot of Japanese lenses.

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com

Brian Baird wrote:
In article ,
says...
Let me reverse that question... why haven't you bought ME a pint?

Er, you must have been in the toilet when it was my round. Yeah, that's the
ticket.

Liar, you're just cheap because you're saving up to buy that magical
Leica rangefinder that will let you take 1/8th hand held shots in
complete darkness while you juggle penguins.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird

Hey! I juggle penguins, what is so wrong about that?

Scott

DD (Rox) wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:35:26 -0700, Bill Funk wrote:

You're the big mouth who said he can shoot handheld with an SLR at
1/8 sec (which we now learn is via IS), so go and shoot a
performer under low lights with it. Remember to shoot wide open
and lets see how your shots compare to those taken with a Leica M.

Ok, now I'm interested.
How is 1/8 sec. different in a Leica M?
Why did you feel it necessary to add the "wide open" bit?
I thought 1/8 sec. would be the same no matter what camera was used.

I think the point about 1/8 sec. is that SLRs have to contend with
mirror flap, which has little adverse effect at very long and very
short shutter speeds. So at 1/8 sec. you might assume as slight
advantage for rangefinder cameras. All of 'em, not just Leicas. I
have a good idea why "wide open" was added, but I'll yeild the floor
and let the next guy in line provide an explanation.


Leitz lenses are designed to be extremely sharp when shot wide open.
The same can't be said for a lot of Japanese lenses.

What has that got to do with shutter speed?
-Nothing whatsoever.

In article .com,
says...

The point is that at ISO 1600 I don't have to shoot at 1/8. When I
was shooting film I hated to use film faster then ISO 100, other might
not be as fussy but I did not like the results from faster film. That
means that at ISO 1600 I am shooting 4 stop higher in ISO then I was
when I was shooting film. A 1/8 exposure at ISO 100 would be 1/128 at
ISO 1600. These are shots that I took recently in a motorhome under
very low light conditions.

http://www.pbase.com/camping05/930

With all due respect, the lighting in those shots looks pretty adequate.

These are shots that I simply would not have been able to get with a
Leica, even if I could have held the camera steady the people were
moving too much for slow shutter speeds.

Here's where we have to disagree. A rangefinder of the calibre of a
Leica will surprise you with its ability to render sharp images in very
little light, regardless of the ISO. Not only is the lens able to
produce sharpness at its widest aperture, but focussing in very low
light, where most modern SLRS are reliant on AF and some form of AF
assist, is a lot easier.

You'd have to use one to understand it, but like most other people who
have opinions without experience, feel free to shoot from the lip...

FWIW, go and look at the photo forums on www.leica.com for some examples
of low light situations where the Leica M is supreme. I have some saved
onto my HDD but for obvious reasons I can't go and publish them on my
own site.

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com

In article ,
says...
Why did you focus on her shoulder?

I didn't - she moved back slightly just before I pressed the
shutter-release.

So why didn't you re-shoot it?

The shot I took (which is of my son paying on the carpet - found on the
last page of the People section of my site) was taken with an M3 (1962)
and 50mm Summicron at f/2. Shutter speed was 1/8sec, film was Ilford XP2
(400ISO). Neat Image dealt with most of the grain.

So that's a stop slower on the lens, and 2 stops slower on the film, with a
3-stop longer exposure time, resulting in the same exposure as the 5D. The
difference being that the 5D at 1600 ISO will produce a less noisy, more
detailed image than pretty much anything on 35mm 400 ISO film, regardless of
how good your lens is, and that you stand a much greater risk of having your
shot ruined by subject motion at 1/8 than I do at 1/60, even if you can
avoid camera shake.

Film has characteristics that just can't be re-created in PS or by any
digital camera. Especially B&W film. But that;s not what this is about.
It's about whether the Leica is the best tool for low light photography
or not. I say it is, you say its not. I've got the shots, you haven't.

BTW, how's the 5D's AF system in low light? Does it hunt a bit or do you
have some kind of AF-assist light?

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com

In article , says...
Who is talking about motion blur? OBVIOUSLY you will have motion blur if
you are shooting a moving subject at that speed, but that's not what
this is about.

Yes it is. You seem to think there will be some magical quality to the
Leica that will allow it to do a 1/8th handheld shot in low light that a
Canon or Nikon with IS/VR can't. I say 1/8th isn't going to give you
sharp pictures of anything other than a corpse at 1/8th of a second, and
that's assuming you hold very, very still while taking the photo.

Go to www.leica.com and look at the photo forums. You don't have to
register, just sign in as a guest.

Additionally, you're changing the requirements of the test after you
were proven wrong. I mean, is there something in the water down there
that makes you a complete twit?

I was not proven anything but correct. Your friends shots are noisy and
out of focus and I really doubt the claimed shutter speeds.

#1: I don't know Chris Brown

#2: It's "you're," not "your."

Really? So I should have said "You are friends shots are noisy..."?
English lessons from someone like you. Outstanding comedic value, Brian.

#3: You were proved wrong in such a hilarious manner that it gets even
more hilarious the more you try and fight it.

I have not been proven wrong.

But show us YOUR shots on this subject. Oh, you haven't got any? Why am
I not surprised...

Hey, we're still waiting for you to show us these magical nightclub pics
at 1/8th of a second that are sharp...

Congratulations Dallas, you're the new Preddy.

Well I don't know who or what a "Preddy" is, but if you can't show me
the pics, why not just admit you're wrong and move on? You know where my
shots are...

--
DD (everything is temporary)
www.dallasdahms.com

"Mark²" mjmorgan(lowest even number wrote in message
news:F9F7f.3442$UF4.2875@fed1read02...
DD (Rox) wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:35:26 -0700, Bill Funk wrote:

You're the big mouth who said he can shoot handheld with an SLR at
1/8 sec (which we now learn is via IS), so go and shoot a
performer under low lights with it. Remember to shoot wide open
and lets see how your shots compare to those taken with a Leica M.

Ok, now I'm interested.
How is 1/8 sec. different in a Leica M?
Why did you feel it necessary to add the "wide open" bit?
I thought 1/8 sec. would be the same no matter what camera was used.

I think the point about 1/8 sec. is that SLRs have to contend with
mirror flap, which has little adverse effect at very long and very
short shutter speeds. So at 1/8 sec. you might assume as slight
advantage for rangefinder cameras. All of 'em, not just Leicas. I
have a good idea why "wide open" was added, but I'll yeild the floor
and let the next guy in line provide an explanation.


Leitz lenses are designed to be extremely sharp when shot wide open.
The same can't be said for a lot of Japanese lenses.

What has that got to do with shutter speed?
-Nothing whatsoever.


Well, if you are going to shoot pictures in dim light, like at a ballet, or
an opera, the faster your lens is wide open the better, and the more silent
your camera is, the better. Leica M's are probably the best tool you can get
for this kind of work....I was thinking about how I could do this with my
F5.....I could lock up the mirror, and use a hotshoe mounted rangefinder,
but I would have a problem with the motor drive....I could put it on
multiple exposure mode, but after each photo I took, I would have to excuse
myself, go out to the lobby to the men's room, and take it off of multiple
exposure mode, and take a picture of the inside of my lens cap in manual
mode in order to get the film to advance, and then put it back in multiple
exposure mode and go back to my seat....All in all, I think I would be much
better off trading it in for the Leica M....:^)

William Graham wrote:
"Mark²" mjmorgan(lowest even number wrote in message
news:F9F7f.3442$UF4.2875@fed1read02...
DD (Rox) wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 08:35:26 -0700, Bill Funk wrote:

You're the big mouth who said he can shoot handheld with an SLR
at 1/8 sec (which we now learn is via IS), so go and shoot a
performer under low lights with it. Remember to shoot wide open
and lets see how your shots compare to those taken with a Leica
M.

Ok, now I'm interested.
How is 1/8 sec. different in a Leica M?
Why did you feel it necessary to add the "wide open" bit?
I thought 1/8 sec. would be the same no matter what camera was
used.

I think the point about 1/8 sec. is that SLRs have to contend
with mirror flap, which has little adverse effect at very long and
very short shutter speeds. So at 1/8 sec. you might assume as
slight advantage for rangefinder cameras. All of 'em, not just
Leicas. I have a good idea why "wide open" was added, but I'll
yeild the floor and let the next guy in line provide an
explanation.

Leitz lenses are designed to be extremely sharp when shot wide open.
The same can't be said for a lot of Japanese lenses.

What has that got to do with shutter speed?
-Nothing whatsoever.


Well, if you are going to shoot pictures in dim light, like at a
ballet, or an opera, the faster your lens is wide open the better,
and the more silent your camera is, the better. Leica M's are
probably the best tool you can get for this kind of work....I was
thinking about how I could do this with my F5.....I could lock up the
mirror, and use a hotshoe mounted rangefinder, but I would have a
problem with the motor drive....I could put it on multiple exposure
mode, but after each photo I took, I would have to excuse myself, go
out to the lobby to the men's room, and take it off of multiple
exposure mode, and take a picture of the inside of my lens cap in
manual mode in order to get the film to advance, and then put it back
in multiple exposure mode and go back to my seat....All in all, I
think I would be much better off trading it in for the Leica M....:^)

All well and good, except that the discussion is about capturing sharp
images at slow shutter speeds hand-held...not whether a camera is noisy.
Besides...Dallas is in the habit of shooting images of sweaty, loud
musicians in night clubs, and other very noisy settings...

DD (Rox) wrote:
In article , says...
Who is talking about motion blur? OBVIOUSLY you will have motion
blur if you are shooting a moving subject at that speed, but that's
not what this is about.

Yes it is. You seem to think there will be some magical quality to
the Leica that will allow it to do a 1/8th handheld shot in low
light that a Canon or Nikon with IS/VR can't. I say 1/8th isn't
going to give you sharp pictures of anything other than a corpse at
1/8th of a second, and that's assuming you hold very, very still
while taking the photo.

Go to www.leica.com and look at the photo forums. You don't have to
register, just sign in as a guest.

Additionally, you're changing the requirements of the test after
you were proven wrong. I mean, is there something in the water
down there that makes you a complete twit?

I was not proven anything but correct. Your friends shots are noisy
and out of focus and I really doubt the claimed shutter speeds.

#1: I don't know Chris Brown

#2: It's "you're," not "your."

Really? So I should have said "You are friends shots are noisy..."?
English lessons from someone like you. Outstanding comedic value,
Brian.

#3: You were proved wrong in such a hilarious manner that it gets
even more hilarious the more you try and fight it.

I have not been proven wrong.

But show us YOUR shots on this subject. Oh, you haven't got any?
Why am I not surprised...

Hey, we're still waiting for you to show us these magical nightclub
pics at 1/8th of a second that are sharp...

Congratulations Dallas, you're the new Preddy.

Well I don't know who or what a "Preddy" is, but if you can't show me
the pics, why not just admit you're wrong and move on? You know where
my shots are...

I still don't know where the 1/8th hand-held sharp shots are.
Where are they again?