Re: High speed camera vs. HD video
- From: "Burgerman" <burgerman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:40:50 GMT
"Ken Hart" <kwhart1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:l4vOj.2267$WU.1750@xxxxxxxxxxx
"AKA gray asphalt" <benvhoff@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:xXsOj.167785$nr1.119043@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxsnip
"Burgerman" <burgerman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:uuaOj.50167$Ff4.16383@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNot many of my past wedding customers wanted 2030 wall prints, except for the really upscale ones, but a 16x20, matted and framed of the bride and groom was purchased about 90% of the time. In many cases, three were purchased (I gave a discount for that), one for the couple and one for each parent. I suspect tht I would have solf far fewer of them if I hadn't been shooting 6x7 negatives.
Yes. Its a point and shoot! Noisy, low image quality, does not compare to a real Digital SLR. Great for snaps. Unusable for printing high quality 20x30 prints unless you are very easily pleased!
That's not what the reviews say. You obviously
haven't used one. They haven't even been
available until last week in the US. So I know you
are bsing. Who wants 20x30 prints for wedding
And how many would want it from a HD video cam at about 2 million pixels?
Or a noisy soft lensed over processed point and shoot?
You really dont need to answer...
Some dont get it because they havent seen or understood the difference or seen the difference in a large print.
However the difference is rather obvious when you do.
You cant upscale a 2 million pixel movie camera shot to even 16 x 20 however you try, even if that shot was somehow not overprocessed, and was correctly exposed and focussed. Which is very unlikely! The reason good DSLR lenses are expensive is bacause they can do this. The reason the sensors are bigger is the same. The "control" allowed is also important to allow the photographer the chance to "get" these shots. And often at high ISO. That requires some real artistic skill thats beyond me though!