Re: Ken gets 'em going


"frederick" <lost@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1196386572.637378@xxxxxxxxxx
He must have been getting some hate mail from D300 fan boys about these
comments:

"High ISO noise is different from the D200. Neither is much better than
the other. High ISO noise has almost nothing to do with image quality
unless you're silly, since I shoot in moonlight at the lowest ISO on a
tripod anyway. I only cranked up the ISO to see what happens.

The D300 uses less noise reduction (NR or deliberate blurring) than the
D200 at low ISOs so it's sharper and noisier than the D200 around ISO 200
and 400. The D300 uses much more NR at high ISOs, so it's softer and
fuzzier than the D200."


So he posts this:
"Every time the wankers get to me..."
http://kenrockwell.com/tech/iso-comparisons/2007-11/index.htm

Oh yeah!! He gets 'em going alright.
Did you click on his link to his dissertation on noise where he tells us he
left his "over one hundred thousand dollar per year job" in the analysis of
digital motion picture systems and "we" should be grateful (we're "lucky")
he's doing it for free, for us, now!!!
Christ it would be nice to, just once, get through one article of his
without having to reach for the bucket! It is truly a comment on human
nature that some take his word as Gospel.
Bob


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Canon - Nikon Observations
    ... at high ISO noise reduction- but by how much? ... buying a "full frame" camera is that they perform better at high ISO ... At lower ISO and normal print sizes you won't find that much ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Canon - Nikon Observations
    ... at high ISO noise reduction- but by how much? ... buying a "full frame" camera is that they perform better at high ISO ... I make an assertion, ...
    (rec.photo.digital)