Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- From: Stephen Bishop <nospamplease@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 16:03:20 -0500
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 11:31:03 -0800, John Navas
<spamfilter1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 08:30:04 -0500, Stephen Bishop
<nospamplease@xxxxxxx> wrote in
<9trpk4tg5mmhfpfki8bcqvq4dl7uias2hc@xxxxxxx>:
On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 20:37:14 -0800, John Navas
<spamfilter1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm not going to waste time on proclamations without support.
Go to any camera review and you'll see all the support you need.
That's too vague. Sorry.
As they say in court, asked and answered.
I have yet to see the evidence.
Why am I not surprised.
You haven't provided it.
Whatever you say. [sigh]
Perhaps if you actually looked at your pictures you wouldn't sigh that
away. Seeing the truth is the first step toward improvement.
Ah yes, the direct insult, last stop of a bankrupt argument.
No support for your contentions. Just pejoratives and insults.
I've clearly wasted my time.
That's not an insult, John. Asking you to look and see the obvious
artifacts and noise that your camera is producing has nothing to do
with you personally.
Finding your better images is your job, not mine.
It isn't my images in question. I've asked for images made by
qualified pros taken at the same event using pro gear.
Indeed, you don't have any images, either of your own, or by anyone
else. Yet you keep proclaiming. It must be comforting to be so certain
in the absence of any support.
You're ignoring all the evidence that has been provided. Again, just
look at all the sample images at sites like dpreview.
Only numbers are objective -- "actual images" just means a pointless
subjective debate.
Numbers can be meaningless. ...
Sorry, that issue just won't go away.
Right, the one that you keep ignoring. Quoting numbers has nothing
whatsoever to do with real-world photographic results.
I can easily find much crappier images taken with dSLR.
Not at ISO 100, you can't. ...
Of course I can -- dSLRs make crappy images all the time.
We were specifically talking about noise levels. If you can find
one from a dslr taken at ISO 100 that has worse noise than that one
example of yours, please post it.
This is getting more and more repetitive. If you have something new to
add, either real data or comparable images of your own, not just more
unsupported proclamations, then I'll be happy to respond. Otherwise
I think it's about time to pack this in.
I can't provide images to compare ...
Painfully obvious.
Clipping text out of context then using it as an insult is a sign of
someone struggling to make a point, John. That's what is obvious.
I'm done with you.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm only trying to help you to improve
your images by pointing out the obvious advantages to using a
different type of camera. Why are you taking this as some kind of
personal battle?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- From: John Navas
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- References:
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- From: Stephen Bishop
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- From: John Navas
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- From: Stephen Bishop
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- From: John Navas
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- From: Stephen Bishop
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- From: John Navas
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- From: Stephen Bishop
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- From: John Navas
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- From: Stephen Bishop
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- From: John Navas
- Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- Prev by Date: Re: Help with buying decision.
- Next by Date: Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- Previous by thread: Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- Next by thread: Re: The sickening reality of high ISO on a P&S
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|