Henning, > As you are aware, I was talking about concurrent generations.
You provided an example that was not what I clearly stated I was comparing, and claimed my comment was incorrect, and it was not. It appeared you simply missed what I was comparing. > Talking > about different generations and drawing conclusions or > generalizations from that is pointless, as the technologies and > techniques are evolving too fast to make that meaningful. To YOU my point may have been pointless, but it was a completely correct and meaningful point, at least to me, who is considering a 1D vs 1Ds. The larger pixels at lower ISOs typically have less noise, that's a fact. It's something that is important to me, and possibly to others, and a valid point to consider IMO. Regards, Austin * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
