fast shutterspeeds, slow film/low ISO Speed, sharp lenses or long focal
lengths.
What I can't choose, anytime I want, is DOF. And I happen to want that
pretty often. For the reasons previously described. So, I wish for better
quaility sensors - with very low noice at high speeds. This will give me -
and everybody else - more choises. More freedom of expression. How can that
be limiting myself. I just don't get it - I'm sorry.
I am not the only one who have been concerned about the relativly high
levels, rendereed by the SONY sensor in the *ist D. Many reviews and Pentax
DSLR users have too. I wish for this issue to be addressed. This is what i
expect form a future high end Pentax DSLR.
If the noice levels are not improved (and the speed issues), I'll probably
be looking elsewhere for future investments.
I guess I have said the same thing many times by now: I expect better image
quality (more MP, lower noice levels) and faster speeds (SF, FPS and -
especially - write speed) from a future high end Pentax DSLR.
Is this really too much to ask?
Regards
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 11. februar 2006 22:58
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: RE: New High End DSLR Speculation
OK, we have very different opinions about what's required in the way of DOF
to make a "good" photograph. There are literally 23, 987, 645
photographers who believe that good photographs can be made using shallow
DOF. Portraits are but one example that such a technique often benefits.
That said, the softening or blurring of backgrounds (and, perhaps to a
lesser degree, foregrounds), has been considered a very viable and helpful
technique almost since the dawn of photography.
Capturing "reality," as you suggest, isn't always desirable, or indicative
of a good photograph. Many people, both on this list and off, myself
included, can give numerous examples of this. A photograph isn't, never
was, and never will be, reality.
Personally, I find it sad that you prefer, or choose, to limit your
photographic expression, although, based on the photos of yours that I've
seen, a somewhat greater DOF to achieve some additional sharpness may serve
you well. But to make so broad a statement as you have is, perhaps,
disrespectful, and certainly it discounts, the vision and sensibilities of
others.
I now stand by my pre-caffeined thought that your statement is inane.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Jens Bladt
Shel, I believe you might need another cup of coffee.
Having enjoyed such a drink you may want to give it a second thought,
after
which I'm sure you'll agree that:(
(Here I wanted to make a long speach about why they invented lenses (in
stead of just using pin hole cameras) and why they - at the same time -
invented adjustable apertures - in order to allow stopping down the used
lenses (to a small hole - pretty much like the pi hole camera, which by
the
eay will render very sharp images - without using a lens) - in order to
achieve better sharpness than the big lenses could provide fully "open").
But I won't.
In stead of starting with the basic history of photography, I'll just
remind
you, that the world is three dimentional - it's round - not flat like at
lens test target. This means, that in order to make photographs, that by
most people can be recogniosed as a good photograph (which BTW means that
it
looks at least a little like the real subject) has at least some
resemblence
with the world we know and see, a certain amount of Dept Of Field is
required.
This is why I want better image quality/less noice at high ISO speeds. I
want to use my lenses stoped down - not fully opened. That is why I don't
want "faster glas", Faster glas means LESS DOF - provided, naturally, I'm
actually using this speed (read: large apertueres) to render pictures.
That's what i DON'T want. - most of the time.
I would shoot 90% of all photographs at F.8- F. 11 if I my gear would
allow
me to.
Regards
Jens
Jens Bladt
http://www.jensbladt.dk
-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: Shel Belinkoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sendt: 11. februar 2006 15:22
Til: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Emne: RE: New High End DSLR Speculation
At first read, that seems to be a most inane statement, but maybe there's
more to it than my pre morning coffee brain can understand. Perhaps you
can elaborate upon it, specifically, why is a certain range of DOF
important for "good" photographs, what is a good photograph, and what does
sensor or film size have to do with anything? Thank you for your
indulgence.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Jens Bladt <
Most good photographs will require at least some DOF (F.4 - F.8) for
APS-sized sensors.
