Received: from  ([206.46.170.212])
 by fonix.org (wcSMTP v5.5.450.2)
 with SMTP id 93467828; Sun, 27 Oct 2002 15:33:58 +0000
Received: from BobDial ([67.249.56.227]) by pop018.verizon.net
          (InterMail vM.5.01.05.09 201-253-122-126-109-20020611) with ESMTP
          id 
          for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2002 09:33:53 -0600
Message-ID: 
From: "Bob Dial" 
To: 
References: 
Subject: Re: Where/Bob4/Ken
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 09:33:46 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at
pop018.verizon.net from [67.249.56.227] at Sun, 27 Oct 2002 09:33:52 -0600


----- Original Message -----
From: 
To: 
Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2002 11:55 PM
Subject: RE: Where


> -> moment I am trying hard to figure out what difference (negatively)
> -> pushing the ISO rating to 400 will make... I am hoping that it will
> -> help me keep the photos sharp while hand-holding the camera.
>
> Like using a faster film, you will probably pick up a little grain.
> But considering that you are using a larger CCD than the 995, it
>shouldn't be as noticeable as it would there..

Agree there..

> Using telephoto lens usually requires a tripod for sharpness.

A tripod is almost always more secure but the ease with which the camera is
steadied when hand held makes a big difference in the need department.  At
one time I shot half second exposures on the 4x5 that were fine, given the
proper circumstances for such things.  On the Sony I get excellent results
most of the time, too, not at half seconds, but doing available light in
general.  I'm not having the same results with the Nikon.  I think its
default ISO 100 is impractical for the way I like to shoot, most of the
time, and it took raising ISO all the way to 400 to get similar sharpness,
hand held, even at lower magnifications than what I do with the Sony.

A lot of the problem, it seems to me, is the physical difference in the two
cameras.  The Sony FD95 lends itself beautifully to a left hand cradle and
forehead rest using the TTL eyepiece finder.  On the Nikon I am still having
problems trying to find any position in which it is both secure and
comfortable.  Conclusion?  Tripods are needed a lot more using the CP5000
than they are using a Sony FD95.  This would hold true over a great many
camera to camera comparisons.  How we get a camera still is forever mated to
the size and style of the cameras.

>They get the image a few degrees closer, but also
> magnifies the shake factor by the same degree. (Why us old guys >like wide
angles :-)

I much prefer the other way around and I'm no spring chicken!  
What we use the cameras to do is the real definer along this line, both in
terms of image gathering and getting the camera to and from the location at
which it's used.  

BobD

--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5