$150 vs. $5000

Dante King wrote in post #2327392
i wanted to go piss on Ken, but that might clean him off.

now that's funny

Dante King wrote in post #2327392
i wanted to go piss on Ken, but that might clean him off.

Not to mention the effect the run-off might have on the environment....There is enough of Ken's $hit floating around now without hosing him down and spreading it around.

Ken,

Barbie called, she wants to know when you're going to give her back the plastic camera....Oh and Dante said no-piss this time, sorry.

Well I am surprised by the amount of Depends votes

Dante King wrote in post #2327392
i wanted to go piss on Ken, but that might clean him off.

Dante don't pollute the environment more

Depends on if I'm producing a 800-pixel image or not.
Depends on if I read the 5D manual or not.
Depends on if I gave the 5D to my grandmother or not.
Depends on whether I really care or not.
Depends on whether Rockwell is a moron or not - well, that's a given.

Just got finished reading it, and for a while, it seemed like he was in a tirade against the 5d. Then he whapped me over the head with his final paragraph (a photographer makes the picture, not the camera) and concluding sentence (I use fancy cameras because...). So, I had to choose "depends."

I don't know about that guy, but I strongly disagree with his conclusions from the enlargements. There is much, much more detail and sharpness in the leaves in the first. I thought the difference was obvious, with the 5d blowing the p+s out of the water, but they guy said they look "about the same." Another objection; he never used objective details, but relied solely on emotional wordplays. I did not see any mtf charts, noise comparisons, or the like (think: dpreview-style review). All I saw was a single image; it looks to me like he is jumping to conclusions.

It bugs me that the p+s's image seems a little "crushed" in the shadows; the 5d preserves detail in the shadows without blowing out the sky.

And before he jumps to conclusions about the 5d, I challenge him to perform tests such as night photography; sports photography, both in dimly lit gyms (think basketball and volleyball) and out in the field; let me see an image from the p+s that is macro, but one version with nice bokeh, and one version with everything sharp; let me see a long exposure (5sec+) or 3fps; how about using the industry standard CF card instead of a lesser compatible (well, when it comes to the professional realm, at least) less supported SD card; the list goes on....

And then comes the conclusion, which I have to agree with somewhat. Photographers do make the picture, not cameras. But let me close with an illustration. When I had my point and shoot (olympus camedia 300 or so), I loved to take panoramic shots, but the camera had no manual control. All of my panoramas would look like a checkerboard; light, dark, light dark, with obvious seams. The solution? Well, as Olympus put it, but one of their smart media cards, which had a "panorama" mode (all it did was lock the exposure off of one shot). But now that I have an SLR, my panoramas can come out just how I want them to, with all the photos of the same exposure.

I could stick many other anecdotes in here, but I'll refrain.

So yeah, the photographer does take a picture, but, up to a point, a "fancier" camera sure does help.

So much hostility here. My mom always taught me not to make fun of the special kids.

gjl711 wrote in post #2332061
So much hostility here. My mom always taught me to to make fun of the special kids.

hmmm.. My dad's third wife wasn't the brightest blonde on the beach. I remember being about eleven when he told me to stop picking on her and not everybody was going to be as sharp as others... Kind of reminds me of that ofcourse when they present themselves as the sharpest knives in the drawer than all bets are off and they become free targets atleast I think that's fair...

sari

gjl711 wrote in post #2332061
So much hostility here. My mom always taught me not to make fun of the special kids.

Well you must be soooo special, editing a simple post like that

saravrose wrote in post #2333392
hmmm.. My dad's third wife wasn't the brightest blonde on the beach. I remember being about eleven when he told me to stop picking on her and not everybody was going to be as sharp as others... Kind of reminds me of that ofcourse when they present themselves as the sharpest knives in the drawer than all bets are off and they become free targets atleast I think that's fair...

sari

Ohh you sound nice,

nice and mean that is.

I believe if someone can make fun of others then they should be able to be made of themselfs by others.

nzl-g3user wrote in post #2335639
Well you must be soooo special, editing a simple post like that


Ohh you sound nice,

nice and mean that is.

I believe if someone can make fun of others then they should be able to be made of themselfs by others.

very true.. in self-defense I was eleven.. and I am nicer to her thirteen years later...

That is stupid. Yeah a PS camera can take the same image but the PS camera has its limitations and one is sharpness, the other is speed and the other is the ability to change lenses. If this guy is thinking his PS is as good as his 5D then he might as well sell it since he obviously doesnt know what he is doing with it. Its a very unfair test.

And I am coming from using a PS for years taking very good pictures with one and mastering it. And still I do not ever regret buying a dSLR at all to replace it because the images from it compared to my PS blow me away.