Not impressed by 20D

Started Sep 4, 2004 | Discussions thread
Phileas Fogg
Senior MemberPosts: 2,317
Like?
Re: "Neither camera makes lousy images"
In reply to David Mazeau, Sep 14, 2004

David Mazeau wrote:

But the weaknesses create restrictions. One may see an interesting
perspective to look at an object or scene from, and to look at
it with your human eyes is an interesting experience, but there's no
point in taking a picture, because from that angle the background
will be all blown out to white, et cetera.

Them are the hard realities at times. Sometimes the shot you want will not be the shot you get. You either do not take it or muddle through and acacept what you can get because som,e thingsd are outside your control.

For my stuff I don't really need much more than 6MP. And as far
whether
a camera with much better dynamic range would make me a better
photographer... no, obviously it wouldn't change me. But it would
bring me closer to getting in my images what I can see with my eyes.

It would give me more of a chance to photograph what I see. More
freedom to compose an image without having to take into
consideration the limitations of the tool I am using.

I do not doubt that and would not want you or me to think differently, But before the 1DmkII great images were still being made. On top of that I am not trying to pull the 1DmkII down, my point is tha comparing he 20D to a 1DmkII is a waste of time. The 1DmkII better be a better camera, but that does not mean a guy with a 20D can not replicate very much the same image and quality at times if not often. It's how the cameras are used. The 1DmkII brings usefull tools for more than twice the price and this is why comparing a 20D to it is a waste.

I as a competant photographer know that I can make beautiful images with either camera.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
NopeNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow