Don't know about how Bob made his shot but here is one at ISO800 and warm
light (bad to noise) full size of 1.36MB JPEG.
http://www.accura.com.hk/P2108869.jpg
Really that bad at noise?
C.H.ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> I don't understand the Can*n folks comments, though. This is a test I
> did shortly after getting the 300D. It's before I got the patched
> firmware, so no iso 3200. In any case, I didn't do anything to the color
> at all in taking the samples. I did sharpen all the samples as the
> camera wasn't set to sharpen much and some sharpening is needed at some
> place in the process to get the detail in digital images
> <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Compar2FM1600sa.jpg>.
>
> I'm not tring to say that the 300D is particularly good at color balance
> or as good as the E-1, only that I've seen no problem with it changing
> at higher isos. It is less noisy at 400 and above than the E-1, and I've
> got lots of nice sharp shots at 800. Fewer at 1600, but that's because I
> use it sparingly because of the noise. Here's a full pixel bird shot,
> albeit perhaps less 'cute' than your warbler to some tastes. :-) In any
> case with full pixel samples right out of the camera and with different
> NeatImage settings. Clearly less noisy than yours at 800.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
