Your mention of the Epic reminds me . . .
I've been waiting for some manufacturer to produce a high quality
digital P&S. By that I mean something similar in design to the XA
that would have acceptable noise at ~ISO800 or higher. Until recently
pocketable digicams got very noisy very quickly at >ISO100. I hope
this new Fuji is the beginning of a trend.
And I agree, tripod very unlikely for that pic. I'd really like to
see what it could do when properly supported.
ScottGee1
On 10/26/05, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> ScottGee1 wrote:
> > Chuck, thanks for reminding me about this. Noise is impressively low,
> > but I'm not thrilled by what appears to be a lack of resolution.
> > Still, given that it was shot at f/2.8, i.e., wide open, it's pretty
> > good.
>
> I downloaded the full image and printed it at roughly 8x10 size and it
> looks very good to me. Noise is hardly evident. The 35mm 2.8 Stylus
> Epic would be hard pressed to do better.
> >
> > Can we assume Simon used a tripod for his low light shots?
> > If it was hand-held, this tells us only about noise. Not sure a 'pod would
> > be
> > allowed in that environment.
>
> I think a tripod is very unlikely. It looks very good printed large
> especially considering 1/4 second exposure.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|