a reply to: wmd_2008
So the P900 is a good camera but I will stick to a DSLR.
I 100% agree with that. heheh
I liked Tony's video, that is one I haven't seen, I trust him, and it was nice to not see Chelsea without a glass of wine in her hand. heheh
What you have shown is a really good example of what most don't know about camera sensors, (me too!) trying to explain that to a non-enthusiast is a
hard thing to do. Tony's video is a lot to ingest, my eyes tried to roll back into my head a couple of times, but it's good information, seeing all of
that side-by-side is great, I wish I had that information when I first got my digital camera. I have seen a lot of online arguments about the
That's a good list of print sizes too, I had no idea about those, I spent (almost) 30 years in printing but still didn't know that, but I didn't
print, I worked in another area, pre-press. I have printed from my Nikon 990 that I had, well, still have, and printed a couple of images to around
2'x3' or so, they came out really good, I was shocked actually, Of course I did quite a bit of Photoshop on them, but still. I printed several around
16"x20", I was only doing it to see how it'd do, and it did real good. I had access to an Epson 40" printer and we'd use scraps to print our own
stuff, pretty cool. I have not ever printed any image from any of my better cameras though, I'm just not a printer type of guy really. Most people I
know that shoot have all kinds of pictures hanging on their walls, but not me.
There is no doubt in my mind that IF I did print out anything it would be a great print, now my skills may show, but... heheh
All I know is that I see a LOT of people that are pretty good wildlife photographers that have images that are not that great looking at them
enlarged, as in a Flickr image, but they are happy, and I am overly critical on mine, so I am sure I am on theirs. Viewed online they are fine, well,
except the ones that don't bother with noise.
I know the P900 is not so bad at taking shots of Jupiter/Saturn and the moon, but as far as deep space objects I am sure that is just too much to ask.
The reach is there but the quality, not so much, and that goes for anything that it would shoot.
Again, I really am too much of a pixel peeper, I don't like that about myself either, I have just enough OCD to ruin things sometimes. Literally I do
not use an image if it doesn't look good at 100%, I mean, I 'might', but it's rare. Really I don't use many of my images anyway, I just put 'em on
I just think that the P900 is a good camera for certain things, and it's probably perfect for a lot of people, it could not be my only camera, I know
that. That camera is perfect for a private eye though, I know one, I am going to tell him about it... heheh I know one thing for sure, looking at the
moon picture that was shown here looked REALLY good, it's what we used to call, "chewed up" when viewed at 100%, but viewed online at a normal size it
has a lot of impact. Lots of good tonal goodness.
Have you ever taken a shot of the ISS?
I ask that 'cause I have, it's amazing how much you can see from something that's way up there. I have
seen some shots that were so detailed it's hard to fathom. Mine are not anything special, I have never had the perfect conditions or I wasn't on a
tripod, etc. If you haven't, it's pretty cool to try.
One thing I bought and have yet to try out on the ISS is my Bahtinov Focusing Mask, I always have a time trying to focus on infinity, so a few tests
show this will do me some good. I didn't buy it for this reason but I want to try it.