> Comes straight back to the fact that one person can potentially create
> amazing images with a pinhole camera and others couldn't take a decent
> picture with a $5000 DSLR/lens.

That's often said and it's obviously got merit BUT a good photographer
can usually more easily  be a great one with superb tools.
(ignore ascended masters who do better with pinhole cameras.)

BUT

>=A0Hugely interesting if you're a camera
> geek or doing science, not so much if you are taking pictures of sport.

No. Not at all.
My aim is to be able to take hand hand reasonable quality photos in
almost any conceivable situation, and in a few others as well.

The Nikon D700 achieves this well enough. The D3s is slightly better.

The D800 doesn't and my new Sony A77 doesn't.

Sports photography often benefits from high shutter speed and small
aperture. High ISO is the necessary 3rd leg of the stool to achieve
this.


Bride and father in shadow at back of church in shadow. Photographer
at front of church. Being able to take reasonable quality hand held
photos without flash in such situations is my aim. A D700 about
achieves this.

Xian. Crowded bus. I missed the landmarks and the bus is now
travelling away from my place of residence, but I don't know that yet.
Lighting is street lights flickering through windows. I take a small
group photo IN the bus - me and a few others - strangers aka friends I
hadn't met that the camera allows me to "communicate" with as we sway
in the jostling crowded almost darkness.  That was taken at 6400 ISO -
max available on an A700. The result is a noisy mess unsuitable for
any normal use. It's great ! Just what I expected. Went with the
situation. BUT a D700 would actually almost take an OK photo in that
situation. You can always force it to take noisier ones if you must


Russell

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.