[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
> Wright Huntley wrote:
> > wshenefelt wrote:
> > > Seems to work
> > BTW, Bill, I have liked pictures I've seen from the Nikon 950 a lot better
> > than the ones from a 990. Maybe it's the photographer, but... The "higher
> > resolution" is mostly mythology, but the results of the 990 are much noisier
> > (at similar ASA setting), and I think the "purple fringing" may be more
> > noticeable.
> > Wright
> > --
> About Nikon 990 is the focus working better than 950? And does the manual focus
> [more steps] and the focus confirmation [sharpened pic in lcd] help in shooting
> fish pic?
I don't have one, so don't know personally, but there are several excellent
sites that review these cameras. I posted a favorite earlier. From it:
Has an updated (Oct.) review that indicated the problems have been fixed,
and adding a USB-port accessory controller overcomes my biggest objection --
no cable release o/e.
My perception of earlier 990s was that the modest 3:1 zoom wasn't
compensated by really good optics. Steve, however, calls them "razor sharp."
I found them with too much Petzval curvature, lateral chromatic aberration
and barrel distortion. [That's an optical techie way of saying the lenses
were clearly the resolution limiters, *not* the ccd.] We may have seen
different cameras from different production runs.
990 images I evaluated early this year were a long way from utilizing the
ccd's resolution capability of 3.3Mp, and the resultant noise was too high
for my liking at *any* ASA setting (low was better, of course). Focus
problem and all, the 950 seemed to take slightly better pictures, IMO.
My Sony 770 has both through-the-lens focus (unfortunately, without good
ground glass screen) and the magnified LCD image for focusing. I never use
the latter, but it could be because my old eyes don't focus as well close
up. I can correct the SLR viewfinder with the "diopter" adjust to make it
easy to see focus. Lack of ground glass is particularly bad for younger
folks, who can accomodate well to different distances. It's possible to be
really fooled, unless you learn to use the grids and double ring around the
focus spot to get the image really into the right plane. Sony discontinued
the 770, and I think the excessive returns from people who could not learn
to use the viewfinder was a major cause.
My experience is that the lenses of just about *all* modern consumer digital
cameras are the resolution limiter, on any that use a ccd with much more
than about 1 Mp. Sony may have overcome that on some models with really
crisp Zeiss lenses. Unfortunately, those tend to be nearly pure P&S cameras,
particularly unsuited to fish portraits.
Wright Huntley, Fremont CA, USA, 510 612-1467
An aquarium is just interactive television for cats.
See http://www.aka.org/AKA/subkillietalk.html to unsubscribe