No one's claiming parity in IQ, but in excellent light or with @large@ (more shapes than fine detail - clouds, sea, mountain ranges) compacts can put in an excellent showing at ISO 100.Simplicius wrote:I would question the intelligence of anyone who claimed the compacts were superior in any regime other than size and cost.Death wrote:Indoor events are where compact digital cameras go to show how in various situations, DSLR's really do kick the crap out of them :d.
It's when the ISO goes up that the difference becomes one of magnitudes (as opposed to needing prints or decent sized screens to notice).
Don't forget usability, weight and basic ease of use .Compacts and bridges are poor cameras overall, but they have a market because not everyone needs or can afford a full-spec camera.
Tell me about it.. (Seriously, I could use some ideas ))aerius wrote:I am not familiar with US tax codes, but in Canada I could write it off as a business expense if I were doing paying work as a photographer or if my pictures were exhibited in a gallery.
I'm at that uncomfortable stage where I'm trying to figure out how to present/sell photos without doing any presenting/selling yet. I know fuck-all about small business and self-employment, so I really don't want to mess around with that unless I have a good reason to do so.
That...Just might work. (Especially a funnel shape over the external flash). Thanks!aerius wrote:I've had pretty good results by taping a piece of notebook or computer paper over the flash. .The Grim Squeaker wrote:I do limit the flash out of politeness, and an unholy loathing for the results of an on camera, non softened flash. (Attempts to make a flash bounce with socks, fabric and plastic have not succeeded).