Hi, Chris, and thank you for your lovely comments and I am honoured that you think I have an 'eye'. It means a lot. I have learned a lot from your helpful criticisms in the past Yes, new camera, an early Christmas present that I accidentally opened - oops Not sure about it, yet. Not much time to play. I do know my 1D mklll rocks, although, I am quite attached to my little xti, also. Are you concerned about the pixel-pushing going on, same size sensors - more pixels? I suppose the photocytes are larger? Anyway, thank youCatIt's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see ~ Henry David Thoreau
Thank you, so much, Donna, Chuck, Jason & Alan (how are you?) I very much appreciate your commentsCatIt's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see ~ Henry David Thoreau
#7 Mon October 19, 2009 4:19am
I'm concerned that while Canon brings the technology forward, getting continuously better results from smaller pixels, Nikon seems to be stuck at 12mp and just re-hashing old cameras with a slapped-on movie function or something. It's like back when they refused to put sensor cleaning technology in the cameras, but they were eventually forced into it by the market. In the meantime, Canon is pushing out wondrous machines like the 7D.
Thank you, mortong, and I agree about the pixels and equipment. CatIt's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see ~ Henry David Thoreau
#10 Tue October 20, 2009 5:25am
I agree that megapixel hunt isn't the way to go just based on that goal. Cat has proven a thousand times with her wonderful XTi photos that you don't need 24mp to create an artistic beauty. My point in bringing up the differences in the camera companies is that the scientific effort to improve the technology eventually benefits us all.