OK - My unscientific test this past two weeks have left me this
in testing two major MFB's
I'm not going to mention any MF brands but...you'll figure it out.
given the choice is it better to deal with a some Moire problems every
now & then & have a great looking file at 400iso & usable at 800iso
or
to have a MFB that you need to shoot at 200iso or lower & have virtually
no Moire with the "promise" in the future things will get better as in a higher iso
I'm shooting 90% location & shoot tethered 20% of the time - lifestyle, stock, concept
Currently I shoot 1ds MKll
thanks for anyone's "snappy" replies.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=111982\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
As long as the ISO200 is pretty good, I would probably go for the lower ISO and no moire but I shoot a lot of fabric which is very prone to moire. For the higher ISO I would continue to use the MKII. The Canon is the king of the hill at the moment for high ISO.
200 ISO is pretty low though. I use 200 quite often on my Aptus, 400 not that often. I find them both pleasing but I like the grainy/noisy effect.
You haven't mentioned how many shots above ISO100 you take?, do you live in Northern Europe like I do (or some other dark place)?, Do you use flash on location?
I just had a look on your website, some really nice shots!. Many of the shots on your site look to have been done with some flash with it as well so they can be made on low ISO as well.
Still is a difficult call. Goodluck with it and let us know what you went with and what made you swing in what direction. These are the very same kind of issues I (and probably more people) are dealing with as well on a regular basis. Unfortunetally I can only spend my money once