Pro 1 and Mark 2 of 1 D

[scottmc]

I feel I must come to Michael's defense here. I'm a long time fan of the Luminous Landscape but this is the first time I've ever felt the need to post a reply. I read a lot of the messages here and I must agree that there is a fair percentage of posts that are, well if not negative, then miss the point.
This website is simply about producing good photos. How you do that is up to you but many people are like Wile E. Coyote; They redouble their efforts as they lose track of their goals. Please read this article:

http://www.golfonline.com/golfonl....00.html

Now, they don't say it in the article but I remember reading that Fred Vuich was actually using a 6mp Nikon SLR for the Masters that year. Yes, he finally took that cover with a medium format camera and not a digital SLR but that's immaterial. The point is Fred realized he would have been just another photographer around the green so he removed himself from the 18th green, took a unique vantage point and came up with one of the (arguably) best covers SI has had in the last ten years. It wasn't about film vs. digital, or pixel count, or Nikon vs. Canon, etc. but about being creative.
Some of the best photo essays I've seen have been from pros shooting on their vacations with a crappy $20 Holga.

What's the best camera to own? The one you have in your hands when you need it.

Thanks,
Scott Mc.

PS - I been using a D60 since the week it came out and have not felt the need to "upgrade" since it does everything that I need.

[Interested in Landscapes]

"But I'm sure that there will be those that don't want the results to be what they are, and so will find something to find fault with. In any event, let the wailing begin."

This is drastically unprofessional, like someone airing their dirty laundry.  In fact, ending an article with "let the wailing begin" most definatly rings of someone trolling for a fight, writing to insense.

But my question as a hopeful landscape photographer, is are the "unimportant" differences that show here important in the real world, when you have to actually sell your clients prints, instead of just telling them how stupid they are as print peepers?

[Frank B]

One thing I thought was particularly interesting was the very slight difference in 10x15 prints.  Considering that this is a natural 3:2 blowup for the 1D Mark II and a crop for the Pro 1 it is amazing that the Pro I was so close in quality.