1 Mar
2005
1 Mar
'05
5:26 a.m.
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 16:45 -0500, Roger Merchberger wrote:
Rumor has it that der Mouse may have mentioned these
words:
Has that been post-processed in any way? The quality's not bad for a
digital - no where near as grainy as most digital cameras are.
After all, long exposure makes the picture more
exposed (as compared to
a shorter exposure, other things constant); slow film makes the picture
less exposed (as compared to a faster film, other things constant). So
you long exposure plus slow film adds up to wanting the "normal"
lighting conditions. And that kind of lighting is what you want for a
digital camera anyway.
Unless, of course, you actually have a decent digital camera... ;-)
http://www.30below.com/~zmerch/d70/Nitetime_shot_30sec.jpg 
1.2Meg of storage used -- it's a 30-second
exposure of downtown Grand
Rapids,
I'm a bit irritated that mine won't do longer than 15 seconds - at least
I haven't found a way of doing so yet. I expected the manual mode would
also give the option of completely controlling exposure, but it seems
not (although there's way too many options hidden away that I keep on
finding ;)
Comparable cameras in that price range either didn't have the hot-shoe
flash attachment or (incredibly) had no optical viewfinder (the latter
would *completely* drive me nuts).
cheers
Jules