D2h user review

[[BnH]]

Incase someone is interested. http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2H_rev00.html
Check out the long exposure shot section :)

=bob=

[Ubiquitous]

The long exposure shot looks fairly impressive... BUT it appears there is no
option to stop it doing a dark frame subtraction. I think I'd probably
prefer a the 10D because who wants to wait another 20 minutes AFTER taking a
shot like that? I admit the 10D probably can't handle 20 minutes without
becoming quite noisy, but then it might be that good with a manual dark
frame subtraction.. who knows.

The other interesting point to note that he took that shot in below zero
temperatures, something which is VERY conducive to low noise... So you're
not really comparing apples with apples unless you shoot the 10D (or any
other camera) in the same circumstances.

"[BnH]" <b18ATiinetDOTnetDOTaus> wrote in message
news:3fdf0a89$0$1727$5a62ac22@freenews.iinet.net.a u...
> Incase someone is interested. http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2H_rev00.html
> Check out the long exposure shot section :)
>
> =bob=
>
>

[Gavin Cato]

"Ubiquitous" <diliff@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:3fdf9abe$0$1731$5a62ac22@freenews.iinet.net.a u...
> The long exposure shot looks fairly impressive... BUT it appears there is
no
> option to stop it doing a dark frame subtraction.

You can stop it from doing the dark frame.

A guy on dpreview posted some long exposures without the dark frame
subtraction and they were very good, only a few hot pixels from a 2min
exposure.

Gav

[Ubiquitous]

"Gavin Cato" <woof@g.com> wrote in message
news:3fdfac0c$0$31744$c30e37c6@lon-reader.news.telstra.net...
>
> "Ubiquitous" <diliff@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
> news:3fdf9abe$0$1731$5a62ac22@freenews.iinet.net.a u...
> > The long exposure shot looks fairly impressive... BUT it appears there
is
> no
> > option to stop it doing a dark frame subtraction.
>
> You can stop it from doing the dark frame.
>
> A guy on dpreview posted some long exposures without the dark frame
> subtraction and they were very good, only a few hot pixels from a 2min
> exposure.

Well thats a good thing then, having that option. I suspect that the black
dots on the full sized sample on that page were very hot pixels, red or blue
or something probably... subtracted from the original photo... so I don't
think its perfect just yet.. will have to see.. you planning on buying it?
;) or keeping the D100?

[Gavin Cato]

"Ubiquitous" <diliff@iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:3fdfd5c6$0$1723$5a62ac22@freenews.iinet.net.a u...

> Well thats a good thing then, having that option. I suspect that the black
> dots on the full sized sample on that page were very hot pixels, red or
blue
> or something probably... subtracted from the original photo... so I don't
> think its perfect just yet.. will have to see.. you planning on buying it?
> ;) or keeping the D100?

I sold my D100 ages ago, I've got a D1h.

I'm waiting to see the specs oif the D2x/ Fuji S3 etc. before deciding. The
D1h is serving me well at the moment so theres no rush.

Gav

[Warren Prasek]

do you think the improvement in long exposure noise is due to the LBCAST
sensor being similar to CMOS, which canon has shown to be very good for long
exposures?

CCDs don't seem to fare nearly as well

[Warren Prasek]

before i get flamed, pls dont misinterpret my post as a slight on any CCD
based camera, i'm just curious because i wasnt aware the D2H was that big an
improvement for long exposures... and it's fairly well accepted that CMOS
does well in this regard. Looks like LBCAST does too. Though it's nice not
having to do dark frame subtraction and still get great results


"Warren Prasek" <newsgroupspam at deletethisbit dot wprasek dotcom> wrote in
message news:3fdff3b8$0$18385$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
> do you think the improvement in long exposure noise is due to the LBCAST
> sensor being similar to CMOS, which canon has shown to be very good for
long
> exposures?
>
> CCDs don't seem to fare nearly as well
>
>

[Gavin Cato]

Actually CCD's are used for the dedicated astro imagers, it's just that
Canon has really gotten the noise thing done really well with their sensors.

I've no idea about specific stuff with LBCAST - I haven't really read much
about it yet.

Gav



"Warren Prasek" <newsgroupspam at deletethisbit dot wprasek dotcom> wrote in
message news:3fdff40a$0$18751$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
> before i get flamed, pls dont misinterpret my post as a slight on any CCD
> based camera, i'm just curious because i wasnt aware the D2H was that big
an
> improvement for long exposures... and it's fairly well accepted that CMOS
> does well in this regard. Looks like LBCAST does too. Though it's nice not
> having to do dark frame subtraction and still get great results
>
>
> "Warren Prasek" <newsgroupspam at deletethisbit dot wprasek dotcom> wrote
in
> message news:3fdff3b8$0$18385$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
> > do you think the improvement in long exposure noise is due to the LBCAST
> > sensor being similar to CMOS, which canon has shown to be very good for
> long
> > exposures?
> >
> > CCDs don't seem to fare nearly as well
> >
> >
>
>

[Rudi]

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 17:59:38 +1100, "Gavin Cato" <woof@g.com> wrote:

>Actually CCD's are used for the dedicated astro imagers, it's just that
>Canon has really gotten the noise thing done really well with their sensors.
>
>I've no idea about specific stuff with LBCAST - I haven't really read much
>about it yet.
>
>Gav


Yeah, except the astro CCD cameras are supercooled to get their
electrical noise down to respectable levels. You would be surprised at
the lengths that astrophotographers go to, even with film (such as
overpressurising the film chamber with nitrogen - pumping it in
constantly, to keep the film dry and flat up against the pressure
plate, etc...)



Regards,

Rudi
http://www.rudiphoto.net/