Phil Cook wrote:

> 
> Well it does seem to keep it stable, I have to use the burst for such  
> things and hope at least one comes out okay. Is it me though or do they  
> seem a bit noisy close-up? 

Yes there are far too many variables for this to be a useful test.  It 
was more a matter of basic proof of concept, can I snap a shot from a 
moving car or in low light and get something even remotely useful? 
Previously, this was not possible.  And yes, next I will try some shots 
'in the field' with side by side comparisons of SR turned on and off.

Understaning the noise and jpeg artifacting will require me to boost my 
understanding of how digital imaging and how these digital cameras work 
by a factor of 1000 at least! But it seems to me that focus, exposure, 
and what is probably some sort of automatic digital filtering applied by 
the camera's various exposure 'modes' are all factors in this.  Further, 
these shots were cropped, resized, and saved from Photoshop at different 
jpeg 'quality levels' in order to get a file < 1 Mb each time.  In 
general the texture in the the foreground pavement seemed to be the most 
sensitive to artifacting and is what I kept my eye on when resaving the 
images.

Since I used fully automatic settings, how the camera acquires a focus 
automatically a factor I think.

Post a reply to this message