|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
December 24th, 2003, 12:47 PM
|
#16 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Somerville, MA
Posts: 360
|
Thanks Federico, no offense taken. I've also defended my GL2s on many occasions since most people in the wedding industry are hard-core Sony users. But, I have no particular allegiances except to the client and if I can get a better but affordable picture with a Sony, Pannie or Canon, I'm interested.
Happy holidays to you also. |
|
|
|
December 24th, 2003, 02:37 PM
|
#17 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Bloomington, IL
Posts: 636
|
I love my GL2 but I have to tell you that yes the 150 has a jaw dropping advantage when it comes to low light. Save the GL2 for controlled environments and for weddings grap the 2000/150.
Ben Lynn |
|
|
|
|
December 28th, 2003, 04:24 PM
|
#18 |
|
Regular Crew
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 92
|
One more stop out of the GL2
When you are in low light with the GL2 put it in frame mode and use 1/30 sec shutter. The motion signature looks quite normal.
This should narrow the Sony's advantage in low light. -Tom- |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
