“The camera I used is a Canon Mark 3, 21 megapixel. The speed was 1600 with a 2 gig card.”
So, they spent about 6 to 8K on a camera, and then only put a 2 Gig card in it and then shot a landscape at 1600 ISO. As a one time professional photographer none of this makes any sense at all. The sole reason for getting a 21 megapixel resolution is to gain enough resolution so you can blow the picture up to absurd sizes, or so you can crop small parts without losing resolution. Shooting a landscape on a sunny day at 1600 ISO defeats the entire purpose of having a camera of that pixel size, and if you spend 6K on a camera, you would probably know that.
Most people who spend tens of thousands on a high horsepower car seldome drive over the speed limit ;-}
and if you spend 6K on a camera, you would probably know that.
= = =
Not necessarily at all.
1. some folks have more money than brains.
2. some folks have expert relatives who suggest a good camera would be . . . knowing such folks have more money than brains . . .
3. such folks often don’t know much about what their TV does or remote does or DVD player or MP3 player or phone does beyond what they desperately want it to do frequently.
4. many folks get expensive gadgets to boost their sense of self worth amongst their friends and they often mostly collect dust except when being shown off.
5. I was a moderately well trained photographer by some of the better in the West . . . had some moderately expensive cameras . . . knew a lot about them and a lot about photography and still just scratched the surface of what the cameras could do.