Hi Chris, thanks for your explanation. And a good point too. I tend to overlook that, as I would shoot such an image with my Nikon D2x, (won't go into the differences with thye Mark II) and that also produces clean shots. The tacktics of shooting for reproduction quality first does make good sense...
Hi Hugo, it was rather tight quarters here - so the tripod was a bit troublesome, but still managable.
I rarely go above iso100, because I've noticed there is a slight decrease in overall detail and an increase in color noise. When I'm shooting for this particular magazine, I'm always thinking "reproduction quality" first, then my ease of shooting second - which is why I almost always use a tripod and go for iso100.
Although we recently published some images from another photographer for a fashion spread, which were shot w/ a 17-40 L lens and a Canon 1Ds Mark II, all at ISO 400...and these are some of the cleanest, detail rich images I've worked with. We used one horizontal image at a reproduction size of 16.5"x8.3" (a full-bleed double spread) and it was TACK sharp...amazing what $10,000 will buy you!
Hi Chris, good journalistic photo, using the shallow dof to emphasise his action and labour. Good tones, and good lighting. With 1/25th, you would need that tripod, but didn't you find it very trouble some? Why not set the camera to ISO 400, and shoot manually with 1/50's? At 39mm, I would've taken that chance, especially if you take two photos in short repetition. That approach always works for me with relative slow shutters, as the second shot is taken when I'm already a bit more relaxed, and usually as sharp as if taken with a tripod (or very close to it) Just curious.
0 
{K:150877} 1/5/2006