This topic is in the 2012 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2012OM-D & PEN Images
p.304 #1OM-D & PEN Images
bobbytan wrote:
The heart of the matter is that an average camera in the hands of a skilled photographer is far better than a high-end camera in the hands of an amateur photographer. All things being equal, FF gives you better IQ than m43 or APS-C. That's a given. Then again, Medium Format trumps Full Frame.
There is no end to this IQ debate. I am happy with m43. You are happy with FF, and that's great. And some other people will not settle for anything less than MF. 
Equipment is a very personal choice and our needs and preferences are all different. More and more people are turning to the compact Sonys and Fujis for travel. And then there are some of us (me included) who would try to find something in-between i.e. something that is compact but versatile with reasonably good IQ ... and m43 fits the bill perfectly ... for folks like us.
Sure, a 50MP FF camera will beat any m43 camera any day. It's all about trade-offs. Why do you think Diego Martin choose to shoot with the OM-D instead of a FF mirrorless or DSLR? Why do you think did I give up a FF Canon for the OM-D? Because you really don't need a FF camera to create and make images like these. Photography is all about having a creative eye and great technique/processing skills ... more than just good equipment.
The m43 cameras/sensors of today are actually better than FF cameras of a few years/generations ago.
?Like we discussed in more than just a single occasion, all other things being equal, for landscape photography I would take a FF camera over a crop camera, any time of the day. And that, regardless whether you never print and only post your images on FB .
I don't know why he chose a m 4/3 format back then when he switched. I didn't even know that he gave up a FF DSLR. A logical answer would be because the Sony FF mirrorless cameras were not readily available when he made the switch.I take it as a compliment - thank you, Bobby!
I fully respect your decision to choose whatever gear you think would fit your style/need of photography. And indeed, the individual's need varies greatly as it should. It is the enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.... hm, passion is what we are after. Let's go out and take more pictures
!.
Since we are in the discussion mood - Bobby, to me, you reach the point of diminished returns in respect to the difference between a FF (35mm format, that is) and MF formats. MF systems are heavy, clunky, clumsy to handle and most of all, very expensive. A completely different beast, IOW and it is definitely not for me, not in my age .
Edited on May 21, 2015 at 01:00 PM · View previous versions
The heart of the matter is that an average camera in the hands of a skilled photographer is far better than a high-end camera in the hands of an amateur photographer. All things being equal, FF gives you better IQ than m43 or APS-C. That's a given. Then again, Medium Format trumps Full Frame.
There is no end to this IQ debate. I am happy with m43. You are happy with FF, and that's great. And some other people will not settle for anything less than MF. AGeoJO wrote
bobbytan wrote
And you are not alone, Joshua. Far from it. You are in the majority group. And the majority of "photographers" are quite clueless. But not you I might quickly add - you belong to the minority of the majority group i.e. those who actually know what they are doing.Equipment is a very personal choice and our needs and preferences are all different. More and more people are turning to the compact Sonys and Fujis for travel. And then there are some of us (me included) who would try to find something in-between i.e. something that is compact but versatile with reasonably good IQ ... and m43 fits the bill perfectly ... for folks like us.
AGeoJO wrote
bobbytan wrote
On the web ... very little. On a very large print the difference would be fairly significant ... unless he shot this in RAW 40MP High Res mode on his E-M5 II.Sure, a 50MP FF camera will beat any m43 camera any day. It's all about trade-offs. Why do you think Diego Martin choose to shoot with the OM-D instead of a FF mirrorless or DSLR? Why do you think did I give up a FF Canon for the OM-D? Because you really don't need a FF camera to create and make images like these. Photography is all about having a creative eye and great technique/processing skills ... more than just good equipment.
The m43 cameras/sensors of today are actually better than FF cameras of a few years/generations ago.
AGeoJO wrote
Could you imagine how Diego's images would look like, had he used a FF 50+MP body outfitted with a wide DR Sony Exmor sensor though?. I don't know why he chose a m 4/3 format back then when he switched. I didn't even know that he gave up a FF DSLR. A logical answer would be because the Sony FF mirrorless cameras were not readily available when he made the switch.
I fully respect your decision to choose whatever gear you think would fit your style/need of photography. And indeed, the individual's need varies greatly as it should. It is the enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.... hm, passion is what we are after. Let's go out and take more pictures
!.Since we are in the discussion mood
- Bobby, to me, you reach the point of diminished returns in respect to the difference between a FF (35mm format, that is) and MF formats. MF systems are heavy, clunky, clumsy to handle and most of all, very expensive. A completely different beast, IOW and it is definitely not for me, not in my age .Edited on May 21, 2015 at 01:00 PM · View previous versions
May 21, 2015 at 12:56 PM
savingspaces
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.304 #2OM-D & PEN Images
AGeoJO wrote:
Sure, a 50MP FF camera will beat any m43 camera any day. It's all about trade-offs. Why do you think Diego Martin choose to shoot with the OM-D instead of a FF mirrorless or DSLR? Why do you think did I give up a FF Canon for the OM-D? Because you really don't need a FF camera to create and make images like these. Photography is all about having a creative eye and great technique/processing skills ... more than just good equipment.
The m43 cameras/sensors of today are actually better than FF cameras of a few years/generations ago.Like we discussed in more than just a single occasion, all other things being equal, for landscape photography I would take a FF camera over a crop camera, any time of the day. And that, regardless whether you never print and only post your images on FB .
I don't know why he chose a m 4/3 format back then when he switched. I didn't even know that he gave up a FF DSLR. A logical answer would be because the Sony FF mirrorless cameras were not readily available when he made the switch.In what scenario would a FF setup "improve" your pictures? And how?I didn't imply any improvement but if you insist, what I meant above is that I prefer the details generated by a larger sensor (FF in this case for the sake of discussion) over those coming from a smaller sensor (m 4/3 or even APS-C), especially if all other things being equal. YMMV, of course and I understand that.The detail you talk about? Do you see it in prints at what sizes? The reason I ask about the detail that you mentioned is because a pro tested the em1 against the a7r/810 and "he" claimed the em1 had just a bit more detail but ultimately he switched to the a7r due to the size of the prints he makes.I have never owned a m 4/3 body and as such, I have not done any comparison nor I am doing any right now. What I am saying here is solely based on the assumption that in order for you to view an image of the same size, be it on the monitor or on the paper/printing material, you have to magnify more from a smaller sensor than from a larger sensor. As simple as that. Again, all other things being equal. Well, that's the same reason for that pro to choose the A7r. Strictly from the image quality point...Show more →
I do not want to seem like I am trying to give you a hard time, but are you a recruiter? I find it very odd to see someone never having used the format expressing favorable opinions of another format. Why do you do it? Insecurity?
At 36 wide m4/3 prints tack sharp.
savingspaces wrote
AGeoJO wrote
savingspaces wrote
AGeoJO wrote
bobbytan wrote
On the web ... very little. On a very large print the difference would be fairly significant ... unless he shot this in RAW 40MP High Res mode on his E-M5 II.Sure, a 50MP FF camera will beat any m43 camera any day. It's all about trade-offs. Why do you think Diego Martin choose to shoot with the OM-D instead of a FF mirrorless or DSLR? Why do you think did I give up a FF Canon for the OM-D? Because you really don't need a FF camera to create and make images like these. Photography is all about having a creative eye and great technique/processing skills ... more than just good equipment.
The m43 cameras/sensors of today are actually better than FF cameras of a few years/generations ago.
. I don't know why he chose a m 4/3 format back then when he switched. I didn't even know that he gave up a FF DSLR. A logical answer would be because the Sony FF mirrorless cameras were not readily available when he made the switch.
I do not want to seem like I am trying to give you a hard time, but are you a recruiter? I find it very odd to see someone never having used the format expressing favorable opinions of another format. Why do you do it? Insecurity?
At 36 wide m4/3 prints tack sharp.
May 21, 2015 at 12:59 PM
savingspaces
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.304 #3OM-D & PEN Images
AGeoJO wrote:
There is no end to this IQ debate. I am happy with m43. You are happy with FF, and that's great. And some other people will not settle for anything less than MF.
Equipment is a very personal choice and our needs and preferences are all different. More and more people are turning to the compact Sonys and Fujis for travel. And then there are some of us (me included) who would try to find something in-between i.e. something that is compact but versatile with reasonably good IQ ... and m43 fits the bill perfectly ... for folks like us.
Sure, a 50MP FF camera will beat any m43 camera any day. It's all about trade-offs. Why do you think Diego Martin choose to shoot with the OM-D instead of a FF mirrorless or DSLR? Why do you think did I give up a FF Canon for the OM-D? Because you really don't need a FF camera to create and make images like these. Photography is all about having a creative eye and great technique/processing skills ... more than just good equipment.
The m43 cameras/sensors of today are actually better than FF cameras of a few years/generations ago.Like we discussed in more than just a single occasion, all other things being equal, for landscape photography I would take a FF camera over a crop camera, any time of the day. And that, regardless whether you never print and only post your images on FB .
I don't know why he chose a m 4/3 format back then when he switched. I didn't even know that he gave up a FF DSLR. A logical answer would be because the Sony FF mirrorless cameras were not readily available when he made the switch.I take it as a compliment - thank you, Bobby!
I fully respect your decision to choose whatever gear you think would fit your style/need of photography. And indeed, the individual's need varies greatly as it should. It is the enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.... hm, passion is what we are after. Let's go out and take more pictures!.Since we are in the discussion mood - Bobby, to me, you reach the point of diminished returns in respect to the difference between a FF (35mm format, that is) and MF formats. MF systems are heavy, clunky, clumsy to handle and most of all, very expensive. Definitely not for me, not in my age .
Ha! You could have said the very same thing about M4/3 and FF, unless you Pixel peep.
bobbytan wrote
The heart of the matter is that an average camera in the hands of a skilled photographer is far better than a high-end camera in the hands of an amateur photographer. All things being equal, FF gives you better IQ than m43 or APS-C. That's a given. Then again, Medium Format trumps Full Frame. There is no end to this IQ debate. I am happy with m43. You are happy with FF, and that's great. And some other people will not settle for anything less than MF. AGeoJO wrote
bobbytan wrote
And you are not alone, Joshua. Far from it. You are in the majority group. And the majority of "photographers" are quite clueless. But not you I might quickly add - you belong to the minority of the majority group i.e. those who actually know what they are doing.Equipment is a very personal choice and our needs and preferences are all different. More and more people are turning to the compact Sonys and Fujis for travel. And then there are some of us (me included) who would try to find something in-between i.e. something that is compact but versatile with reasonably good IQ ... and m43 fits the bill perfectly ... for folks like us.
AGeoJO wrote
bobbytan wrote
On the web ... very little. On a very large print the difference would be fairly significant ... unless he shot this in RAW 40MP High Res mode on his E-M5 II.Sure, a 50MP FF camera will beat any m43 camera any day. It's all about trade-offs. Why do you think Diego Martin choose to shoot with the OM-D instead of a FF mirrorless or DSLR? Why do you think did I give up a FF Canon for the OM-D? Because you really don't need a FF camera to create and make images like these. Photography is all about having a creative eye and great technique/processing skills ... more than just good equipment.
The m43 cameras/sensors of today are actually better than FF cameras of a few years/generations ago.
. I don't know why he chose a m 4/3 format back then when he switched. I didn't even know that he gave up a FF DSLR. A logical answer would be because the Sony FF mirrorless cameras were not readily available when he made the switch.
I fully respect your decision to choose whatever gear you think would fit your style/need of photography. And indeed, the individual's need varies greatly as it should. It is the enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.... hm, passion is what we are after. Let's go out and take more pictures
!. - Bobby, to me, you reach the point of diminished returns in respect to the difference between a FF (35mm format, that is) and MF formats. MF systems are heavy, clunky, clumsy to handle and most of all, very expensive. Definitely not for me, not in my age .Ha! You could have said the very same thing about M4/3 and FF, unless you Pixel peep.
May 21, 2015 at 01:01 PM
p.304 #4OM-D & PEN Images
savingspaces wrote:
.
I don't know why he chose a m 4/3 format back then when he switched. I didn't even know that he gave up a FF DSLR. A logical answer would be because the Sony FF mirrorless cameras were not readily available when he made the switch.In what scenario would a FF setup "improve" your pictures? And how?I didn't imply any improvement but if you insist, what I meant above is that I prefer the details generated by a larger sensor (FF in this case for the sake of discussion) over those coming from a smaller sensor (m 4/3 or even APS-C), especially if all other things being equal. YMMV, of course and I understand that.The detail you talk about? Do you see it in prints at what sizes? The reason I ask about the detail that you mentioned is because a pro tested the em1 against the a7r/810 and "he" claimed the em1 had just a bit more detail but ultimately he switched to the a7r due to the size of the prints he makes.I have never owned a m 4/3 body and as such, I have not done any comparison nor I am doing any right now. What I am saying here is solely based on the assumption that in order for you to view an image of the same size, be it on the monitor or on the paper/printing material, you have to magnify more from a smaller sensor than from a larger sensor. As simple as that. Again, all other things being equal. Well, that's the same reason for that pro to choose the A7r. Strictly from the image quality point of view, maybe I would prefer the files from the Nikon 810 but a mirrorless system has its own advantages that are not associated with the IQ. Again, that's strictly my opinion and others may think differently and that's perfectly fine.
My recent largest print from my A7r was 36 inches wide and it is currently hanging over the fire place of the family I gave that enlargement to.I do not want to seem like I am trying to give you a hard time, but are you a recruiter? I find it very odd to see someone never having used the format expressing favorable opinions of another format. Why do you do it? Insecurity?
At 36 wide m4/3 prints tack sharp.
Now, you are reaching.... What recruiter? Why would I do that and for what? Insecurity? Far away from that! You like your 36-inch print? That's fine and more power to you!
My original post was more addressed to Bobby Tan as I know him personally and he is one of my shooting buddies. That's all, not more and not less.
AGeoJO wrote
savingspaces wrote
AGeoJO wrote
savingspaces wrote
AGeoJO wrote
Like we discussed in more than just a single occasion, all other things being equal, for landscape photography I would take a FF camera over a crop camera, any time of the day. And that, regardless whether you never print and only post your images on FB. I don't know why he chose a m 4/3 format back then when he switched. I didn't even know that he gave up a FF DSLR. A logical answer would be because the Sony FF mirrorless cameras were not readily available when he made the switch.
My recent largest print from my A7r was 36 inches wide and it is currently hanging over the fire place of the family I gave that enlargement to.
At 36 wide m4/3 prints tack sharp.
Now, you are reaching.... What recruiter? Why would I do that and for what? Insecurity? Far away from that! You like your 36-inch print? That's fine and more power to you!
My original post was more addressed to Bobby Tan as I know him personally and he is one of my shooting buddies. That's all, not more and not less.
May 21, 2015 at 01:05 PM
p.304 #5OM-D & PEN Images
I have shot with an SLR/dSLR for 40+ years and this Grandpa has had enough. Schlepping around bulky/heavy gear is not my thing anymore. And most of my photography these days are travel-related. Give me a good compact and I am a happy camper. Who knows ... in another few years I may downsize to a Sony RX 100 Mk V.
AGeoJO wrote:
There is no end to this IQ debate. I am happy with m43. You are happy with FF, and that's great. And some other people will not settle for anything less than MF.
Equipment is a very personal choice and our needs and preferences are all different. More and more people are turning to the compact Sonys and Fujis for travel. And then there are some of us (me included) who would try to find something in-between i.e. something that is compact but versatile with reasonably good IQ ... and m43 fits the bill perfectly ... for folks like us.
Sure, a 50MP FF camera will beat any m43 camera any day. It's all about trade-offs. Why do you think Diego Martin choose to shoot with the OM-D instead of a FF mirrorless or DSLR? Why do you think did I give up a FF Canon for the OM-D? Because you really don't need a FF camera to create and make images like these. Photography is all about having a creative eye and great technique/processing skills ... more than just good equipment.
The m43 cameras/sensors of today are actually better than FF cameras of a few years/generations ago.Like we discussed in more than just a single occasion, all other things being equal, for landscape photography I would take a FF camera over a crop camera, any time of the day. And that, regardless whether you never print and only post your images on FB .
I don't know why he chose a m 4/3 format back then when he switched. I didn't even know that he gave up a FF DSLR. A logical answer would be because the Sony FF mirrorless cameras were not readily available when he made the switch.I take it as a compliment - thank you, Bobby!
I fully respect your decision to choose whatever gear you think would fit your style/need of photography. And indeed, the individual's need varies greatly as it should. It is the enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.... hm, passion is what we are after. Let's go out and take more pictures!.Since we are in the discussion mood - Bobby, to me, you reach the point of diminished returns in respect to the difference between a FF (35mm format, that is) and MF formats. MF systems are heavy, clunky, clumsy to handle and most of all, very expensive. A completely different beast, IOW and it is definitely not for me, not in my age .
AGeoJO wrote:
bobbytan wrote
The heart of the matter is that an average camera in the hands of a skilled photographer is far better than a high-end camera in the hands of an amateur photographer. All things being equal, FF gives you better IQ than m43 or APS-C. That's a given. Then again, Medium Format trumps Full Frame. There is no end to this IQ debate. I am happy with m43. You are happy with FF, and that's great. And some other people will not settle for anything less than MF. AGeoJO wrote
bobbytan wrote
And you are not alone, Joshua. Far from it. You are in the majority group. And the majority of "photographers" are quite clueless. But not you I might quickly add - you belong to the minority of the majority group i.e. those who actually know what they are doing.Equipment is a very personal choice and our needs and preferences are all different. More and more people are turning to the compact Sonys and Fujis for travel. And then there are some of us (me included) who would try to find something in-between i.e. something that is compact but versatile with reasonably good IQ ... and m43 fits the bill perfectly ... for folks like us.
AGeoJO wrote
bobbytan wrote
On the web ... very little. On a very large print the difference would be fairly significant ... unless he shot this in RAW 40MP High Res mode on his E-M5 II.Sure, a 50MP FF camera will beat any m43 camera any day. It's all about trade-offs. Why do you think Diego Martin choose to shoot with the OM-D instead of a FF mirrorless or DSLR? Why do you think did I give up a FF Canon for the OM-D? Because you really don't need a FF camera to create and make images like these. Photography is all about having a creative eye and great technique/processing skills ... more than just good equipment.
The m43 cameras/sensors of today are actually better than FF cameras of a few years/generations ago.
. I don't know why he chose a m 4/3 format back then when he switched. I didn't even know that he gave up a FF DSLR. A logical answer would be because the Sony FF mirrorless cameras were not readily available when he made the switch.
I fully respect your decision to choose whatever gear you think would fit your style/need of photography. And indeed, the individual's need varies greatly as it should. It is the enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.... hm, passion is what we are after. Let's go out and take more pictures
!. - Bobby, to me, you reach the point of diminished returns in respect to the difference between a FF (35mm format, that is) and MF formats. MF systems are heavy, clunky, clumsy to handle and most of all, very expensive. A completely different beast, IOW and it is definitely not for me, not in my age .May 21, 2015 at 01:09 PM
p.304 #6OM-D & PEN Images
savingspaces wrote:
There is no end to this IQ debate. I am happy with m43. You are happy with FF, and that's great. And some other people will not settle for anything less than MF.
Equipment is a very personal choice and our needs and preferences are all different. More and more people are turning to the compact Sonys and Fujis for travel. And then there are some of us (me included) who would try to find something in-between i.e. something that is compact but versatile with reasonably good IQ ... and m43 fits the bill perfectly ... for folks like us.
.
I don't know why he chose a m 4/3 format back then when he switched. I didn't even know that he gave up a FF DSLR. A logical answer would be because the Sony FF mirrorless cameras were not readily available when he made the switch.I take it as a compliment - thank you, Bobby!
I fully respect your decision to choose whatever gear you think would fit your style/need of photography. And indeed, the individual's need varies greatly as it should. It is the enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.... hm, passion is what we are after. Let's go out and take more pictures!.Since we are in the discussion mood - Bobby, to me, you reach the point of diminished returns in respect to the difference between a FF (35mm format, that is) and MF formats. MF systems are heavy, clunky, clumsy to handle and most of all, very expensive. Definitely not for me, not in my age .Ha! You could have said the very same thing about M4/3 and FF, unless you Pixel peep.
Oh, brother. Now, you got me going - have you handled the Sony A7 series cameras? The A7r is about the same weight and bulk as the EM-1. And have you checked their prices? I would definitely put the two systems as comparable.
I apologize to the other Oly users. I hope I didn't come across as a jerk. I really didn't want to do this on this thread and this is my last post on this matter. Sorry
.
AGeoJO wrote
bobbytan wrote
The heart of the matter is that an average camera in the hands of a skilled photographer is far better than a high-end camera in the hands of an amateur photographer. All things being equal, FF gives you better IQ than m43 or APS-C. That's a given. Then again, Medium Format trumps Full Frame. There is no end to this IQ debate. I am happy with m43. You are happy with FF, and that's great. And some other people will not settle for anything less than MF. AGeoJO wrote
bobbytan wrote
And you are not alone, Joshua. Far from it. You are in the majority group. And the majority of "photographers" are quite clueless. But not you I might quickly add - you belong to the minority of the majority group i.e. those who actually know what they are doing.Equipment is a very personal choice and our needs and preferences are all different. More and more people are turning to the compact Sonys and Fujis for travel. And then there are some of us (me included) who would try to find something in-between i.e. something that is compact but versatile with reasonably good IQ ... and m43 fits the bill perfectly ... for folks like us.
AGeoJO wrote
Like we discussed in more than just a single occasion, all other things being equal, for landscape photography I would take a FF camera over a crop camera, any time of the day. And that, regardless whether you never print and only post your images on FB. I don't know why he chose a m 4/3 format back then when he switched. I didn't even know that he gave up a FF DSLR. A logical answer would be because the Sony FF mirrorless cameras were not readily available when he made the switch.
I fully respect your decision to choose whatever gear you think would fit your style/need of photography. And indeed, the individual's need varies greatly as it should. It is the enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.... hm, passion is what we are after. Let's go out and take more pictures
!. - Bobby, to me, you reach the point of diminished returns in respect to the difference between a FF (35mm format, that is) and MF formats. MF systems are heavy, clunky, clumsy to handle and most of all, very expensive. Definitely not for me, not in my age .Oh, brother. Now, you got me going - have you handled the Sony A7 series cameras? The A7r is about the same weight and bulk as the EM-1. And have you checked their prices? I would definitely put the two systems as comparable.
I apologize to the other Oly users. I hope I didn't come across as a jerk. I really didn't want to do this on this thread and this is my last post on this matter. Sorry
.May 21, 2015 at 01:20 PM
savingspaces
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.304 #7OM-D & PEN Images
AGeoJO wrote:
There is no end to this IQ debate. I am happy with m43. You are happy with FF, and that's great. And some other people will not settle for anything less than MF.
Equipment is a very personal choice and our needs and preferences are all different. More and more people are turning to the compact Sonys and Fujis for travel. And then there are some of us (me included) who would try to find something in-between i.e. something that is compact but versatile with reasonably good IQ ... and m43 fits the bill perfectly ... for folks like us.I take it as a compliment - thank you, Bobby!
I fully respect your decision to choose whatever gear you think would fit your style/need of photography. And indeed, the individual's need varies greatly as it should. It is the enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.... hm, passion is what we are after. Let's go out and take more pictures!.Since we are in the discussion mood - Bobby, to me, you reach the point of diminished returns in respect to the difference between a FF (35mm format, that is) and MF formats. MF systems are heavy, clunky, clumsy to handle and most of all, very expensive. Definitely not for me, not in my age .Ha! You could have said the very same thing about M4/3 and FF, unless you Pixel peep.Oh, brother. Now, you got me going - have you handled the Sony A7 series cameras? The A7r is about the same weight and bulk as the EM-1. And have you checked their prices? I would definitely put the two systems as comparable.
I apologize to the other Oly users. I hope I didn't come across as a jerk. I really didn't want to do this on this thread and this is my last post on this matter. Sorry.
You are a funny guy! Why would I have to have any experience with any equipment? All that matters is my opinion isn't it? FYI, yes I have handled the A7 cameras. I was talking about FF DSLRs VS M4/3
savingspaces wrote
AGeoJO wrote
bobbytan wrote
The heart of the matter is that an average camera in the hands of a skilled photographer is far better than a high-end camera in the hands of an amateur photographer. All things being equal, FF gives you better IQ than m43 or APS-C. That's a given. Then again, Medium Format trumps Full Frame. There is no end to this IQ debate. I am happy with m43. You are happy with FF, and that's great. And some other people will not settle for anything less than MF. AGeoJO wrote
bobbytan wrote
And you are not alone, Joshua. Far from it. You are in the majority group. And the majority of "photographers" are quite clueless. But not you I might quickly add - you belong to the minority of the majority group i.e. those who actually know what they are doing.Equipment is a very personal choice and our needs and preferences are all different. More and more people are turning to the compact Sonys and Fujis for travel. And then there are some of us (me included) who would try to find something in-between i.e. something that is compact but versatile with reasonably good IQ ... and m43 fits the bill perfectly ... for folks like us.
I fully respect your decision to choose whatever gear you think would fit your style/need of photography. And indeed, the individual's need varies greatly as it should. It is the enjoyment of this wonderful hobby.... hm, passion is what we are after. Let's go out and take more pictures
!. - Bobby, to me, you reach the point of diminished returns in respect to the difference between a FF (35mm format, that is) and MF formats. MF systems are heavy, clunky, clumsy to handle and most of all, very expensive. Definitely not for me, not in my age .I apologize to the other Oly users. I hope I didn't come across as a jerk. I really didn't want to do this on this thread and this is my last post on this matter. Sorry
.You are a funny guy! Why would I have to have any experience with any equipment? All that matters is my opinion isn't it? FYI, yes I have handled the A7 cameras. I was talking about FF DSLRs VS M4/3
May 21, 2015 at 01:41 PM
savingspaces
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.304 #8OM-D & PEN Images
AGeoJO wrote:
I didn't imply any improvement but if you insist, what I meant above is that I prefer the details generated by a larger sensor (FF in this case for the sake of discussion) over those coming from a smaller sensor (m 4/3 or even APS-C), especially if all other things being equal. YMMV, of course and I understand that.The detail you talk about? Do you see it in prints at what sizes? The reason I ask about the detail that you mentioned is because a pro tested the em1 against the a7r/810 and "he" claimed the em1 had just a bit more detail but ultimately he switched to the a7r due to the size of the prints he makes.I have never owned a m 4/3 body and as such, I have not done any comparison nor I am doing any right now. What I am saying here is solely based on the assumption that in order for you to view an image of the same size, be it on the monitor or on the paper/printing material, you have to magnify more from a smaller sensor than from a larger sensor. As simple as that. Again, all other things being equal. Well, that's the same reason for that pro to choose the A7r. Strictly from the image quality point of view, maybe I would prefer the files from the Nikon 810 but a mirrorless system has its own advantages that are not associated with the IQ. Again, that's strictly my opinion and others may think differently and that's perfectly fine.
My recent largest print from my A7r was 36 inches wide and it is currently hanging over the fire place of the family I gave that enlargement to.I do not want to seem like I am trying to give you a hard time, but are you a recruiter? I find it very odd to see someone never having used the format expressing favorable opinions of another format. Why do you do it? Insecurity?
At 36 wide m4/3 prints tack sharp.Now, you are reaching.... What recruiter? Why would I do that and for what? Insecurity? Far away from that! You like your 36-inch print? That's fine and more power to you!
My original post was more addressed to Bobby Tan as I know him personally and he is one of my shooting buddies. That's all, not more and not less.
Well, tell us why do you have to make such statements about a system you have never tried? Maybe to feel superior?
As far as you addressing Bobby specifically, can't you do that in person? You don't make sense. Especially after seeing Bobby Tan's shots. Let your pictures do the talking. It is disrespectful to put down M4/3 in a M4/3 thread. There is a reason why we chose this sensor, and it isn't because we can't afford a sony mirrorless FF camera/lens.
savingspaces wrote
AGeoJO wrote
savingspaces wrote
AGeoJO wrote
savingspaces wrote
In what scenario would a FF setup "improve" your pictures? And how?My recent largest print from my A7r was 36 inches wide and it is currently hanging over the fire place of the family I gave that enlargement to.
At 36 wide m4/3 prints tack sharp.
My original post was more addressed to Bobby Tan as I know him personally and he is one of my shooting buddies. That's all, not more and not less.
Well, tell us why do you have to make such statements about a system you have never tried? Maybe to feel superior?
As far as you addressing Bobby specifically, can't you do that in person? You don't make sense. Especially after seeing Bobby Tan's shots. Let your pictures do the talking. It is disrespectful to put down M4/3 in a M4/3 thread. There is a reason why we chose this sensor, and it isn't because we can't afford a sony mirrorless FF camera/lens.
May 21, 2015 at 01:46 PM
savingspaces
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.304 #10OM-D & PEN Images
galenapass wrote:
I think you are over-reacting here.
I really don't think so, I am simply asking questions of him that "to me" makes no sense. I personally would never write the same post.
I think you are over-reacting here.
I really don't think so, I am simply asking questions of him that "to me" makes no sense. I personally would never write the same post.
May 21, 2015 at 02:08 PM
p.304 #11OM-D & PEN Images
Hmmmm I've got a 40x27 inch photo hanging on my wall here, captured in 2006 with a 10mp APS-C Nikon D80 sensor and it looks down right freaking amazing.
Modern day m43 and even smaller sensors beat the Nikon D80 hands down. So much as happened. I wouldn't feel worried at all printing large with a 16mp m43 sensor. Question is, how many people would really see a difference in a large print without moving in very very close to the photo? In my opinion, very very few. Of course, if you move in very very close to a 40x27 inch print to check detail you are probably the same kind of guy who checks and compares every picture he sees at 100%-300% and then makes silly comments about "noise" performance.
Simple fact it, if it doesn't show up in print it really doesn't matter. No one will spot a difference between a FF or smaller sensor on the web, most won't see the difference in large prints either.
Shoot what you enjoy and enjoy what you shoot and stop the comparison crap, it's a dead dog that's been continuously beaten ever since it died the poor fellow.
Modern day m43 and even smaller sensors beat the Nikon D80 hands down. So much as happened. I wouldn't feel worried at all printing large with a 16mp m43 sensor. Question is, how many people would really see a difference in a large print without moving in very very close to the photo? In my opinion, very very few. Of course, if you move in very very close to a 40x27 inch print to check detail you are probably the same kind of guy who checks and compares every picture he sees at 100%-300% and then makes silly comments about "noise" performance.
Simple fact it, if it doesn't show up in print it really doesn't matter. No one will spot a difference between a FF or smaller sensor on the web, most won't see the difference in large prints either.
Shoot what you enjoy and enjoy what you shoot and stop the comparison crap, it's a dead dog that's been continuously beaten ever since it died the poor fellow.
May 21, 2015 at 02:13 PM
p.304 #12OM-D & PEN Images
Ps.
Beautiful portrait Bobby.
Duke, lovely seascape as always.
Beautiful portrait Bobby.
Duke, lovely seascape as always.
May 21, 2015 at 02:13 PM
p.304 #13OM-D & PEN Images
Home from work, sick, bored, testing the Nikon 50mm F1.2 Ais on the Em5 as well as testing Capture One Pro.
And before someone yells "m43 NOISE!"
it has been added as part of the software testing.
And before someone yells "m43 NOISE!"
it has been added as part of the software testing.  |
||
 |
||
|
May 21, 2015 at 02:15 PM
p.304 #14OM-D & PEN Images
Thanks! FWIW, I have a Sony A7 II + FE 16-35 but I still pre-ordered the Olympus 7-14 PRO. They are all good.
Wilbus wrote:
Ps.
Beautiful portrait Bobby.
Duke, lovely seascape as always.
Wilbus wrote:
Ps.
Beautiful portrait Bobby.
Duke, lovely seascape as always.
May 21, 2015 at 02:29 PM
p.304 #15OM-D & PEN Images
Still waiting to see some shots and thoughts on the A7 Bobby 
Only reason it really interests me is this nice Nikon 50mm F1.2 and my Olympus 24mm F2.8
Figured a used A7 could be a good way of getting some more use out of those two amazing lenses even though I have more MF glass those are really the only two ones I really want to use.
Only reason it really interests me is this nice Nikon 50mm F1.2 and my Olympus 24mm F2.8
Figured a used A7 could be a good way of getting some more use out of those two amazing lenses even though I have more MF glass those are really the only two ones I really want to use.
May 21, 2015 at 02:38 PM
savingspaces
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.304 #16OM-D & PEN Images
_5200018 by Thomas Dekany, on FlickrMay 21, 2015 at 02:42 PM
p.304 #18OM-D & PEN Images
Having both systems, I happen to think A7 and m43 are perfectly complimentary. There are times when the A7 and an adapted nikkor 105mm Ai-s feels nice... just as there are times I reach for my Pen with a body cap lens wanting to go minimalist.
Personally I am glad, although it sounds selfish, when people put down either system, just because I am having so much fun switching back and forth. To summarize, A7 and Pen systems have equally made my photos better than they ever were with a dslr, and for that I am extremely thankful.
Personally I am glad, although it sounds selfish, when people put down either system, just because I am having so much fun switching back and forth. To summarize, A7 and Pen systems have equally made my photos better than they ever were with a dslr, and for that I am extremely thankful.
May 21, 2015 at 03:24 PM
p.304 #19OM-D & PEN Images
Very nice ... and 3D-like.
Wilbus wrote:
Nice! Beautiful colors!
Wilbus wrote:
Nice! Beautiful colors!
May 21, 2015 at 03:47 PM
p.304 #20OM-D & PEN Images
Wilbus wrote:
Nice! Beautiful colors!
Thank you! I decided to take only the 20mm 1.7 with me yesterday and we saw these guys on the way home, we had to stop and take some pictures. The sky was very unusual looking yesterday.
Nice! Beautiful colors!
Thank you! I decided to take only the 20mm 1.7 with me yesterday and we saw these guys on the way home, we had to stop and take some pictures. The sky was very unusual looking yesterday.
May 21, 2015 at 03:59 PM