FlyPenFly wrote:
If we're not doing a bokeh test, I would put up a $100 to say that in a double blind test, nobody will be able to accurately point out which was the D700 shot vs OM-D for a given scene post processed by myself in 1024 width.
Question is; why would I choose a system depending on how you process your images? Of course I meant my own images, processed by me. I know several people who constantly screw up any image from their $$$ gear, making them look like they were shot with a cellphone camera.
Edit: If one is happy with the OM-D and can't see a difference, that's great! I wish it applied to me, but it doesn't and I use the cameras for different occasions. Mostly the OM-D because I hate the weight of the D700, and I got the 20/1.7 again yesterday, because I need to restrict my use of gear (yes, very ironic). I also have the better 25/1.4 but I don't like the size of it.
Just pointing out the post processing will make far more difference than the camera between a FF and MFT if you're talking about web sizes.
Everything between the moment of capture and the final image makes a difference. It's up to you to define what's worth more effort, larger sensor, more PP or whatever that takes you where you want to get. In my case, I can't 100% what I want out of the OM-D, but I can with the D700. Anyway, I can get close enough to keep the camera and like it for what it is.
i am VERY happy with my OM-D, but still miss the beautiful image quality of the D700. If there was a D700 with IBIS and video, i'd buy it today at any price under $3k.
Of course I meant my own images, processed by me. I know several people who constantly screw up any image from their $$$ gear, making them look like they were shot with a cellphone camera.
