alundeb wrote:
Jman, you are just fooling yourself and you know it. It is not the smaller format and register distance that buys you smaller and lighter lenses, it is the acceptance of more photon shot noise in your images.
?? What? Of course it\'s the smaller format and register distance that provides smaller and lighter lenses. And yes, I accept the downsides to that format as a trade. That\'s not fooling myself, it\'s a conscious trade off. The fact is that current m4/3 sensors are pretty darn good, and so the tradeoff is basically insignificant for what I shoot. It, of course, will not be the case for everyone...but for a lot of people it is.
Yes, a smaller format has tradeoffs...you give up sensor size for compactness, and certainly some people won\'t want to make that trade. But EVERYONE makes that trade at some level. You\'re acting like 35mm full frame is some sort of holy grail reference standard, but it\'s not...it was the \'small format\' at one point, and in the film days, it carved out the niche of being small enough to be convenient but high quality enough for professional use for most photographers. Why don\'t most professionals use medium format digital? Well, it\'s bigger, it\'s more expensive and there are some things it doesn\'t do as well. It\'s the same thing with m4/3 shooters to full frame.
Now you have the mirrorless segment...it\'s lower absolute quality than modern full frame digital, but for many people, especially with the latest cameras, it\'s high enough quality to make the tradeoff for the significantly reduced size and weight. And it does some things better than DSLRs (faster and more accurate single shot AF, all with live view, for instance).
May 21, 2012 at 10:28 AM
Previous versions of Jman13's message #10653588 « 12-35/2.8 is out »
