I\'m going to measure how far I have to canoe to get that
I\'ve got a tree branch, a ruler and a micrometer. I count how many tree branches it takes to get there, until the tree branch is too big make the last measurement. Then I switch to the using the ruler to continue measuring, until all I have left to go is something smaller than the smallest mark on the ruler. Lastly, I switch to using the micrometer to get my final measurement.
How accurate is my measurement? Is there a difference between the tools and did it make a difference or not? If so, why? If not, why not?
A system is only as strong as it\'s weakest link (or something close to that for simplicity). If our lens is our weak link, going from 999,999 MP to 1,000,000 MP isn\'t going to improve much. If our lighting / WB is off, getting a Leica won\'t help us much either. If our PP is unrefined, new Profoto\'s won\'t do us much good either.
Before we can know what will make things better, we need to truly know what is holding us back. Is it the engine, the clutch, the transmission or the tires. Getting a bigger engine won\'t make a dragster faster if the tires are spinning too much already. Sounds like it would, but if that isn\'t the real problem, then neither is it the real solution to gains. But, putting in a smaller engine that doesn\'t spin the tires really isn\'t a step forward either. Difference vs. no difference.
There will always be a weakest link to the Nth degree somewhere in a system. The most gains can be made (typically) by improving the weakest link first. Then, there will be something else that is now the new \"weakest link\" ... and on it goes as you keep strengthening/improving each link. When will your system be strong enough for your needs ... well, that\'s highly variable, highly subjective, highly individual and highly debatable.
I\'m going to measure how far I have to canoe to get that
I\'ve got a tree branch, a ruler and a micrometer. I count how many tree branches it takes to get there, until the tree branch is too big make the last measurement. Then I switch to the using the ruler to continue measuring, until all I have left to go is something smaller than the smallest mark on the ruler. Lastly, I switch to using the micrometer to get my final measurement.
How accurate is my measurement? Is there a difference between the tools and did it make a difference or not? If so, why? If not, why not?
A system is only as strong as it\'s weakest link (or something close to that for simplicity). If our lens is our weak link, going from 999,999 MP to 1,000,000 MP isn\'t going to improve much. If our lighting / WB is off, getting a Leica won\'t help us much either. If our PP is unrefined, new Profoto\'s won\'t do us much good either.
Before we can know what will make things better, we need to truly know what is holding us back. Is it the engine, the clutch, the transmission or the tires. Getting a bigger engine won\'t make a dragster faster if the tires are spinning too much already. Sounds like it would, but if that isn\'t the real problem, then neither is it the real solution to gains. But, putting in a smaller engine that doesn\'t spin the tires really isn\'t a step forward either. Difference vs. no difference.
I\'m going to measure how far I have to canoe to get that
I\'ve got a tree branch, a ruler and a micrometer. I count how many tree branches it takes to get there, until the tree branch is too big make the last measurement. Then I switch to the using the ruler to continue measuring, until all I have left to go is something smaller than the smallest mark on the ruler. Lastly, I switch to using the micrometer to get my final measurement.
How accurate is my measurement? Is there a difference between the tools and did it make a difference or not? If so, why? If not, why not?
Aug 20, 2013 at 10:22 PM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #11755627 « Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference »
