Boris, I agree with almosl everything you say. Except in very few pictures where AF is critical, for innstance, I don't take advantage of my camera by far.
My point is: when the total novice looks at the camerashop and sees a Panasonic m4/3 and a Samsung or NEX next to it, same aspect, same size...he/she is going to ask...'what is the difference between them?' -An informed seller will answer..'well, sensor size'... -'Oh...and is that important?' (fill the blank) So, if for the same money I get same size, similar functionality and bigger sensor...why should I chose the smaller one? I don't see any reason except Dario's lens ecosystem and, as he also says,...marketing !!... ----- Mensaje original ---- > De: Boris Liberman <[email protected]> > Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > Enviado: vie,22 octubre, 2010 18:21 > Asunto: Re: OT - 4/3, m4/3 > > On 10/22/2010 6:08 PM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote: > > I am just trying to say that if size is similar, the other important > > aspect >is > > Image quality, that it seems that will be always better in APSC land. >So...why > > m4/3? > > Dario's answer is: lens 'ecosystem' and IQ is not that important. > > Jaume, the "IQ is always better in larger sensor land" (which is direct >generalization of the quote above) is debatable. If you shoot targets in >controlled environment, then indeed it is likely to be true up to the up >todate-ness of the gear being compared. If you do real life shooting it is not > >all that straightforward. > > I am slowly but surely growing to understand that gear has very little part > in >image creation process. Whatever suits the photographer is good enough. It >can >be anything really. Of course driving Mercedes is better than driving Kia but >as one who's driving the latter every day for past two years I should say, >Kia >is just fine. By the way, I am not implying here the direct parallel between >Merc and APSC or FF and Kia and (m)4/3. > > In fact, I opine that for 99.9% of hobbyist or amateur photographers, their >actual abilities were surpassed when K10D (D200, 40D) were introduced. I am >approaching 10K clicks on my K-7 and I am going to write a blog entry follow >up >to my K-7 review when I bought about year and half ago, slightly less >actually. >I am surprised myself, but I am using really very small sub set of what K-7 >has >to offer. And I consider myself being reasonably well versed, being a square >type who does RTFM and being a software engineer. > > I doubt that if one will be presented with the three cameras, m43, APSC and >FF, they could just so, on the spot come up with three images, one from each >camera, that will extract most from their gear consequently showing >practically >that m43 < APSC < FF in IQ department, as you appear to claim. > > Case to point - recently someone posted on PentaxForums an image and asked >which camera was used to take it. Apparently it was *istD and no one even >thought of such a possibility. > > Like I said, Godfrey knows exactly what he is doing and he constantly proves >how good a photographer and a photo-technician he is. Evidently yours and >mine >mileages will be and are different. > > Boris > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow >the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
