;-)
Since you mentioned image stabilization, I though I'd give a heads up on
a potential buying opportunity that probably won't last long, for people
looking for a great digicam who are spoiled on DSLRs, in terms of
design and features, but who want to have a fairly small and lightweight
You're right, Olympus is taking forever to bring out the new model, which
has probably cost them some market base, but I'm waiting for it. The leaked
info sounds great. The 14-35mm f2.0 lens is taking even longer, and isn't
expected until next spring, rumor has it. It would seem to me odd that
From: Berry Ives [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You're right, Olympus is taking forever to bring out the new model, which
has probably cost them some market base, but I'm waiting for it. The leaked
info sounds great. The 14-35mm f2.0 lens is taking even longer, and isn't
expected until next spring, rumor
On Jul 7, 2007, at 7:34 AM, David J. Littleboy wrote:
But you are forgetting to take the other aspects of the format
difference
into account.
This seems like an assumption. ;-)
For the same pixel count (to a rough first approximation, 10 is
about the
same as 12.7), a 4/3 camera's pixels
Uh, this should be deeper...sorry. ;-)
On Jul 7, 2007, at 12:08 PM, R. Jackson wrote:
But since DOF is two stops shallower you don't need to stop the lens
down as much to get the same effective DOF.
From: R. Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So a birder, for example, will have a two-stop DOF advantage over a
FF guy right out of the gate just because of his format of choice.
Add in the faster Zuiko f/2.0 lens at ISO 100 and he can use a higher
shutter speed at a lower aperture all day long.
It
On Jul 7, 2007, at 1:29 PM, David J. Littleboy wrote:
It don't work that wayg.
The 5D user shoots at ISO 400 with the same image quality (photon shot
noise) and same shutter speed and sees the same DOF (and same
background
blurring effects) at f/4.0 as the 4/3 user does at f/2.0.
It is
I have been trying to follow this thread, with some difficulty -
probably my old age. But to keep perspective and depth of field equal,
when comparing Full Frame with smaller formats, lens focal length,
circle of confusion, or blur circle, size must be adjusted
proportionately. Control of
On Jul 7, 2007, at 3:59 PM, James L. Sims wrote:
Control of chromatic aberrations become
proportionately more restrictive. Then there's Lord Rayleigh's
Criteria
regarding Diffraction Limit is just as true today as it was when he
published it. Therefore, with today's APO lenses, we can
From: R. Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Again, if you are using a 10MP 4/3 camera, then the comparison is
with the 70-200/4.0 (IS).
I know you like that f/4 comparison, but like you said earlier, with
the A/D converters as they are you aren't seeing a dynamic range
advantage at low ISO, so the
From: James L. Sims [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have been trying to follow this thread, with some difficulty -
probably my old age. But to keep perspective and depth of field equal,
when comparing Full Frame with smaller formats, lens focal length,
circle of confusion, or blur circle, size must be
On Jul 7, 2007, at 5:15 PM, David J. Littleboy wrote:
The 5D doesn't deliver a dynamic range advantage
(at low ISOs), just a two stop sensitivity advantage across
comparable ISOs.
Sure. I thought I'd already made that stipulation clear. Yes, a
bigger sensor will get you more high-ISO
From: R. Jackson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
So IQ is vital to you unless it isn't. Heh...I guess we could go on
for a couple of days with me saying that 645 isn't a serious format
and you can choose to use an inferior format if it suits your needs,
but that doesn't make it worth using. ;-)
Exactly!
13 matches
Mail list logo
