FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

relative size difference m43/APS/FE

Page  123 7>
Author
LAbernethy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 November 2015
Country: Canada
Location: Ontario
Status: Offline
Posts: 3398
Post Options Post Options   Quote LAbernethy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: relative size difference m43/APS/FE
    Posted: 09 December 2021 at 23:42
Well, it all comes down to time, money, pragmatism and pride.



Time. It marches on.
I used Olympus gear analog, loved it. Slow to digital, very expensive. I still have and use my 4/3rds gear. The E-5, I was really happy with. If Olympus released the E-7 with the upgraded sensor and processor I would have stayed.
In light of our recent conversation, I HATE processing, not my thing. The out of the box images from the Olympus processor renders far better than I can. I've only been dealing with RAW files for the last few years because I was so unhappy with what I was getting from the Sony's. When I finally saw what the CCD sensor from my a100 was actually capturing and the crap the image processor was putting out, my jaw dropped. With Olympus it's the other way around. The RAW's are Meh, but it comes out NICE.
I LOATHE the electronic view finder. My EM-1 has remained mostly unused 'till this year because of it. I have a set of a99's and a77's but prefer the OVF of a850. I am learning to tolerate the EVF's.

Money, It all costs something.
While waiting for the a77III I hesitated. fumbled. A-Mount discontinued, E-Mount expensive and for me, not ready for prime time. I scrambled and stocked up on A-Mount and started another look at Olympus. The Body isn't the only expense and I was well provisioned in legacy gear for the change back.

Pragmatism. I'm closer to the end of my photographic journey than the beginning and was never more kitted out.
I finally went with the Olympus OM-D EM-1 Mk2 for the in camera processing of HDR, Focus stacking and High Resolution images. It makes my workflow easier. At least the little I still do. I've been backing away from weddings; permits, insurance requirements and "Hollywood" expectations. Realty listings want Drone shots and 4K video now.

The Olympus IBIS is good but if you're more than two cups of coffee shaky... it's not magic. I've never gotten the headline performance. I think the person who rated it was an eye surgeon. I found it best set to IBIS auto and sequential low. If you try for a single use the 2sec. timer.
The IBIS also has a problem. Movement beyond camera shake. Sway, Shiver, Subject movement, it will result in blur or loss of sharpness. All that is smoothed out in video but it's still there. Good light is really good. I rarely run over ISO 1000.
The Sony's I like and use for different reasons. OVF - the a850 is a joy to use. The a700 also. EVF - The Sony EVF's have been functionally better for me with the a77/a99. The Olympus EM-1 Mk1 gave me vertigo, still does actually, but my time with Sony seems to have lessened the effect. Not a problem with the Mk2 but my concern returning to Olympus.
The a77 Mk1 is my favorite Sony camera for business and pleasure. If it had an OVF it would be perfect. The a99 as a 10MP full frame camera it is awesome, 24MP less so.
Edit: TMI

   

Edited by LAbernethy - 11 December 2021 at 12:34
 



Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Online
Posts: 37834
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 19:51
I am genuinly interested, why wouldn't I? I help a lady in the neighbourhood regularly with some technical aspects of photography and file/computer management while she is trying to complete a photography education. She shoots with two OM's (OM-D E-M1 Mark 2 and Mark 3 and a full suite of Pro lenses) but she keeps asking if she should exchange her equipment for a FF set. I keep advising against it because the results I see from her in normal light are indeed just as good as what I get from FF, it's only low light where the noise gets in the way much earlier than on my FF cameras. She is a frail lady who somehow doesn't get the full 5 stops of IBIS from her system. So a FF system would only make this worse I think. I would be interested in your perspective given you shoot both systems.
You can see the April Foolishness 2023 exhibition here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum
Back to Top
LAbernethy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 November 2015
Country: Canada
Location: Ontario
Status: Offline
Posts: 3398
Post Options Post Options   Quote LAbernethy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 19:33
That's a stretch. I use boxes with lenses attached. Noted which ones, Noted a similar result. Why these two setups in the first place I can get into, if you wish. I wasn't sure if you were genuinely asking.
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Online
Posts: 37834
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 14:47
Originally posted by LAbernethy LAbernethy wrote:

It's not a question of it's existence. It's a question of it's relevance. The more you manipulate the information, in camera processing and post processing the less relevant things like equivalence become. I don't think I can be any clearer. You are free to agree to disagree. on this topic, I'm done.
Huh, you denied the existence the analog part for several posts, but that's fine, at least we're clear on that now.

And I think "less relevant" is still far away from "irrelevant", or in other words "(ir)relevance is in the eye of the beholder" . Indeed PP can overcome some problems but in my mind certainly not all, but I guess that's where we will have to agree to disagree. If PP can do that for you all the better.

Maybe another question, has nothing to do with "equivalence", if you shoot Olympus M43 and are more than happy with the results and these are equal or better than your FF equipment why don't you make the jump to 100% Olympus? Are there certain aspects where you like the FF better than what you get out of M43?
You can see the April Foolishness 2023 exhibition here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum
Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14453
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 14:28
Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

On a further note, people saying "I'm not interested in X" is perfectly fine. In that case they should just avoid X. But saying that is not the same as saying "X is irrelevant" or "X is nonsense". My participation in this thread has been mostly to identify the differences among those statements.
Well, you did not help. Because you missed the most important one: "X is practically irrelevant in specific situations".

I didn't help you. You didn't help me either. But you and I aren't the only people here.

And I didn't miss it at all, but it came late. Perhaps it was my input that prompted it to be expressed that way after it was expressed in those other ways.
Sigh - you did not miss it but it came to late? What? I mentioned it before but you seem to have missed that.

I tried to explain why some people are different then you, but I failed. I quit.

Look back at my posts. I was addressing some people who are not you, and talking to them about the actual things they have said here, and about what they eventually said later in the thread.

Your interaction with me was totally initiated by you, and has been all about questioning why I want to say anything, and thus has been of no help to either of us.

I'm happy to know you quit. Saves me a lot of time.

Edited by sybersitizen - 09 December 2021 at 14:31
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 15283
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 14:03
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

On a further note, people saying "I'm not interested in X" is perfectly fine. In that case they should just avoid X. But saying that is not the same as saying "X is irrelevant" or "X is nonsense". My participation in this thread has been mostly to identify the differences among those statements.
Well, you did not help. Because you missed the most important one: "X is practically irrelevant in specific situations".

I didn't help you. You didn't help me either. But you and I aren't the only people here.

And I didn't miss it at all, but it came late. Perhaps it was my input that prompted it to be expressed that way after it was expressed in those other ways.
Sigh - you did not miss it but it came to late? What? I mentioned it before but you seem to have missed that.

I tried to explain why some people are different then you, but I failed. I quit.

Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
 



Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14453
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 13:30
Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

On a further note, people saying "I'm not interested in X" is perfectly fine. In that case they should just avoid X. But saying that is not the same as saying "X is irrelevant" or "X is nonsense". My participation in this thread has been mostly to identify the differences among those statements.
Well, you did not help. Because you missed the most important one: "X is practically irrelevant in specific situations".

I didn't help you. You didn't help me either. But you and I aren't the only people here.

And I didn't miss it at all, but it came late. Perhaps it was my input that prompted it to be expressed that way after it was expressed in those other ways.
Back to Top
LAbernethy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 November 2015
Country: Canada
Location: Ontario
Status: Offline
Posts: 3398
Post Options Post Options   Quote LAbernethy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 13:22
Originally posted by pegelli pegelli wrote:

OK, a small step for mankind, so you admit A exists

However A for instance controls sharpness and while overrated it still is an important aspect of photography. And unless you believe everything you see in CSI sharpness can only be improved in a very limited way by D (or D+D, or D+D+D or however many D's you want to throw at it)

It's not a question of it's existence. It's a question of it's relevance. The more you manipulate the information, in camera processing and post processing the less relevant things like equivalence become. I don't think I can be any clearer. You are free to agree to disagree. on this topic, I'm done.
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Online
Posts: 37834
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 13:09
OK, a small step for mankind, so you admit A exists

However A for instance controls sharpness and while overrated it still is an important aspect of photography. And unless you believe everything you see in CSI sharpness can only be improved in a very limited way by D (or D+D, or D+D+D or however many D's you want to throw at it)
You can see the April Foolishness 2023 exhibition here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum
Back to Top
LAbernethy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 November 2015
Country: Canada
Location: Ontario
Status: Offline
Posts: 3398
Post Options Post Options   Quote LAbernethy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 12:59
There is analog (A) + digital (D). A+D=Y.
The more D the less relevant A is. A+D+D+D=X
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Online
Posts: 37834
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 12:49
Why do you keep making (wrong) assumptions what kind of person and photographer I am, I do use computational photography and I have no tilit shift lenses or use filters for digital photography, but it seems very hard for you to admit digital photography is not only "bits and bytes" but that there is a definite analog part involved as well. That's the only point I'm trying to make. Yes you can manipulate this process with the techniques you mention, but even without any manipulation it still exists and without it photography (as we use it here on Dyxum today) would be impossible.

Edited by pegelli - 09 December 2021 at 12:52
You can see the April Foolishness 2023 exhibition here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum
Back to Top
LAbernethy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 November 2015
Country: Canada
Location: Ontario
Status: Offline
Posts: 3398
Post Options Post Options   Quote LAbernethy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 12:36
Like I said, if it works for you. Sounds like you're a process guy. The light through the lens. Glass filters and tilt shift lenses. No, corrections, stacking, stitching, layering, saturating, desaturating, sharpening. I can respect that.
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Online
Posts: 37834
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 11:58
Lens correction and white balance is all part of the processing after the signal leaves the A/D converter. No doubt about that but where's the difference before the light reaches the sensor, that's what I'm talking about.
You can see the April Foolishness 2023 exhibition here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum
Back to Top
LAbernethy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 November 2015
Country: Canada
Location: Ontario
Status: Offline
Posts: 3398
Post Options Post Options   Quote LAbernethy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 December 2021 at 11:49
Lens correction, white balance? really? If it works for you.
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > Other camera systems Page  123 7>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.