Why insist on FF format?

Started Sep 22, 2012 | Discussions thread
oklaphotog
Contributing MemberPosts: 801Gear list
Like?
Re: OMD Vs D800
In reply to kelly15, Sep 23, 2012

kelly15 wrote:

Serious reply.
Try yourself.
If you have an A4 printer, print a detail of an A2 enlargment.

You will see that with good level M43 primes the result will be extremely close if not equal to FF camera fitted with same level reputation lens.

I'm not speaking for nothing here: I tested OMD with 45 1.8 compared with EOS 5DII with 85 1.8 and the latter was not better at all. Then I decided to change.I will not post here as pixel cunters will object in any case, but as told try yourself.

At big print sizes it's all about pixel count, not sensor size per say. It just so happens that all the ultra high pixel count cameras are full frame or MF. A2 isn't a big print, a clean 16mp file shot with a good lens can do a good 20x24". For many A2 would be the starting size for true enlargements. Anything smaller is a proof :). At 24x30" standing a foot away or so the OMD really doesn't look much worse than my 5d2. This is why so many FF people are buying OMD's. The camera provides more than adequate IQ for all but the most extreme situations and print sizes, and it's WAY smaller and easier to deal with. As soon as Panny releases that 150/2.8 and a good TC (or oly does something similar), things will really be looking up for m4/3 as the tele end is where the system is lacking, but where the format really shines when it comes to size difference

These days you gotta go to an A1 or bigger print to really show off what something like a D800 is good for. If you want to print A1 or bigger, by all means buy a D800, you'll love it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
DOFNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow