Why the G5 is right for me and maybe of help to bird shooters thinking of buying one

Started Nov 11, 2012 | Discussions thread
boxerman
Contributing MemberPosts: 676Gear list
Like?
Re: Why the G5 is right for me and maybe of help to bird shooters thinking of buying one
In reply to maggiemole, Nov 13, 2012

maggiemole wrote:

Extra Tele Conversion (EX) ...

Digital Zoom ...

Confused!

Maybe I can help, but I'm coming from Canonland, and terminology varies a lot. So, caveat emptor. On my G11, what they call digital zoom only kicks in AFTER full optical zoom. That means, up to full optical zoom, the full sensor is being used, and afterward, they are doing a crop (and probably interpolate).

Digital teleconverter is like putting on an optical teleconverter in that it does its thing at ALL zoom levels. So, even below full optical zoom, you are getting a crop, probably plus interpolation. If you're using digital digital teleconverter and using an effective focal length less than your full optical zoom, you are losing pixels, which is essentially never a good idea, no matter how good the interpolation.

Honestly, I don't know why one has a teleconverter function that does not use full optical zoom first, and only digitally extend after. But, I think that's it. I guess it's easier to implement. Certainly on legacy lenses that don't communicate much with the camera, the cam can't know enough to decide whether to let you continue optical zoom, or whether you need digital boost instead. OK, that's a reason for digital teleconverter! But, I don't have legacy lenses.

It appears that extra teleconversion on your G3 explicitly recognizes that you are really using a smaller number of pixels, all the time, in forcing setting to M or S. "There is no deterioration in picture quality" is a cheat because there is no deterioration relative to M or S, but certainly deterioration from fewer pixels compared to normal use of the sensor. I guess that means it is not interpolated, either. Easy to check with file sizes.

Some people have convincingly explained (to me) that in camera interpolations can be very smart. For one, they can work on the RAW (or whatever internal form), and some claim some interpolation algorithms appear superior to Photoshop equivalents. I don't know about that, but I just judge what is good enough for me, with the effort I'm willing to expend. (I don't do RAW.) But, some results seem indisputably good, such as a few here, or see daddyo's post at:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3334717?page=3

In the mean time, I'm experimenting and looking at the quality boundary I'm unwilling to cross with digital tele conversion, compared to changing lenses, or buying a new one. So far, it has a place with my OMD.

-- hide signature --

The BoxerMan

 boxerman's gear list:boxerman's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow