A few words on Equivalence and comparing systems

Started Apr 2, 2013 | Discussions thread
Great Bustard
Forum ProPosts: 23,573
Like?
Re: The role of ISO
In reply to Dr_Jon, Apr 3, 2013

Dr_Jon wrote:

Okay, sorry about the misunderstanding, but perhaps you can see why I might have read it another way?

Still not sure what that "other way" is, but, no matter -- the misunderstanding is cleared up. 

I think you can take photographs with the majority of decent or semi-decent cameras that you can shove up on a wall at a pretty fair size and they will look great.

I completely agree, and am on record saying the vast majority would be well served with a good compact, like an RX100.

My sister has one of the Panasonic TZ models (it was the top one a generation ago) and has a 30" wide pic (maybe 12" high) she took up on her wall that look stunning and most people assume it's a professional print she bought. It's the composition in a large part, but actually it's also sharp and low noise (gotta love a bright sunny day). Where the better kit helps is as the conditions become trickier.

I have framed photos in my office, ranging from 8x12 inches to 20x30 inches, taken with 3 MP compacts up to 13 MP FF, and two of the 20x30 photos are from the 3 MP compacts.

No one has *ever* commented on the IQ differences between the photos which ranges from trivial to extreme.

Oh, and when deciding which camera to take weight and lens availability (I have some very nice Canon glass) is probably more of an effect than equivalence. So is noise for low-light work, but let's leave that discussion for another day...

Each person will make their decisions based on what matters most to them.  Equivalence is merely part of the equation.

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