SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? Replies wanted!!

Started Apr 26, 2013 | Discussions thread
RealPancho
Senior MemberPosts: 1,013Gear list
Like?
Re: Yes and no (or is it no and yes?)
In reply to ultimitsu, Apr 27, 2013

ultimitsu wrote:

RealPancho wrote:

I don't really give a tinker's dam what they were: they were monstrosities.

Thank you for proving my point.

I didn't

You did.

The context of this thread is m43 vs FF.

RealPancho wrote: Those things are HUGE! - implying they are FF.

That does not imply that they were FF. I simply said that I saw a lot of Canons and Nikons. Whether they were FF or APS-C (or APS-H) is immaterial to the story I was telling.

ultimitsu wrote:  what you saw were most likely APS-C SLRs.

Msnap wrote: No, what he saw were most likely Full Frame. Do you know what "HUGE" and "most likely" mean? How could you possible conclude that cameras described as HUGE would be reduced-size APS-C models?

So you see Mr Pancho, you proved my point nicely. And proved the point OP tried to disapprove - you have no clue what FF cameras are like, you simply dismiss anything size of APs-C SLr as "monstrosities".

That is because they wanted pictures that you could not have taken.

Ridiculous.

I happen to walked a 3 hour one way trail in Rob Roy Glacier (Wanaka, New Zealand) a year ago with 60D and 70-200.

Wow - you must be really strong. I'll bet your mom is really proud of you.

I took pictures like this which I do not think would have been possible, or certainly nowhere as easier, with a m43.

This has more to do with the focus system than the size of the sensor. Furthermore, I see such photographs as novelties, with only marginal artistic merit. They're not worthless, but they don't especially interest me. It's a cool photo, except for your cutting the bird's wing off, but it isn't extraordinary by any means.

I dont get the impression that you know that much now either.

You are wrong.

Why dont you tell us the difference between m43 and FFDSLR and prove me wrong then?

I have no need to prove anything to you.

but I'd bet that a fair number of the people I saw didn't know much about gear either,

probably, but then again you incorrectly assume they all use 6D + 70-200

I did not, it is you who are making the assumptions.

Real Pancho:  they were they size of a pay phone. And put that 70-200 on a Canon 6D and you've got a pay phone with a bazooka attached to it!

So are they or are they not using 6D and 70-200? if they are not, why bring it up?

or they probably wouldn't have been hiking with those monstrosities, when extremely nice IQ could have been had for much less hassle.

Depending on what you call extremely nice IQ.

More absurdity here. You're making a fool of yourself.

Because...?

Because if you don't acknowledge the exceptionally fine image quality that many mft cameras are capable of, you are demonstrating yourself to be a fool.

Nothing wrong with that, just do not hold out to be an expert.

I don't think there was much in post that even hinted at a claim of expertise.

The claim of everyone else were carrying FF and that you now know all there is to know about the difference between OMD to these "FF".

I made neither claim.

For the first claim, see the top of this post.

For the second claim, I am glad you have come to your senses and acknowledge what you do not know.  It is not that hard, is it?

It's apparently a bit too difficult for you. Pray for strength.

-- hide signature --

Frank

 RealPancho's gear list:RealPancho's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS3 Olympus E-620 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Yes.New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow