Is FF really better than m43? and why?

Started Jun 9, 2013 | Discussions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Just another Canon shooter
Just another Canon shooter Senior Member • Posts: 4,691
Re:If it was trolling it would of been pulled

A2T2 wrote:

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

A2T2 wrote:

Wow, that touched a "raw" nerve LOL. All I asked was a simple question, wanting to understand a bit more of what makes the FF brigade tick. Man did I get it with both barrels.

It is called trolling, and you just confirmed it.

Appears not, appears FF shooters are very insecure?

Are you still sticking to your story that this was a simple question?

 Just another Canon shooter's gear list:Just another Canon shooter's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L USM +4 more
GingerBread Regular Member • Posts: 384
Re: Whoa, away for a day, raw nerve or Xenophobia?

A2T2 wrote:


So it wasn't just a simple question ... it was also a rather silly one, as if to suggest that M4:3 IQ has come so far in its development, it can now easily compete with full frame, which is, of course, nonsense.

The evidence actually suggests otherwise, and not one poster has posted anything apart from "comment" to support any such thing.

I'm curious as to what evidence you think suggests otherwise.  Nothing in this thread shows that M43 equals FF in all regards.  I shoot both, I shoot M43 more than I shoot FF over the past three years.  But I don't live in a fantasy world where I believe my E-M5 equals FF in all regards.

-- hide signature --

Ging

 GingerBread's gear list:GingerBread's gear list
Sony RX100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Nikon D700 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 +3 more
Photo Pete Senior Member • Posts: 2,734
Re:If it was trolling it would of been pulled
2

Just another Canon shooter wrote:

A2T2 wrote:

Wow, that touched a "raw" nerve LOL. All I asked was a simple question, wanting to understand a bit more of what makes the FF brigade tick. Man did I get it with both barrels.

It is called trolling, and you just confirmed it.

Appears not, appears FF shooters are very insecure?

I see what you did there. Transferred your insecurity onto others. Very cunning (and only took a day to come up with )

I'll give you 12 months before your insecurity results in you buying a FF dSLR... and you really don't need one.

-- hide signature --

Have Fun
Photo Pete

Kevin Patrick Regular Member • Posts: 172
Answer
11

The only thing that can be definitively answered is that you are a much better troll than you are a photographer.

Detail Man
Detail Man Forum Pro • Posts: 16,413
Is M43 really better than RAW-recording compacts ? Why ?

Please explain why this would be the case in specific and technically coherent terms, magister ...

captura Forum Pro • Posts: 21,781
Re: Is M43 really better than RAW-recording compacts ? Why ?

There are threads and there are threads.... (sigh)

Detail Man
Detail Man Forum Pro • Posts: 16,413
Re: Is M43 really better than RAW-recording compacts ? Why ?
1

captura wrote:

There are threads and there are threads.... (sigh)

Original poser is inconsistent:

There are some comments on mirrorless rumors by a pro who has been using the G6 and he says its excellent, in fact he basically says if you want real improvement in iq go MF!

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51575304

Image-sensor active-area size either matters, or it does not. If original poser asserts that it does not, a technical explanation is in order. Neither perceptual or technical myopia qualifies as objective fact.

SteveCooper Regular Member • Posts: 499
Re: Is FF really better than m43? and why?
1

yes, FF is really better than m43 for the same reason DX is better than m43  

 SteveCooper's gear list:SteveCooper's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S100fs Sony Cyber-shot DSC-F828 Nikon D90 Nikon D300S Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +9 more
inasir1971
inasir1971 Senior Member • Posts: 3,460
Re: Is FF really better than m43? and why?

A2T2 wrote:

If I said I used a FF camera to produce this would you dispute it, seriously, why?

No as I could probably achieve comparable results using a lens cap with a pinhole.

That is one of the worst lenses that I have ever seen - is this deliberate?

 inasir1971's gear list:inasir1971's gear list
Sony RX1R II Nikon D4 Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED
Rafael CG Regular Member • Posts: 102
Re: YES! However, not today...

The Photo Ninja wrote:

My main camera is a 5D Mark III. Its focus is amazing, the fps blistering, the lenses astounding, the noise performance is amazing. However, it's a monster to carry around. This weekend, my wife was off visiting her sister and I decided to take our 5.5 and 1.5 year old girls to the zoo. No stroller - they are a pain. So, I grabbed my Thinktank backpack which usually stores a 5DIII with a 24-70 or a 70-200mm, a flash, smaller lens, batteries, etc. and made it into a diaper bag. Today I was able to pack an epl5 with 17mm 1.8 with flash attached, diapers, wipes, ointment, 2 peaches, an apple, granolla bars, seed and nuts, raisons, and goldfish crackers. I haven't seen the pics yet, but they will not be nearly as good as a well done shot composed with a 5D III which has more field of view and better optics. The new Sigma 35mm 1.4 beats the Olympus 17mm 1.8 as does the Canon 50mm 1.2. However, there is NO WAY I would have been able to manage today with a DSLR! Today it was all point and shoot style with facial autofocus. Today is the day that the Micro 4/3 format was designed for!

I'm not worried about the bulk, I need the best camera for my work, if it is only for family casual snapshots then anything can do it

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads