sarlo100

sarlo100

Lives in United States Chicago, IL, United States
Works as a Chemical distributor/bodypaining photog
Joined on Feb 23, 2007
About me:

Camera equipment (in case for some reason you are curious)

Digital Rebel XT
- Canon 24-85
- Tamron 28-75
- Canon 75-300 III
- Canon 50/1.8
- Canon 35/f2
- Sigma EF500-DG Super w/Stofen

- Powershot S2IS
- Finepix F31fd/F70EXR
- Powershot Pro1
- Powershot G11
- Powershot S60

Lost to dad:
Panasonic TZ1
Powershot SD550

Comments

Total: 3, showing: 1 – 3
In reply to:

Mike99999: For all the trolls (yabokkie etc..): if you do the aperture equivalence, you also have to do the ISO equivalence.

To imitate an image captured by four thirds 17mm/1.4 ISO 6400 (clean on an E-M5), you'd have to set your full frame camera to 34mm/2.8 ISO 25600. Suddenly the comparison becomes less attractive when you do *full* equivalence...

He's right. Aperture equivalence is straight mathematics, and there's a two stop difference between full frame and 4/3. Photographically, 12-35 f/1.4 (4/3") is 24-70 f/2.8 (FF) in all respects.

ISO equivalence is a fudged concept, because the manufacturers play around with the numbers so much. You can use it as a crude rule of thumb, but the only way to have true ISO equivalence is to have the same sensor manufacturer, using the same sensor technology of the same era, and the same number of pixels. Only then will you be close enough to a level playing field to make a difference - and you'll very likely see the noise performance of ISO 6400 (4/3) looking close to identical as ISO 25600 (FF).

Full frame is the standard. All other formats are size/performance/cost issue compromises. Nobody converts focal length or apertures into 4/3 or APS-C equivalents. I'm not in any way knocking 4/3rds, it's my preferred set up due to the size/cost/performance combination. But facts are facts

Direct link | Posted on Dec 16, 2013 at 19:43 UTC
On Canon announces PowerShot N Facebook ready edition article (48 comments in total)

Ahhhhhh...a belly flop into a pool of fail. We'll be seeing these @ $75 on Slickdeals by X-mas for sure.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 22, 2013 at 16:24 UTC as 21st comment | 1 reply

This isn't the answer. Canon should just build the camera/smartphone already. While they still have time to get ahead of the curve.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 7, 2013 at 15:06 UTC as 19th comment | 4 replies
Total: 3, showing: 1 – 3