Reading mode: Light Dark

4/3 Theory

Go to last post
You meant excreta...You could also do with some basic civility coaching, my friend.
 
Yeah, feed the birds, feed the birds, tuppence... Ah, sweet memories.
 
(sorry for my broken english)
  • I am an owner of profi minilab http://www.everestfoto.sk
  • I developing digital photos from 9x13 to 50x75cm
  • My second job is the photographer
  • I see thousand digital photos per day
  • I had all Nik, Can, Min,... cameras in my hand and make 100 and more photos with each of it..
And after all the pictures what I seen...
  • I buy 4/3 system and I am satisfied with it!
  • I use it for pro work an its good enough for me and my clients
  • For me is 4/3 full of good lenses and excelent colors/resolution
Stop reading test and counting the pixels.

Just make the photo. Put it to big paper. And if you are satisfy - the system (can/nik/oly..) is good...

Stop talking about technical parameters, Just take the picture and look! Photography - its about painting with the light. Its about creativity - its not about playing with numbers. Camera system is only "tool"...

But 4/3 is for me very good tool :-)
 
Fact - a good photographer will take a good photograph with any camera.

Fact - it doesn't matter what you use, stop analysing figures and looking at what you can use if you go to a different system and just use what you have to hand.

Yes you can get sparkly clean iso 3200 in a different camera (apparently), when would you use it? more than likely for a dreadful image of a pet sat on the edge of an armchair!! But it has to be taken on a £3000 camera doesn't it!!

How many more pointless threads like this do we and all the other forums have to endure before people realise that there aren't really any bad digital SLR's made anymore, they just all have different strengths and weaknesses. But they can all be used to take a good photograph.

Stephen.
--
http://www.notofthisearth.co.uk
http://www.abannforlife.co.uk
 
Exactly. That's why I shoot Oly and sell Fine Art work. I also want a digital equivalent of Leica and happen to think that Oly is in good position to produce it.
 
Good heavens, an argument? I can do without one. All I wanted is to see if there is a support for Oly RF system, but all I get is insecurity vented through aggression. Pity...
 
That's beside the point. I didn't say Oly was bad - I am using one.

What I said was "Oly and Panny are bound to be finding themselves on the wrong foot when pitched against the rest of the pack", and suggested 4/3 branched off into RF territory.
 
I apologise for the couch and would've poured you a drink, should you be in need of one. I was caught off guard.
 
Hi Jeff
JeffSp said:
Good heavens, an argument? I can do without one. All I wanted is to
see if there is a support for Oly RF system, but all I get is
insecurity vented through aggression. Pity...
Click to expand...
I think you're implying that I'm insecure about my decision to buy Olympus gear? And that my argument that your 'facts' were simply opinions is therefore invalid? Is this correct?

kind regards

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk
 
Hi Jeff
JeffSp said:
I apologise for the couch and would've poured you a drink, should
you be in need of one. I was caught off guard.
Click to expand...
Most generous - so maybe I should apologise for my tone . . . . . and I do so (but not for my points).

kind regards

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk
 
FOA, I do agree with the statements but then I have to point out that they are not facts, but theories. Since nobody ever made a 4/3 and FF sensor on the same technology.

Fact is though the 4/3 do suffer a more restricting sensor because of the lesser physical space, and the 4/3 system do suffer because Oly ( I would discount Panasonic as they have just begin to enter the market ) fails to capitalize on the size advantage the 4/3 offers. And fact is 4/3 as a system suffer not because of the sensor ( image quality is good enough provided one do not always need ISO 800 or above ) but because of a continous lack of depth in the system.

AS for 4/3 used for RF. I am certainly not seeing it as much of a viable option. I simply do not see it working that well in an RF mechanism.

--
Franka
 
JeffSp said:
Solution: 4/3 standard should be used as a platform for digital RF
system whereby attempts to incorporate expensive and convoluted OVF
systems are abandoned in favour of fully articulated monitors, and
cameras and lenses are significantly reduced in size. Small tough
bodies and small high-quality lenses will be seen as a fair
trade-off for not having ISO 3200 or 8 fps.
Click to expand...
This is going in the direction of the much talked about EVIL camera that is always rumoured to be "about to be released". I think it would make sense to have 4/3 models that drop the mirrors and have an electronically linked viewfinder. Such a system would be at the greatest advantage though, it if can share lenses with more traditional reflex viewfinder systems. That way you can keep both the small quiet EVF body and the larger noisier OVF body for when you want its benefits.

If its 4/3, then the lenses will be the much the same as they are though.

This same reasoning can be applied to APS sized sensors too, so 4/3 is not in a unique position here - only to the extent that it could be made that bit more small.
 
Not at all. What I am saying is that majority of the respondents reacted in an aggressive-defensive way, which may belie insecurity. SirSeth and Peter were two exceptions. As I explained below I have probably overreacted to your post...
 
Yes, you see 'load of old rubbish' to my mind is not the best way to start a conversation.

The dilemma is that the weight of my digital Oly system is no less than the weight of my late film-based Canon system. It becomes an awful nusance to drag it across the Cairngorms for several days in a row.

Wouldn't it be sweet to have Oly RF - said I to myself and posted on the forum using, perhaps rashly, the word fact rather than, say, popular perception.

Now, after the initial outcry subsided, I achieved the status of a troll, which apparently indicates that I cannot fall any lower.
 
Ah, it takes a lady to say something constructive.
Franka, why do you think 4/3 will not be a good platform for RF?
 
JeffSp said:
All I wanted is to
see if there is a support for Oly RF system, but all I get is
insecurity vented through aggression. Pity...
Click to expand...
Looks like you're trying to backpedal your way out of making several asinine statements. There are much easier ways of asking about people's interest in an RF system.

--
http://srpluta.zenfolio.com/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top