Can you explain this?
So people who shoot sports, action, wildlife, PJs... are not serious shooters? I'm asking because I have never seen one with a medium format camera.
Yes. Turn a D40's sensor on its side and see how it resolves. As I've written many, many times, the 45 degree twist on the Bayer pattern has tangible improvements on the vertical and horizontal axis at the detriment of the diagonal. The traditional Bayer is the opposite. Fujifilm's twist is useful for most subjects because of, well, gravity, amongst other things. Basically, on the horizontal and vertical axis you get the equivalent of a traditional 8mp Bayer. The cost is stairstepping on diagonals. Yes, you can alias those out, but that comes at the cost of acuity.
There was an "or" in my sentence. The problem with generalizations is that they generalize. Forum posts don't have room for long, considered essays.
I have. In fact, I tell a story about one of mentors, who sent me out to shoot a track meet using a MF DLR. So I've done it myself. But I've seen Hasselblad and other MF cameras shooting all those things. In fact, I've had several argue with me that their MF choice is better than my best DSLR choice (even after the D3x appeared).
Errr.....yes you did...or rather, "wrote".
Now you are more to the point, IMO; this is what you intended to write in the first place; but you did not. Hey we all make mistakes from time to time, you're no exception Thom :¬)
No Charles wasn't thinking that at all.......you wrote something of the sort....maybe you were?
That is exactly how it sounded though. I think and said no such thing. Just the opposite is what I believe.
Thom: no need to work too hard to defend your statements. I think most of us knew what you intended/meant to say. Being concise in a forum often means being obscure, but I don't think that was the case here.
So Thom ... it's Saturday morning, and I'm sitting here finally getting around to reading more/much of the S5 Pro User's Guide I bought from you when I get to this paragraph: "Overall, the integrity of the Fujifilm 12mp interpolation is quite good, and coupled with the slight detail bump gained by the on-angle photosite design, the 12mp JPEGs coming out of the S5 Pro are darned close to being what you might expect out of a standard Bayer camera with 12mp."
Steve if you view them critically I would say they hold up at about 8mp but......
I've just recieved back a completed a storybook wedding album today, shot totally with S5's, for a client and it looks superb.....the files print beautifully having a richness about them I love....
I've got a little DP1 for pleasure that also gets used for candids of groups at weddings and love it......but Dslr's are a whole different ball game these days.
Bit like me really....came to the Fuji party late...glad I did though and of course managed to get them at the right price
And you.
If you liked your D2X you'll love the D700....its been a bit of a revalation for me....its almost good enough at high iso not to use flash again
I dont see much difference in IQ between the D300 and D700 with the exception of DR and high iso performance....so if you dont need high iso the D300 isnt a bad buy and of course Nikon is a bit lacking in good FF glass.....nothing like the Canon F4 range for example.Now here is a quote from Thom's S5 product review:
You see, this is what happens when human beings get involved in a process. Errors! Cameras and computers, of course, never ever Err.
So it DOES have more resolution than 6MP-cameras and your first statement was wrong? BTW, my D50 shows more stair stepping on diagonals than my S5.
I'm not a native English speaker, so could you please tell me what you wanted to say? What does the "or" change? For me it sounded like "if you are a serious shooter, you need a medium format camera. Sorry if I misunderstood you.
Does anyone know a professional sports shooter (NBA, NHL, NFL, Soccer Worldcup, Olympic Games) who uses a Hasselblad for his work? I'd love to see his pictures.
you quoted him above....
--
Sorry, Alan, but he wrote:
There's only one problem with both your statement and mine: you can't isolate to the pixel count. So we're both wrong.
Yes, I'd write it differently today. The statement would be "darned close to what you get out of several of the Nikon DSLRs in JPEGs at up to about 10mp."
It's not just humans, it's time. I can only write about my view at the point in time I'm writing it as the time machine I've been working on in my basement isn't done yet. And I continue to grow and discover more as do (most) of the camera makers. I'm better at testing today than I was a few years ago.
Of course I could be wrong, but as far as I can remember, I only said the S5 would have more resolution than 6mp cameras. And if you look at the test charts, I'm right. It doesn't matter why it is better (different angles, antialiasing...).
First, the D50 (and D40, D70) has an extremely weak antialiasing filter, not an aggressive one (like the S5). Second, as a photographer it doesn't matter how you theoretically could get more resolution out of your camera if practically you can't.
