Considering Canon

Started Jun 4, 2013 | Discussions thread
alFR Regular Member • Posts: 286
Re: Considering Canon

Colin Franks wrote:

I suppose that my main disappointment is with the 100-300 lens. The other day I was shooting a Blue Heron at the beach, and took many shots at myriad settings (tripod).  Granted, this lens is known to be a little soft on the far end, but none of the images were tack sharp, and I wasn't happy with 'em.

Was it moving? If so it might have been the AF in your body rather than the lens, as from what I read the contrast AF in micro 4/3 bodies does seem to have issues with moving subjects at times.

My 20mm/1.7 is an impressive little lens, and does well for its uses, but tell me if I'm incorrect in the following:
It seems that I see sooo many images (on the 'net) from the big bad-boy Canikons that just flat-out have an IQ that a M4/3 cannot achieve.  Yes, the M4/3s are a good little camera, but their sensor is considerably smaller.  And isn't there something to be said about the fact that Canon & Nikon are "camera" companies, and all the rest are "electronics" companies; or is that just not the case now-a-days?

I wouldn't worry too much about the companies: they've been making micro 4/3 bodies for quite a while now, I think they know what they're doing overall. I suppose it depends a bit what you mean by IQ as well. As you probably know, for an equivalent number of megapixels / equivalent quality optics the DSLR is likely to have lower noise and maybe better colour transitions (esp. at high ISO) due to the larger sensor. At the big print sizes you're able to do this might be a difference you can see: I think it's less of an issue for smaller prints and on-screen viewing. Also, the bigger sensor means less DOF in the DSLR as well at the same aperture etc., which might give "better IQ" if shallow DOF is what you wanted.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow