MY Overall M43 Impression

Started Dec 10, 2013 | Discussions thread
Bob Tullis
Bob Tullis Forum Pro • Posts: 36,144
Re: LOL! 3D talk
1

PerL wrote:

Lab D wrote:

pinnacle wrote:

mraspex wrote:

GodSpeaks wrote:

You are welcome to your opinion, even if wrong.

The MFT cameras, especially the current generation, can easily go head to head with APS sensors when it comes to image quality. I own MFT, APS and FF sensored cameras, so I can state this from experience.

The area where MFT falls behind would mainly be pixel count. APS is now at 24MP and FF 36MP. Although 24MP is not a terribly significant increase, 36MP is. That said, I expect to see 20 and/or 24MP MFT next year.

In any event, up to you what you think or believe.

Could you be so kind to post some pictures or sources to support your argument Sir? If you really own all these formats, it should be rather easy and would be appreciated.

I don't believe that they can squeeze even more MP on this tiny MFT sensor. 16 is too much already because the noise levels are getting too high. This is simply physics. MFT pictures mostly look like point and shoot or smart phone pictures without any 3D effect to them because of the small sensor. This will even get worse with more MPs.

Oh please sir, bless us with your large sensor "3D" samples that just could never be done with such puny sensors used on M43 gear.

Come on. I dare you!

Samples? Samples?

Another problem of MFT clearly is that, while it is small, it just doesn't allow serious portrait photography. Creating a really shallow depth of field is not possible with small sensors and getting fast lenses is much more important if you want shallow depth of field. These are overpriced.

So while I think MFT is nice for touristy pictures, if your looking for good quality pictures, look elsewhere.

If you are looking elsewhere, how in the world did you even find your self "looking" here? Oops? Shouldn't you be trolling the Leica forum and extolling the virtues of the S2 sensors?

Sheesh!

Dan

I picked up the old Lumix 3D lens awhile back. The images REALLY do look 3D. Can a FF camera do that?

Since the sensor tech is the same and you can use any FF lens on an M43 camera the 3D claim is BS.

Well, there are differences in DOF and with almost all image quality parameters improved with the larger sensor (if the tech is the same) at the same final image size, it may add up to more of the subjective term "3-D feel".

The 3-D look isn't hard to get -  you make the circular hole inside the glass tube a BIG hole, hold the camera still, get close (no, not THAT close!), and press a button until you hear the camera go click-click.  But not just ANY camera, it has to be a DSLR.

Smaller camera operators must make compromises regarding FOV, distance, and something called an aperture, to attain the DOF larger formats offer.   But that is unrelated to the 3-D effect, which is simply unattainable with anything but a FF DSLR.  The m4/3 camera operators refuse to accept this, and perpetuate the myth that the 3-D effect is merely about DOF and bokeh.  As if bandying about technical terms makes them right.

[sigh] One shouldn't waste their time on them.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm X-H1 Fujifilm X100F Fujifilm X-T2
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
yyr
yyr
NCV
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow