look at my gallery. Edit: how many challenges have you entered ?
Which is why I though it was a good term to use without going into the detail of SNR, even more difficult now that there is widespread confusion between DR and SNR (it's SNR that matters here). After all, that 'creaminess' is why some people shell out for MF kit. If it wasn't offering anything, no-one would be spending the money.I like the term "creamy". It gives the idea of what I see when I look at the images from this camera. SNR I am sure is more technically correct, but it does not give the idea of what you see when you look at these images.Now you've just descended into inanity. If you had a sensible point, you'd be making it. It seems that you haven't.
'Creamy', BTW is not my term, it's NCV's. It's how he described the results from his D700 compared to his E-M5. I would have talked about SNR, but I though that was a littel esoteric for most. Seems that I didn't aim low enough.
if your up to the challenge and post the best skin tone texture detail from FF im sure I will post one from a Samsung sensor that will blow it away.Which is why I though it was a good term to use without going into the detail of SNR, even more difficult now that there is widespread confusion between DR and SNR (it's SNR that matters here). After all, that 'creaminess' is why some people shell out for MF kit. If it wasn't offering anything, no-one would be spending the money.I like the term "creamy". It gives the idea of what I see when I look at the images from this camera. SNR I am sure is more technically correct, but it does not give the idea of what you see when you look at these images.Now you've just descended into inanity. If you had a sensible point, you'd be making it. It seems that you haven't.
'Creamy', BTW is not my term, it's NCV's. It's how he described the results from his D700 compared to his E-M5. I would have talked about SNR, but I though that was a littel esoteric for most. Seems that I didn't aim low enough.
On the other hand, if you're on a lactose-free, low-fat diet, it's likely not what you want.
I got a GX80 (aka a GX85) as a portable addition to my FF system. Nowadays I find that I use it more than the FF, simply because I take it with me when I'd probably pass on the FF.
That is what I use. It's an excellent combo!
If you're up to the challenge of having a sensible discussion that might be informative for people, rather than engaging in gratuitous insults and silly stunts, then it might be worthwhile. It's not straightforward, though, because capturing good 'skin tone texture detail' is dependent on all kinds of thing as well as equipment properties. There's a whole load of technique, lighting (I find that really critical), DOF choice, focus, lens quality, processing, etc, etc. So, to be sure one has 'the best skin tone texture detail' takes a bit of time and effort.if your up to the challenge and post the best skin tone texture detail from FF im sure I will post one from a Samsung sensor that will blow it away.Which is why I though it was a good term to use without going into the detail of SNR, even more difficult now that there is widespread confusion between DR and SNR (it's SNR that matters here). After all, that 'creaminess' is why some people shell out for MF kit. If it wasn't offering anything, no-one would be spending the money.I like the term "creamy". It gives the idea of what I see when I look at the images from this camera. SNR I am sure is more technically correct, but it does not give the idea of what you see when you look at these images.Now you've just descended into inanity. If you had a sensible point, you'd be making it. It seems that you haven't.
'Creamy', BTW is not my term, it's NCV's. It's how he described the results from his D700 compared to his E-M5. I would have talked about SNR, but I though that was a littel esoteric for most. Seems that I didn't aim low enough.
On the other hand, if you're on a lactose-free, low-fat diet, it's likely not what you want.
Don
If you're up to the challenge of having a sensible discussion that might be informative for people, rather than engaging in gratuitous insults and silly stunts, then it might be worthwhile. It's not straightforward, though, because capturing good 'skin tone texture detail' is dependent on all kinds of thing as well as equipment properties. There's a whole load of technique, lighting (I find that really critical), DOF choice, focus, lens quality, processing, etc, etc. So, to be sure one has 'the best skin tone texture detail' takes a bit of time and effort.if your up to the challenge and post the best skin tone texture detail from FF im sure I will post one from a Samsung sensor that will blow it away.Which is why I though it was a good term to use without going into the detail of SNR, even more difficult now that there is widespread confusion between DR and SNR (it's SNR that matters here). After all, that 'creaminess' is why some people shell out for MF kit. If it wasn't offering anything, no-one would be spending the money.I like the term "creamy". It gives the idea of what I see when I look at the images from this camera. SNR I am sure is more technically correct, but it does not give the idea of what you see when you look at these images.Now you've just descended into inanity. If you had a sensible point, you'd be making it. It seems that you haven't.
'Creamy', BTW is not my term, it's NCV's. It's how he described the results from his D700 compared to his E-M5. I would have talked about SNR, but I though that was a littel esoteric for most. Seems that I didn't aim low enough.
On the other hand, if you're on a lactose-free, low-fat diet, it's likely not what you want.
Don
You cant cheat skin tone texture detail. if you what to recommend a system you post images to prove your point ( like me)of the capability of a system or you tell the truth that's its more than just the camera like you did above. I find it fascinating that a lot of FF users always opt for the FF is better ;-)
Entering challenges doesn't make you a pro. Seems the true amateur here is you.
at the moment im process 400 photos (sales), from a sunday photo shoot , how many are processing ?
A Sony A7III + a few tiny prime will give amazing result as travel and family camera while keeping the size and cost very " manageable" in my opinion, there is a pretty significant difference in the Image quality between the Sony FF sensor and the MFT, I own both but if I can have one only for a vacation trip, it will definitely be the A7R II or A7R III not my OMD 10 II.
What you meant is you can't cheat it. I certainly can. Want some tips?You cant cheat skin tone texture detail.If you're up to the challenge of having a sensible discussion that might be informative for people, rather than engaging in gratuitous insults and silly stunts, then it might be worthwhile. It's not straightforward, though, because capturing good 'skin tone texture detail' is dependent on all kinds of thing as well as equipment properties. There's a whole load of technique, lighting (I find that really critical), DOF choice, focus, lens quality, processing, etc, etc. So, to be sure one has 'the best skin tone texture detail' takes a bit of time and effort.if your up to the challenge and post the best skin tone texture detail from FF im sure I will post one from a Samsung sensor that will blow it away.Which is why I though it was a good term to use without going into the detail of SNR, even more difficult now that there is widespread confusion between DR and SNR (it's SNR that matters here). After all, that 'creaminess' is why some people shell out for MF kit. If it wasn't offering anything, no-one would be spending the money.I like the term "creamy". It gives the idea of what I see when I look at the images from this camera. SNR I am sure is more technically correct, but it does not give the idea of what you see when you look at these images.Now you've just descended into inanity. If you had a sensible point, you'd be making it. It seems that you haven't.
'Creamy', BTW is not my term, it's NCV's. It's how he described the results from his D700 compared to his E-M5. I would have talked about SNR, but I though that was a littel esoteric for most. Seems that I didn't aim low enough.
On the other hand, if you're on a lactose-free, low-fat diet, it's likely not what you want.
Don
So, if you want, you start with the Samsung sensor image, and let's discuss. Rather than 'blow it away', I'll come back with a critical appraisal, and an honest assessment, with, hopefully, examples, of where my particular FF might or might not surpass it (other people might be more capable with their FF or have better FF). Also, please do ensure full EXIF is left on, because apart from the obvious, that also details all the processing and post-processing steps done. Not a lot of people know that, but it's a good way to spot fakery.
So, that would be a 'no', then. I've never said anything other than it's more than just the system, which is why your challenge is likely to be some effort, and not worth doing unless you're willing to do it seriously. As for recommending a system, I did. I recommended mFT, or maybe you were so keen to read what I wrote the way you wanted, you missed that.
The thing is, an a7III with "a few tiny primes" (presumably f2.8 primes), nets you only 1/2 stop more light and 4 more megapixels than, say a GX9 with f1.7 primes, and at substantially greater cost. In my view, the only reasons to go 35mm format is to use f1.4 primes for a full 2-stop noise benefit and/or to get more than twice the megapixels with a 42MP sensor.
That E-M<5 II/14-150 is a great all around travel kit. Small, weather sealed, good reach and good IQ. The only place it will let you down a bit is in very low light situations. Add a small prime like a 25mm 1.8 for museums, etc and you are good to go.
I use the Panasonic equivalent: GX85 and 14-140, with a 20/1.7 for low light. These are not weather-sealed, but I don't shoot in pouring rain, and I have no trouble shooting in falling snow (with care). I also have a $4 rain sleeve just in case.
If you go m43 I'd recommend G9 way. It beats E-M5 II in every aspects. At this stage e-m5 ii is camera with 2012 sensor, lacking AF, poor movie capabilities, way inferior viewfinder etc.
The 12-100 is not nearly as weight-friendly as the 14-150, that's for sure. I was reluctant to try it on the Pen F for this reason, but once I used it, the combination of the sync IS and the super detail of the lens took my Pen F to a whole other level. So, now I often put up with the inconvenience of the larger lens.
