Can i see your LARGE prints from M43 cameras?

XVOYAGERX · Nov 13, 2018

Kiwisnap said:
No. Never made a print of any size from M43.

Then you are really missing out on good quality!!

Muzfox · Nov 13, 2018

burritosandbeer said:
Simon97 said:

Somewhat off topic, but what is a good resource for having these prints made with good quality and reasonable cost? I want to get what I think is called "gallery wrap" where the print is made on a canvas like material and wrapped on a wooden frame like painting canvases. I have a few photos I want to hang on the wall.

It seems people are moving away from the framed prints with mats to these borderless designs.

Click to expand...

It may sound odd, but I ran a few test prints through my local walmart and was really impressed with what they put out for me.

I have a few portraits and a few macro shots around the house printed from them with good results.

The trick is to remember that they are printing the image then its attached to the frame, so you lose the outside .75-1.5". Something to think of when framing the shot

Not necessarily, I get my canvases printed with a mirror edge. They add extra sides to the print that mirror the nearest part, this means the full photograph is displayed on the front, and the mirror of that side wraps around. It looks like its extended and blends in beautifully however you retain full viewing of the original photo which is a must for me.

Great Bustard · Nov 13, 2018

Tommi K1 said:
Ab Latchin said:

To speak honestly, one of the main problems with answering that question is that often there isn't a comparable file from another format available on the same production run to see real differences. Add that to that fact that I work commercially producing imagery for use online, in print communication and retail spaces

Click to expand...

Only way to really do that is to get the cameras you want to compare, get out with them and shoot them side by side on same scene with identical settings, process all the files as well as you can, print as well you can etc and then do the comparison blindly.

Member said:

So in my experience he is around the edge where if he leans right into a perfect shot between a 36mp FF file and a 20mp m43rds file and looks at the leaves, tree bark, grass etc. he might see some differences, but he wouldn't have to pull back 3 feet for them to disappear, just pull back slightly.

Click to expand...

It requires almost more than that, to really know what minute detail to compare and to then judge the whole photo by that 0.5% difference and do it by overlaying the images etc. Already placing the print on opposite sides of the room makes all the differences go away as you forget them when you walk couple meters next to other print.

Make the real review, what is actually without comparison but taking ie. X scenes and randomly pick prints from different formats and then try to guess what was used to make the print. When you have ie. 10 prints on the wall and 5 formats/brands were used to take them, it is basically impossible to get them correctly named and it is just lucky guessing.

Ie. https://www.thewanderinglensman.com/2014/02/the-practical-difference-part-2-between.html

That was when the Nikon had released their D800 beast and even those are larger than common prints.

Member said:

Having said that, we don't know what lenses he is using, is he on a tripod when shooting, his processing technique, if he is sharpening for print etc. All of these would have about the same impact as the differences I mentioned above.

Click to expand...

Exactly. The context is still missing, even now if we know the final print size and the material, as it is still question about the photos whole workflow.

Member said:

I think most people enjoy the idea of quality more than see the reality

Click to expand...

That is so! The idea, or believe (lack of knowledge) that you are getting "better quality" is such a illusion that is poisoning the peoples minds.

This forum should be about place to discuss about gear, without comparisons to other formats. Like discuss the different reason to buy a 7-14mm f/4 over 8-18mm f/2.8-4. The reason to go for 20Mpix over 16Mpix or is there reason to get a E-PL5 today.. Instead the common theme is around "I want to get best IQ, how I do that?" and it without context.

The modern sensors in ILC are least of the cause for IQ difference or bad photo. The reason really is the person holding the camera and handle the whole workflow.

And it is almost a disease that gets spread to peoples mind about this "better IQ".

I can trump your link above with a more "profound" one:

https://luminous-landscape.com/kidding/

Here, a 15 MP Canon G10 *compact* camera matched a Hasselblad 39 MP digital camera for a 13x19 inch print. And, no, he wasn't kidding (he says so right off the bat).

So, upthread, when you say (bold emphasis mine):

Then I have as well two of those "magical" copies [of the Olympus 7-14 / 4]. Sharp corner to corner without any smudging etc wide open etc. Better than any Canon or Nikon for same field of view.

Well, I'm sure I speak for all when I say we'd all love to see your photos that demonstrate that superiority. After all, if a 15 MP compact can match a 39 MP medium format Hassy, your photos must be amazing to be even better than *any* Canon or Nikon UWA.

Jacques Cornell · Nov 13, 2018

RondaArouseMe said:
Im currently shooting full frame Canon 5d Mk2 and do mostly landscapes.

Photos shown are what im looking for examples off from M43 cameras. Are these prints possible and with great detail or would I be shooting myself in the foot trying to achieve this?

pic for examples only:

Well, I can't show you a print online, and my biggest prints are 16"x24". But, I had a Canon 1Ds MkIII before switching to MFT five years ago, and a 1Ds MkII before that. The 1DsIII has the same sensor as your 5DII. My current GX8 and GX85 give me IQ, in terms of resolution and noise, at least as good as my 1Ds MkII and very close to my 1Ds MkIII. It helps that my MFT glass is as good as or better than my Canon glass. View my gear list to see what I had then and what I have now. The 1Ds MkIII did resolve a tad more in the center, but I really don't think you'll see much of a difference, if any, in prints like those you posted above.

Are you using a three-stage sharpening workflow, including an "output sharpening" stage customized for a particular print size and particular media? I use DxO PhotoLab's "Lens Sharpening" feature for the "capture sharpening" stage and Pixel Genius' now-free PhotoKit Sharpener plugin for Photoshop for the "creative sharpening" and "output sharpening" stages, and this makes a huge difference in the quality of my prints.

In a nutshell, if you can do it with your 5D MkII, you can do it with a 20MP MFT camera, and probably with a modern 16MP MFT camera.

--
"No matter where you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Banzai
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos

Dan_168 · Nov 13, 2018

RondaArouseMe said:
Im currently shooting full frame Canon 5d Mk2 and do mostly landscapes.

Photos shown are what im looking for examples off from M43 cameras. Are these prints possible and with great detail or would I be shooting myself in the foot trying to achieve this?

First of all, have " great details" is very personal, I have made prints looks like crap but co-worker said it was nice and I said if you are OK with that you can have it it will be scrap anyway, and I have seen prints I thought look pretty decent but fellow photographer friends was complaining.......everyone has a different eyes and different standard. we may have very different definition of what " great details" means, in MFT forum, 20MP mean high resolution, in Nikon and Sony forum, 46 is high........

I don't have a print hanging on the wall to show you but the largest I have print from MFT is 24 X 36 on metal print and I definitely don't want to go larger than that, since I have much higher resolution camera so I normally don't use my OMD as my main camera for landscape,

Here is a picture I got last year that I made a few 36 inch long metal prints ( from OMD EM 5 II), just want to see how big of a print I can accept from this tiny MFT sensor, I got two print from two different print shop just see who can do a better job, basically it was mean to be a experiment just for fun. And I found the detail start to show some smearing effect on this print size while every thing is really sharp on the 12X18 inch print I got previous. so I probably will cap it at 36 inch long, for portrait I think it can go much bigger, but I have not tried because this is not my main system. I was able to sell that at a local art fair and sold one at a fund raiser auction, so I guess they are not that horrible even I was not too happy with it.

Dan_168 · Nov 13, 2018

rjensen11 said:
Given the expense of a purchase, have you considered renting an EM1.M2 and 7-14 f2.8 to see if it meets your needs? It would be a better than relying on opinions from the group.

Totally agree, get one to play with yourself is better than reading 1000 online review or listen to any internet expert.

Sergey_Green · Nov 13, 2018

Tommi K1 said:
James Stirling said:

You don't just have a "tacky " copy you have a magic copy I think the 7-14mm is by far the most disappointing pro lens. Were i looking for such a focal length in m43 I would be going with an adapted FT 7-14mm

Click to expand...

Then I have as well two of those "magical" copies. Sharp corner to corner without any smudging etc wide open etc. Better than any Canon or Nikon for same field of view.

And totally I wouldn't touch at all to FT 7-14mm f/4 as those are softer (even when very highly praised).

People talk trash about digital correction affecting IQ, and yet that is what makes better results in the end. It doesn't matter how you get it, when you get it.

So let us see them then,

Your turn ..

--
- sergey

iano · Nov 13, 2018

Great Bustard said:
Tommi K1 said:

Ab Latchin said:

To speak honestly, one of the main problems with answering that question is that often there isn't a comparable file from another format available on the same production run to see real differences. Add that to that fact that I work commercially producing imagery for use online, in print communication and retail spaces

Click to expand...

Only way to really do that is to get the cameras you want to compare, get out with them and shoot them side by side on same scene with identical settings, process all the files as well as you can, print as well you can etc and then do the comparison blindly.

Great Bustard said:

So in my experience he is around the edge where if he leans right into a perfect shot between a 36mp FF file and a 20mp m43rds file and looks at the leaves, tree bark, grass etc. he might see some differences, but he wouldn't have to pull back 3 feet for them to disappear, just pull back slightly.

Click to expand...

It requires almost more than that, to really know what minute detail to compare and to then judge the whole photo by that 0.5% difference and do it by overlaying the images etc. Already placing the print on opposite sides of the room makes all the differences go away as you forget them when you walk couple meters next to other print.

Make the real review, what is actually without comparison but taking ie. X scenes and randomly pick prints from different formats and then try to guess what was used to make the print. When you have ie. 10 prints on the wall and 5 formats/brands were used to take them, it is basically impossible to get them correctly named and it is just lucky guessing.

Ie. https://www.thewanderinglensman.com/2014/02/the-practical-difference-part-2-between.html

That was when the Nikon had released their D800 beast and even those are larger than common prints.

Great Bustard said:

Having said that, we don't know what lenses he is using, is he on a tripod when shooting, his processing technique, if he is sharpening for print etc. All of these would have about the same impact as the differences I mentioned above.

Click to expand...

Exactly. The context is still missing, even now if we know the final print size and the material, as it is still question about the photos whole workflow.

Great Bustard said:

I think most people enjoy the idea of quality more than see the reality

Click to expand...

That is so! The idea, or believe (lack of knowledge) that you are getting "better quality" is such a illusion that is poisoning the peoples minds.

This forum should be about place to discuss about gear, without comparisons to other formats. Like discuss the different reason to buy a 7-14mm f/4 over 8-18mm f/2.8-4. The reason to go for 20Mpix over 16Mpix or is there reason to get a E-PL5 today.. Instead the common theme is around "I want to get best IQ, how I do that?" and it without context.

The modern sensors in ILC are least of the cause for IQ difference or bad photo. The reason really is the person holding the camera and handle the whole workflow.

And it is almost a disease that gets spread to peoples mind about this "better IQ".

Click to expand...

I can trump your link above with a more "profound" one:

https://luminous-landscape.com/kidding/

Here, a 15 MP Canon G10 *compact* camera matched a Hasselblad 39 MP digital camera for a 13x19 inch print. And, no, he wasn't kidding (he says so right off the bat).

So, upthread, when you say (bold emphasis mine):

Then I have as well two of those "magical" copies [of the Olympus 7-14 / 4]. Sharp corner to corner without any smudging etc wide open etc. Better than any Canon or Nikon for same field of view.

Well, I'm sure I speak for all when I say we'd all love to see your photos that demonstrate that superiority. After all, if a 15 MP compact can match a 39 MP medium format Hassy, your photos must be amazing to be even better than *any* Canon or Nikon UWA.

Yes, so many other factors will determine ultimate quality. The OP with his 21mp 5D mkII will sometimes get photos that make a better large print than a 80mp image from a G9 but it will depend on lens, light and so many other factors. Sometimes the 80mp image from the G9 will also be able to better produce a large print too.

JaKing · Nov 13, 2018

And your images demonstrate what, precisely?

GBC · Nov 13, 2018

I was not aware the 7-14f4 was softer than the 7-14f2.8.

You have a source?

RondaArouseMe · Nov 13, 2018

rjensen11 said:
Given the expense of a purchase, have you considered renting an EM1.M2 and 7-14 f2.8 to see if it meets your needs? It would be a better than relying on opinions from the group.

Yes. But rebting for $250 with a lense for $100 and a print for $350 is a bit cost prohibitive when I can buy a whole kit for $1200

RondaArouseMe · Nov 13, 2018

Thanks

Dan_168 said:
RondaArouseMe said:

Im currently shooting full frame Canon 5d Mk2 and do mostly landscapes.

Photos shown are what im looking for examples off from M43 cameras. Are these prints possible and with great detail or would I be shooting myself in the foot trying to achieve this?

Click to expand...

First of all, have " great details" is very personal, I have made prints looks like crap but co-worker said it was nice and I said if you are OK with that you can have it it will be scrap anyway, and I have seen prints I thought look pretty decent but fellow photographer friends was complaining.......everyone has a different eyes and different standard. we may have very different definition of what " great details" means, in MFT forum, 20MP mean high resolution, in Nikon and Sony forum, 46 is high........

I don't have a print hanging on the wall to show you but the largest I have print from MFT is 24 X 36 on metal print and I definitely don't want to go larger than that, since I have much higher resolution camera so I normally don't use my OMD as my main camera for landscape,

Here is a picture I got last year that I made a few 36 inch long metal prints ( from OMD EM 5 II), just want to see how big of a print I can accept from this tiny MFT sensor, I got two print from two different print shop just see who can do a better job, basically it was mean to be a experiment just for fun. And I found the detail start to show some smearing effect on this print size while every thing is really sharp on the 12X18 inch print I got previous. so I probably will cap it at 36 inch long, for portrait I think it can go much bigger, but I have not tried because this is not my main system. I was able to sell that at a local art fair and sold one at a fund raiser auction, so I guess they are not that horrible even I was not too happy with it.

Thank you!

thats the feedback I’ve been looking for. What’s your main camera system?

Great Bustard · Nov 13, 2018

JaKing said:
And your images demonstrate what, precisely?

Tommi said (bold emphasis mine):

Then I have as well two of those "magical" copies [of the Zuiko 7-14 / 4]. Sharp corner to corner without any smudging etc wide open etc. Better than any Canon or Nikon for same field of view.

Sergey replied with some photos using a UWA Nikon lens:

So let us see them then,

Your turn ..

Not sure where the confusion is -- seems pretty self-explanatory to me.

JaKing · Nov 13, 2018

Great Bustard said:
Not sure where the confusion is --

Why does your reply not surprise me ...

Great Bustard said:
seems pretty self-explanatory to me.

Your biases are showing, and are very well known and understood ...

BTW, I hope you are well away from the fires.

Sergey_Green · Nov 13, 2018

JaKing said:
Great Bustard said:

Not sure where the confusion is --

Click to expand...

Why does your reply not surprise me ...

If you are not surprised then why did you post the question in the first place? Or was it meant to be digressive, but again, why?

JaKing said:
JaKing said:

seems pretty self-explanatory to me.

Click to expand...

Your biases are showing, and are very well known and understood ...

Would not be asking for more, if you do understand that much ..

JaKing said:
BTW, I hope you are well away from the fires.

--
- sergey

Adrian Harris · Nov 14, 2018

I don't currently have any examples from my exhibitions on my phone, but can assure you of 2 things:

I have done some very large canvases with m43 (even with the original 12mp G1 model), one is 6ft x 4ft (far to large for most UK homes).

The other issue is that I frequently shoot alongside a Canon 5mk2 pal and both my Panasonic GX8 and Olympus em1-mk2 (both 20mp models) far exceed her cameras capabilities.

In raw using lightroom both will show slight noise at mid ISO upwards using LR's base settings, but it is easily dealt with, without loosing detail.

The lenses are generally staggeringly good, especially the pro line, including my Olympus 7-14 f2.8.

I generally prefer the GX8 for my landscape work.

Sergey_Green · Nov 14, 2018

Adrian Harris said:
I don't currently have any examples from my exhibitions on my phone, but can assure you of 2 things:

I have done some very large canvases with m43 (even with the original 12mp G1 model), one is 6ft x 4ft (far to large for most UK homes).

The other issue is that I frequently shoot alongside a Canon 5mk2 pal and both my Panasonic GX8 and Olympus em1-mk2 (both 20mp models) far exceed her cameras capabilities.

Far exceeds the capabilities of the camera from 2008, that's certainly worth saying it. Makes you a happy owner of the cameras that you have.

Adrian Harris said:
In raw using lightroom both will show slight noise at mid ISO upwards using LR's base settings, but it is easily dealt with, without loosing detail.

The lenses are generally staggeringly good, especially the pro line, including my Olympus 7-14 f2.8.

I generally prefer the GX8 for my landscape work.

--
- sergey

Adrian Harris · Nov 14, 2018

I forgot we had a medium large print hanging in our stairwell which I look at every day!!!

--
Adrian

Artfotografia for Photography and Art

avalvo · Nov 14, 2018

I'd say 40 inches on the long side is about the limit. If you are using HR mode it can certainly be more than that. There are many factors that go in to the quality of any print. The OP seems like he/she has great talent and should be able to extract a lot out of a camera like the OMD EM-1 II.

The benefit of the system can sometimes have great advantage. I did this photo recently, and while I would have loved to have my D850 to do it. The OMD with a 12-100 lens was the tool of choice for a variety of reasons. Most of which was that I shoot primes on the 850 and it was a really wet and rainy day, so I did not want to be changing lenses. The Oly zoom made this a lot easier to handle. And, HR mode gave me what I would a have gotten out of the 850.

nebulla · Nov 14, 2018

Muzfox said:
Just had this one done, 40inch x 30inch OMD Em5.2, 12-40mm. Hahnemuhle Canvas. Yes some high ISO there too.

And this is the biggest I've done yet. 120cm x 80cm same canvas, original Em5 and the 12-40mm pro.

Beautiful pictures. Well done sir.

I have a Canon Pro 100 printer so from a printing perspective I only print up to 13x19", but I get beautiful prints from the M43 at that size

Can i see your LARGE prints from M43 cameras?

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Attachments

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts