The hour of truth has struck

victorav said:

Raist3d said:

victorav said:

Raist3d said:

This doesn’t answer the question what I see is yet another set of contrived tests to do what exactly?

there’s situations not shown here where FF does notably better It’s all about trade offs

it’s virtually impossible to suggest your link has answer to the question because the requirements and situations s people shoot are vastly more varied than what you are shooting

and the tradeoffs in size/ weight for m43 vs FF is all personal choice

Click to expand...

How does this comparison show mft is better?

Click to expand...

Where did I say his comparison show mft is better? How does this address the point on answering the question or not?

Click to expand...

You said there are situations that ff does notably better not shown here. That too me means the the comparison shown here that mft does at least as good or better.

Click to expand...

Wait, hold on. Let's review what you said because you just changed the allegation.

What you said: "How does this comparison show mft is better?"

Saying there are situations that FF does notably better not shown here does not imply in any shape or form necessarily at all that mft does better.

victorav said:

I really do not understand why people are getting so riled up about this post, it's quite innocent really.

Click to expand...

The way it's presented makes the difference. Also what the purpose is may not be met depending on its methodology. But the attitude in presentation is what I think many are reacting to. What "ultimate truth" etc. And then the answers of the OP and again, way of answering. But maybe the OP is just being ironic all along

The latest photo in the series is from 2016. Why now, near the end of 2021, has the "hour of truth" suddenly struck? :-O

I wonder if any newer technologies have influenced IQ since then? Hmmm....

the way you presented yourself with this data (and the data).

I respect the methodical amount of time you have done photographing so many cameras but other than a quick way to see how they have changed in some situations it doesn't say anything beyond that, given the more many situations the comparison would need.

But let's go with what seems to be your intent for a second here's my feedback:

Camera sensor evolution through time may have been a better post

Comparisons with flash would have been nice

Comparison in indoor light would have been nice

Comparison at night would have been nice (higher iso).

I mean, basically adding to your database. If only documenting this kind of sensor evolve is your intent that is.

Basically your post is very far from an "hour of truth" . It's not clear at all in what way this relates photography (sure doesn't seem to) other than in a limited way to the documentation of a spefic aspect - though incomplete- of camera tools.

--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - Apparently Selwyn Duke and not George Orwell

You have difficulty with the second level, Don't worry, you are obviously not the only one.
I have the beginning of an answer, just three posts above yours (Attempted response!)

Everything you mention is present in my various comparisons.
EX: Nikon D500 (2016) / Nikon D600 (2012) Nuit / Night
or: Nikon D3s (2009) / Nikon D500 (2016) ISO
And I understood for a long time, that no matter what we do, there will always be someone to come and tell you otherwise. It's part of life!!

I have the beginning of an answer (Attempted response!) just five messages above yours

Cafe Racer said:

I wonder if people regularly compare their full frame cameras to M4/3rds on the Canon, Sony and Nikon forums?!

Click to expand...

I shoot with both formats and am not bothered in the slightest and, no, I've not seen any such nonsense on the Sony forums or any other forum apart from the first few general forums on the list which are general discussion and 'what shall I buy' questions.

Maoby said:

Everything you mention is present in my various comparisons.
EX: Nikon D500 (2016) / Nikon D600 (2012) Nuit / Night
https://www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72157684511394636
or: Nikon D3s (2009) / Nikon D500 (2016) ISO
https://www.flickr.com/photos/maoby/albums/72157714674997917

Click to expand...

Everything I said is there? Where's the mft / FF set on these? you are giving different links. But hey, that's better for some of the other cameras.

Maoby said:

And I understood for a long time, that no matter what we do, there will always be someone to come and tell you otherwise. It's part of life!!

Click to expand...

That is indeed truth, but do not mistake honest feedback for simply someone coming in and mindlessly telling you something else. I mean, you were asking for it you said no? And again, this doesn't change the way you presented the information to begin with no?

Maoby said:

I have the beginning of an answer (Attempted response!) just five messages above yours

Click to expand...

I saw it, and my reply to you here is taking that into account. It's good to clarify without having to put the onus and mischaracterizations on the reader, if the way of presenting the intent and data could have been better. Right?

I also pointed out to you before that doing fast shutter speeds at High ISO while happens in real life situations too, makes all cameras look better at High ISO.

Now, I totally understand you can't simply put every single situation. That Is indeed a lot but then perhaps not present your information as some sort of truth without a context.

You may want to be more clear about the intent of your data, and limitations or things you are consciously not doing in your database.

--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - Apparently Selwyn Duke and not George Orwell

You know, whatever the title, the extremists are always there to attack us.
But it is true that here I was a little provocative. (And it was voluntary)

Wrong!

Who believed in the future of Mirrorless in 2008?
The arrival of Sony in the world of the Great!

mostlyboringphotog said:

ikolbyi said:

mostlyboringphotog said:

ISO200 shots again?

Click to expand...

Here you go, ISO 8000 shot through glass at an event MF was not 'designed' for.

View attachment fe34fc088b664317a9b452203f1a46b4.jpg

I have no m4/3 comparisons at this ISO (8000) because anything above 5000 for m4/3 is too grainy for me - Topaz does help alleviate this.

Click to expand...

Indeed, a very nice shot. I really like the inclusion of the hockey stick at the right bottom corner.

Click to expand...

My wild guess is that this shot was not posed and the glass was too thick for the player holding the stick on the bottom-right to hear ikolbyi's directions to move the stick. Just a guess.

Maoby said:

You know, whatever the title, the extremists are always there to attack us.
But it is true that here I was a little provocative. (And it was voluntary)

Click to expand...

Well then. I think everyone should take responsibility? Was it just the title or also the way the information was presented and context? I mean, this is honest feedback, I am not trying to be difficult or anything.

I want t make clear it's not that the title is just a little provocative but it's very hard to make the intent at all from no context like that. Then I think it's straight forward to imagine that putting a provocative title will just get more responses trying too also guess context that can be quite wrong- understandably so.

I don't think it's good to go on the "extremists' (however many would show up anyway) when this is all presented this way. But I welcome the clarifications.

--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - Apparently Selwyn Duke and not George Orwell

Raist3d said:

Member said:

I really do not understand why people are getting so riled up about this post, it's quite innocent really.

Click to expand...

The way it's presented makes the difference. Also what the purpose is may not be met depending on its methodology. But the attitude in presentation is what I think many are reacting to. What "ultimate truth" etc. And then the answers of the OP and again, way of answering. But maybe the OP is just being ironic all along

Click to expand...

Idk, I re read the post. Op posed a question, is 20mp enough vs 36mp. Also they ask, is it better to mft or ff.

The OP Made no indication which one is in fact better. You are free to choose which images you like more to come to your own conclusion as the OP said in the post. I think people are just overreacting to the title of the original thread

Then there is a link to a flicker page, with I presume other comparison photos. The answer to the question is up to you, which is what I think the OP was getting at.

Maoby said:

Your avatar looks great on you

You are right, it is better to do nothing in life.
And despise his neighbor

Click to expand...

This reply makes no sense in any way.

What I was saying is that you can have the best, largest and most performing sensor behind the lens. But if the light is wrong, the photographer gets the exposure wrong and/or the photographer does not know how to communicate visually with a picture, then we have a photograph which is worse than a photograph taken in the right light which is well composed and exposed taken on a "lesser" camera.

--
https://momenti-indecisivi.blogspot.com/

Finally, someone who ends up understanding!

Maoby said:

Wrong!

Who believed in the future of Mirrorless in 2008?
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65654876
The arrival of Sony in the world of the Great!
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63918278

Click to expand...

Sorry, I meant apart from topics started by and/or written by yourself, on similar lines, which are certainly myriad.

victorav said:

Raist3d said:

victorav said:

I really do not understand why people are getting so riled up about this post, it's quite innocent really.

Click to expand...

The way it's presented makes the difference. Also what the purpose is may not be met depending on its methodology. But the attitude in presentation is what I think many are reacting to. What "ultimate truth" etc. And then the answers of the OP and again, way of answering. But maybe the OP is just being ironic all along

Click to expand...

Idk, I re read the post. Op posed a question, is 20mp enough vs 36mp. Also they ask, is it better to mft or ff.

The OP Made no indication which one is in fact better. You are free to choose which images you like more to come to your own conclusion as the OP said in the post. I think people are just overreacting to the title of the original thread

Then there is a link to a flicker page, with I presume other comparison photos. The answer to the question is up to you, which is what I think the OP was getting at.

Click to expand...

There was a presumptuous title, some links given and nothing more. A link is given without much context. What is better or worse? hard to say following those links and why this is some kind of truth or something.

All I am saying it, there's hardly an answer to the question as presented that without context it's hard to say what exactly the data provided is supposed to be evidence of. Anyway, hope I answered your question, at least speaking for myself.

You may want ask other people too and see what they say.

--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - Apparently Selwyn Duke and not George Orwell

Yannis1976 said:

... if I just copy/paste your response to every sensor comparison message I read??

Couldn't have said it better and it doesn't just apply to m43 vs FF but more or less to every sensor comparison.

Click to expand...

Oh, thank you, and sure

-J

This is what we call ... Smash an open door
Your first message was more confusing, for me.

P.S. I answered your question below. (Attempted response!)

Cafe Racer said:

I wonder if people regularly compare their full frame cameras to M4/3rds on the Canon, Sony and Nikon forums?!

Click to expand...

I did, between current m4/3 and 36x24 sensor cameras bodies a few years back, still have my m4/3 bodies, sold the 36x24. Didn't bother posting about it on forums though.

Maoby said:

No, people in general, prefer to follow fashion and preconceived ideas. And to repeat them endlessly, without ever having verified them by himself. It's much easier to believe that it's their wonderful cameras that will make them great photographers.
And you will notice that there are obsessives, in any format or brand used.
They didn't like to analyze and understand, they just wanna be right.

Fortunately, there are people, like jalywol and some other, which saves the game.

Personally, I am passionate about photography and a collector, who is particularly interested in the history of digital photography.
I have accumulated over the years a loan of 200 cameras which made history.

In my beginnings with Digital (1996-98), I was frustrated not to find pictures taken with the first cameras,
like Kodak DCS, Agfa, Fujix or Dycam, fotoman's etc ... and I decided to make up for this shortcoming, and start comparisons.
And not to show that cameras are the best. But to see the evolution that is taking place at high speed before our eyes.

Click to expand...

Perhaps there are Canon, Sony and Nikon users that secretly wish they had bought into m43rds but are now heavily invested in their full frame system so feel the need to justify their choice by repeatedly comparing it to m43rds!