Not too impressed

[Brad Morris]

What are you tallking about? With the Olympus, the lenses are
marked with 35mm Focal lengths and are effectively 35mm units with
a new mount.

You have to deal with a 2x FOV crop instead of a 1.5, 1.6 or 1.7 x
crop compared to a full frame sensor - That is even worse.

Sorry, but that makes no sense whatsoever. 35mm sensors have a crop
factor compared with 120 film for instance, and that has a crop
factor when compared to large format. EVERYTHING has a crop factor
when compared to SOMETHING.

The lenses for a 120 camera are not marked with 35mm Frame size focal lengths, all the Nikon, Canon and OLYMPUS SLR glass is. That is the reason that the bulk of people are obsessing over the FOV crop. In real times digital is digital and film is film and are not directly comparible, yes the other SLRs use parts (lenses) that can be used on cameras other than digital (except the DX range of lenses) but the sensor size is. the same thing happens if you use an adapter with a 645 lens. you get an apparent "Crop".

The problem is exaserbated because even the P&S camera are quoted with an equivalent 35mm zoom range when the actual range is much smaller

What I'm referring to here is that the focal length of the lenses
are designed for the size of sensor in that camera. Nikon and Canon
have zoom lenses with focal lengths that are fantastic to use on a
35mm camera, but stick a 28-70mm lens on a 10D and you've got an
awfully awkward focal legnth range that would require another
ultrawide zoom just to get a range similar to what Oly has put in
one lens.

Light is light, Physics of glass and the way it refracts light doesnt change. The only thing that is upsetting your view on this is the paint on the lens barrel marking the zoom range. You have conditioned your thinking with dSLR to think like a 35mm camera, it is not. You have bought into the Oly Marketing spin. The Physics to design the optical systems on both cameras remain the same, only the marketing labels are different you need even wider focal length with an oly to get the same wide angle view you can get with an 15mm Nikon. Yes Oly has engineered different focal length lenses to what has been the norm but there is nothing stopping the other manufacturers for doing likewise

So, yes, this IS a smaller sensor than the others, but that isn't
the point, the point is that the focal lengths of the lenses are
useful with this sensor... Whereas on a 10D or an SD9 the sensor
size throws the focal length equivalent all out of whack.

Point is that the physics of glass doesnt change, the higher the FOV crop, the less that the glass can effectively resolve due to the circles of confusion, that is entirely controilled by the type of glass used in the construction of the lens.

The FOV crop doesnt actually give you a longer focal length, it only crops the outside of the image compared to 35mm to give an apparent increase. you get the same effect taking a negaitve into the lab, enlarging it and then cropping off the outside edges to retain teh image in the middle, digital does not magically resolve more distant detail simply because it is digital

Take another look at the Oly glass, the Zoom range painted on the lens is a 35mm range that needs to be doubled to be applicable to the 4/3 sensor.

Bottom line, the E1 looks like a fine camera, but it simply CAN'T
be MORE expensive than the competition while delivering LESS. It
doesn't make any sense.

I agree, If they price it at $800 it might stand a chance - The likes of sony 7x7, nikon 5700, Oly e-20 et al have smaller sensors with reduced potential quality compared to a dSLR camera, they still sell and and are fine cameras so that indicates that ultimate picture quality is not the only driving force in making a purchasing decision. At $2200 I cannot see it suceeding

Regards,
photovoyager

--

DCS-F707, Nikon CP 950, http://www.pbase.com/bmorris65 , http://www.usefilm.com/browse.php?mode=port&data=13628

 

[photovoyager]

The lenses for a 120 camera are not marked with 35mm Frame size
focal lengths, all the Nikon, Canon and OLYMPUS SLR glass is.

Of course not, they are marked with the actual numbers in millimeters. This includes incidentally the E-system lenses which make no mention anywhere I've seen of 35mm equiv. size.

The point still is that a lens with a very handy focal length of film - say, 28-105mm - is a LOT less useful slapped on to a camera with a 1.6x FOV crop, at least on the wide end. On the other hand Oly has a lens that on their sensor is the equivalent of a 28-105mm (an immensely useful range IMO).

Take another look at the Oly glass, the Zoom range painted on the
lens is a 35mm range that needs to be doubled to be applicable to
the 4/3 sensor.

No, it's a REAL range, NOT in terms of 35mm. You will have to double that number to get a "35mm equivalent" focal length BECAUSE it isn't stated in terms of a 35mm format just as you will have to divide the markings on a 645 system lens by 1.6 to get a "35mm equivalent". IF it was stated in 35mm terms it would say "28-108mm (135 equivalent)" not "14-54mm"!

28-105mm says absolutely NOTHING about field of view. We are just used to thinking in terms of 35mm. Multiply that focal length by 1.6 and you would get a focal length range with the same field of view on a 645-sized sensor; divide it by 2 and you'd get a focal length range with the same field of view on a 4/3 sized sensor.

I agree, If they price it at $800 it might stand a chance - The
likes of sony 7x7, nikon 5700, Oly e-20 et al have smaller sensors
with reduced potential quality compared to a dSLR camera, they
still sell and and are fine cameras so that indicates that ultimate
picture quality is not the only driving force in making a
purchasing decision. At $2200 I cannot see it suceeding

Of course image quality is not the only driving force in making a purchasing decision; if it were nobody would ever buy any digicam on the market today except a Canon 1Ds!

$800 is unrealistically low - maybe for the up-and-coming prosumer model it would be a reasonable price. This camera, I think, should be in the $1000-$1300 range, making up for its slightly worse image quality by both a lower price and its own unique advantages (designed-for-digital lenses, dust shaker, water seals, etc.). If they sold this camera for, say, $1200, I think it WOULD stand a chance, at least until the others reduced their prices to match. Heck, I might even buy one at that price!

Regards,
photovoyager

 

[Matti J]

My wide angle? It is there with 1Ds, if I need. It was about "Canon users stuck with crop" when in reality there are most levels of freedom with Canon DSRL system having 1.6, 1.3 and non-cropped FF sensor versions available. And Nikon variants were...?

HI Matti
I have no pain - I've got a perfectly serviceable D1x with fabulous
'out of the camera' shots and no smeary noise reduction.

Nikon cameras suffered some sort of smeary NR in the past? I just didn't knew. Good for you, the problem is now solved.

Added to
which I have a nice 12-24mm DX lens that gives me real wide angle,
a good work flow, great Nikon software and some new bodies to be
announced soon.

I hope the DX-series of DSRLs will be made in the future to be used with DX-lenses. A bad thing, those DX users are destined to use the non-FF for a very very long time ;-)

I was just hoping for something special from the E1, and it looks a
little doubtful now.

Agree. Wonderfull specs, except for the crop factor.

Cheers,
Matti J.

kind regards
jono slack

Seems a little premature!

Nothing to shout about ;-)

as things stand at the moment, the only Canon users who can take
advantage of real wide angle are the 1Ds users (and to a lesser
extent the 1D).

Whereas you can get 18mm NOW for your D100/D2H etc. etc.

and if the 17-55 AFS 2.8 DX nikkor is up to par, then things look
even better.

You see, I just reacted what was said in the previous post: "...
we'll likely be stuck with crop factors (Canon...".

Just the fact alone, that my Canon EOS lenses are FF compatible,
makes me feel good i.e. my EOS lenses are 1Ds compatible.

I feel your pain, Jono,
Matti J.

Oly will have to come out with a consumer camera QUICK, OR lower
the price equally quickly, otherwise I fear they may have blown it.
What's worse, if this camera fails, other brands will probably not
enter 4/3, AND it will probably discourage brands thinking of
coming up with their own digital "system" (Minolta?) from doing so
as well. That means we'll likely be stuck with crop factors (Canon
or Sigma) ...

Canon users are not stuck with any crop factor. Having a selection
of standard Canon SLR EOS system lenses, Canon users of
D30/D60/10D/1D have already the luxury of stepping into full frame
DSRL world if they wish and can afford. And if Canon can produce a
professional FF DSLR (1Ds), they eventually can make a FF DSRL for
prosumers and amateurs as well.

Cheers,
Matti J.

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[Matti J]

you can buy sub-zero glass door freezer for the price of that 12-24
though. or 2-3 really nice primes. or a 1965 mustang that runs but
needs restoration. or 75 yards of concrete. or 4 months of
groceries. or 3 car payments on a bmw. or field level season
tickets for numerous nfl teams. hehe this is fun.

And what a wonderfull laughter there will be among DX lens owners, when Nikon is finally able to announce their first full frame DSLR.

Cheers,
Matti J.

 

[Matti J]

Canon users are not stuck with any crop factor.

Well, those who don't want to spend $8k on a camera are.

And that was the point. If I will and can afford there IS the FF Canon 1Ds. Not stuck to any particular crop factor.

And Nikon users who want FF look for Kodak. Unless they have a legion of wide angle DX lenses when it is actually useless.

Cheers,
Matti J.

 

[Jono Slack]

Hi Jason

Jono, where are we going here? I am glad you are happy with your
D1x, but if you were that happy with it then you would not be
looking at a possible E-1 now would you?

Oh - I was always interested in the E1 - I've never said I was going to abandon my Nikon gear - I was interested in something smaller to carry around.

I am glad that they came
out with the 12-24 DX lens so you could finally get your wide
angle, but how useful is that lens going to be to you if Nikon one
day decides to go full frame?

They've said they won't, they're bringing out pro level DX lenses - I'm inclined to believe then (not sure I want full frame anyway)

On the other hand, the Canon 1Ds is
a full frame camera and can take advantage of what already exists.

Including CA available on all but L glass ;-)

The Great Nikon software you refer to was an added expense and not
included with your initial purchase.

Okay - certainly

The Kodak 14n while not the
success that we had hoped for, will also let you take advantage of
what is already existing. So while the DX lenses are a wonderful
asset to the Nikon 1.5 crop factor line, you are sort of tied into
fixes like that.

I think that you will recall and agree with me that one of the best
things about our E-10 days, was that the lens was matched to the
sensor.

But Jason - that is EXACTLY what DX lenses are!

So I hope we do not drag the Nikon Vs Canon or anything
else in here while we are waiting and watching and the E-1 evolves.

Isn't that just what you've done?

and I was only responding to Matti's rather caustic remarks about my pain - which were then tied in to his Canon.

Kind Regards
jono slack

Jason

Pain?

I was just hoping for something special from the E1, and it looks a
little doubtful now.

kind regards
jono slack

Seems a little premature!

Nothing to shout about ;-)

as things stand at the moment, the only Canon users who can take
advantage of real wide angle are the 1Ds users (and to a lesser
extent the 1D).

Whereas you can get 18mm NOW for your D100/D2H etc. etc.

and if the 17-55 AFS 2.8 DX nikkor is up to par, then things look
even better.

You see, I just reacted what was said in the previous post: "...
we'll likely be stuck with crop factors (Canon...".

Just the fact alone, that my Canon EOS lenses are FF compatible,
makes me feel good i.e. my EOS lenses are 1Ds compatible.

I feel your pain, Jono,
Matti J.

Oly will have to come out with a consumer camera QUICK, OR lower
the price equally quickly, otherwise I fear they may have blown it.
What's worse, if this camera fails, other brands will probably not
enter 4/3, AND it will probably discourage brands thinking of
coming up with their own digital "system" (Minolta?) from doing so
as well. That means we'll likely be stuck with crop factors (Canon
or Sigma) ...

Canon users are not stuck with any crop factor. Having a selection
of standard Canon SLR EOS system lenses, Canon users of
D30/D60/10D/1D have already the luxury of stepping into full frame
DSRL world if they wish and can afford. And if Canon can produce a
professional FF DSLR (1Ds), they eventually can make a FF DSRL for
prosumers and amateurs as well.

Cheers,
Matti J.

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

--
Jason Stoller [email protected]
We are just Beta Testers who pay the Camera Companies to test their
new products!

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[Jono Slack]

How much do you pay for Canon glass?

kind regards
jono

p.s. and then, soon, there will be the 17-55, which is cheaper than the existing 17-35, and also cheaper than the equivalent Canon L lenses.

Pain?

I was just hoping for something special from the E1, and it looks a
little doubtful now.

kind regards
jono slack

Seems a little premature!

Nothing to shout about ;-)

as things stand at the moment, the only Canon users who can take
advantage of real wide angle are the 1Ds users (and to a lesser
extent the 1D).

Whereas you can get 18mm NOW for your D100/D2H etc. etc.

and if the 17-55 AFS 2.8 DX nikkor is up to par, then things look
even better.

You see, I just reacted what was said in the previous post: "...
we'll likely be stuck with crop factors (Canon...".

Just the fact alone, that my Canon EOS lenses are FF compatible,
makes me feel good i.e. my EOS lenses are 1Ds compatible.

I feel your pain, Jono,
Matti J.

Oly will have to come out with a consumer camera QUICK, OR lower
the price equally quickly, otherwise I fear they may have blown it.
What's worse, if this camera fails, other brands will probably not
enter 4/3, AND it will probably discourage brands thinking of
coming up with their own digital "system" (Minolta?) from doing so
as well. That means we'll likely be stuck with crop factors (Canon
or Sigma) ...

Canon users are not stuck with any crop factor. Having a selection
of standard Canon SLR EOS system lenses, Canon users of
D30/D60/10D/1D have already the luxury of stepping into full frame
DSRL world if they wish and can afford. And if Canon can produce a
professional FF DSLR (1Ds), they eventually can make a FF DSRL for
prosumers and amateurs as well.

Cheers,
Matti J.

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[GDD]

My wide angle? It is there with 1Ds, if I need. It was about "Canon
users stuck with crop" when in reality there are most levels of
freedom with Canon DSRL system having 1.6, 1.3 and non-cropped FF
sensor versions available. And Nikon variants were...?

And that is just my problem with the Canon policy, about every camera has a different cropfactor. How can you plan a lens collection with that? I have an EOS30 and a good collection of lenses, but for a 10D I would need to buy an ultrawide, and Canon does not even offer a "normal" zoom for the 1.6 cropfactor. (that would cover something comparable to the zoomrange of a 28-70 on full frame)

Both Nikon and Olympus offer a dedicated lens collection for the chip size they choose, and that is something Canon lacks. Canon should make clear what they plan for the future, and do it fast. The 1.6 cropfactor seems too much of a temporary solution and I'm not going to spend my money on a "temporary" format.

Geert.

 

[Jono Slack]

My wide angle? It is there with 1Ds, if I need.

I assume that paying for it is no problem then?

It was about "Canon
users stuck with crop" when in reality there are most levels of
freedom with Canon DSRL system having 1.6, 1.3 and non-cropped FF
sensor versions available. And Nikon variants were...?

But, what you're saying, is that if you want to use a 10D (nice camera by the way) then you are pretty much committed (for ever) to a widest angle of about 26mm - are you really happy with that?

HI Matti
I have no pain - I've got a perfectly serviceable D1x with fabulous
'out of the camera' shots and no smeary noise reduction.

Nikon cameras suffered some sort of smeary NR in the past? I just
didn't knew. Good for you, the problem is now solved.

Matti, my pictures are so awful that a little smeary noise reduction can do them nothing but good

Added to
which I have a nice 12-24mm DX lens that gives me real wide angle,
a good work flow, great Nikon software and some new bodies to be
announced soon.

I hope the DX-series of DSRLs will be made in the future to be used
with DX-lenses. A bad thing, those DX users are destined to use the
non-FF for a very very long time ;-)

Well, this is becoming a matter of religion - you BELIEVE that full frame is the best (even if you can't afford it), whereas I BELIEVE that I don't want full frame. Argument and discussion is completely useless - I know I won't convince you of the error of your ways, or vice versa.

But don't kid yourself into thinking that in my heart of hearts I really know your right - because I don't!

I was just hoping for something special from the E1, and it looks a
little doubtful now.

Agree. Wonderfull specs, except for the crop factor.

I didn't think it had a crop factor - I thought that was the whole point - lenses designed to match the sensor - no crop factor.

kind regards
jono slack

Cheers,
Matti J.

kind regards
jono slack

Seems a little premature!

Nothing to shout about ;-)

as things stand at the moment, the only Canon users who can take
advantage of real wide angle are the 1Ds users (and to a lesser
extent the 1D).

Whereas you can get 18mm NOW for your D100/D2H etc. etc.

and if the 17-55 AFS 2.8 DX nikkor is up to par, then things look
even better.

You see, I just reacted what was said in the previous post: "...
we'll likely be stuck with crop factors (Canon...".

Just the fact alone, that my Canon EOS lenses are FF compatible,
makes me feel good i.e. my EOS lenses are 1Ds compatible.

I feel your pain, Jono,
Matti J.

Oly will have to come out with a consumer camera QUICK, OR lower
the price equally quickly, otherwise I fear they may have blown it.
What's worse, if this camera fails, other brands will probably not
enter 4/3, AND it will probably discourage brands thinking of
coming up with their own digital "system" (Minolta?) from doing so
as well. That means we'll likely be stuck with crop factors (Canon
or Sigma) ...

Canon users are not stuck with any crop factor. Having a selection
of standard Canon SLR EOS system lenses, Canon users of
D30/D60/10D/1D have already the luxury of stepping into full frame
DSRL world if they wish and can afford. And if Canon can produce a
professional FF DSLR (1Ds), they eventually can make a FF DSRL for
prosumers and amateurs as well.

Cheers,
Matti J.

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[Jono Slack]

Hi Geert

My wide angle? It is there with 1Ds, if I need. It was about "Canon
users stuck with crop" when in reality there are most levels of
freedom with Canon DSRL system having 1.6, 1.3 and non-cropped FF
sensor versions available. And Nikon variants were...?

And that is just my problem with the Canon policy, about every
camera has a different cropfactor. How can you plan a lens
collection with that? I have an EOS30 and a good collection of
lenses, but for a 10D I would need to buy an ultrawide, and Canon
does not even offer a "normal" zoom for the 1.6 cropfactor. (that
would cover something comparable to the zoomrange of a 28-70 on
full frame)

Funny ain't it, they STILL insist that this is an advantage - it seems to me that even if you did have a 1Ds for 'best' and a 10D to carry about - and you could afford two overlapping sets of lenses - it would be really confusing swapping back and forth from one crop factor to another.

Both Nikon and Olympus offer a dedicated lens collection for the
chip size they choose, and that is something Canon lacks. Canon
should make clear what they plan for the future, and do it fast.
The 1.6 cropfactor seems too much of a temporary solution and I'm
not going to spend my money on a "temporary" format.

Absolutely - the implication is that they're heading for FF across the board, but it sounds like an expensive option - not least because all but the best glass doesn't work well on FF (CA and the like).

But if you say you don't actually WANT FF, they kinda smile knowingly in disbelief!

Oh well!

kind regards
jono slack

Geert.

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[Jono Slack]

Canon users are not stuck with any crop factor.

Well, those who don't want to spend $8k on a camera are.

And that was the point. If I will and can afford there IS the FF
Canon 1Ds. Not stuck to any particular crop factor.

And Nikon users who want FF look for Kodak. Unless they have a
legion of wide angle DX lenses when it is actually useless.

Why is it useless oh wise one? and why would one have a legion of them? for most of us just the one lens does the trick, and gives us something you cannot have (unless of course you have a strong back and a stronger bank balance)

At the moment I'm in the rather joyous position of being able to carry around a focal length range of (equivalent) 18mm - 600mm with VR (IS to you) available from 36mm upwards - all in 3 good quality lenses which I can actually carry!

With the 10D you're missing the wide end, and if you go full frame then you'll need a golf trolley to carry the telephoto end around with you.

kind regards
jono slack

Cheers,
Matti J.

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[PDM]

Too bad the 1Ds doesn't work well with wide angle lenses. You can use them but there are a number of lens/sensor issues that make the smaller Nikon sensor and their new 12-24 lens a better optimized optical/sensor combination.

Paul

Canon users are not stuck with any crop factor.

Well, those who don't want to spend $8k on a camera are.

And that was the point. If I will and can afford there IS the FF
Canon 1Ds. Not stuck to any particular crop factor.

And Nikon users who want FF look for Kodak. Unless they have a
legion of wide angle DX lenses when it is actually useless.

Cheers,
Matti J.

 

[Matti J]

My wide angle? It is there with 1Ds, if I need.

I assume that paying for it is no problem then?

No, not me. Changing my DSLR body once every 2 years. But for some others, there might be a money factor present.

It was about "Canon
users stuck with crop" when in reality there are most levels of
freedom with Canon DSRL system having 1.6, 1.3 and non-cropped FF
sensor versions available. And Nikon variants were...?

But, what you're saying, is that if you want to use a 10D (nice
camera by the way) then you are pretty much committed (for ever) to
a widest angle of about 26mm - are you really happy with that?

No, not me. Changing my DSLR body once every 2 years ;-)

The real news is: I don't have to change my arsenal of lenses if and when my next DSLR is FF. In that situation DX owners have a dilemma. Invest more on DX series or sell them...?

HI Matti
I have no pain - I've got a perfectly serviceable D1x with fabulous
'out of the camera' shots and no smeary noise reduction.

Nikon cameras suffered some sort of smeary NR in the past? I just
didn't knew. Good for you, the problem is now solved.

Matti, my pictures are so awful that a little smeary noise
reduction can do them nothing but good

Oh, mi god.

Added to
which I have a nice 12-24mm DX lens that gives me real wide angle,
a good work flow, great Nikon software and some new bodies to be
announced soon.

I hope the DX-series of DSRLs will be made in the future to be used
with DX-lenses. A bad thing, those DX users are destined to use the
non-FF for a very very long time ;-)

Well, this is becoming a matter of religion

Religion? For me not.

When A has no more arguments, the whole argumentation of B is labeled as being "religious" or something equally intellectual. Like pulling a carpet under your feet. Thanks.

• you BELIEVE that full

frame is the best (even if you can't afford it),

Right there, Jono. And a truck load of arguments have been presented to back it up.

whereas I BELIEVE
that I don't want full frame.

Whereas I believe, some day you will want one. Sooner or later. ;-)

Argument and discussion is completely
useless - I know I won't convince you of the error of your ways, or
vice versa.

Yes, I have not seen any particular evidence for "error of my ways".

But don't kid yourself into thinking that in my heart of hearts I
really know your right - because I don't!

No sweat, I believe you on this one.

I was just hoping for something special from the E1, and it looks a
little doubtful now.

Agree. Wonderfull specs, except for the crop factor.

I didn't think it had a crop factor - I thought that was the whole
point - lenses designed to match the sensor - no crop factor.

I meant the crop factor being the limiting factor for future resolution increase for lens & sensor combinations vs. FF.

Cheers,
Matti J.

 

[Matti J]

The 1.6 cropfactor seems too much of a temporary solution and I'm
not going to spend my money on a "temporary" format.

Having money on 10D is not having invested on the whole system or format. Crop factor is not a "format" on body. Crop factor on E-1 or Nikon DX is a format because it is about the whole series of lenses.

Lenses are expensive part and EOS lenses will fit 1.6, 1.3 and FF sensors. Lenses stay, bodies are changed like rolls of film ;-)

Matti J.

 

[Jono Slack]

Well
Maybe the 1.6 crop factor isn't there for life, but I think Nikon's 1.5 may be.

OTOH, should Nikon decide to go full frame (very unlikely I'd say) then I'll only have one (or possibly two) lenses designed or the smaller sensor

In the mean time I have exactly what I want

kind regards
jono slack

The 1.6 cropfactor seems too much of a temporary solution and I'm
not going to spend my money on a "temporary" format.

Having money on 10D is not having invested on the whole system or
format. Crop factor is not a "format" on body. Crop factor on E-1
or Nikon DX is a format because it is about the whole series of
lenses.

Lenses are expensive part and EOS lenses will fit 1.6, 1.3 and FF
sensors. Lenses stay, bodies are changed like rolls of film ;-)

Matti J.

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[Jono Slack]

Too bad the 1Ds doesn't work well with wide angle lenses. You can
use them but there are a number of lens/sensor issues that make the
smaller Nikon sensor and their new 12-24 lens a better optimized
optical/sensor combination.

And that's always going to be a problem with FF - added to which one doesn't get the telephoto 'bonus' with FF

kind regards
jono slack

Paul

Canon users are not stuck with any crop factor.

Well, those who don't want to spend $8k on a camera are.

And that was the point. If I will and can afford there IS the FF
Canon 1Ds. Not stuck to any particular crop factor.

And Nikon users who want FF look for Kodak. Unless they have a
legion of wide angle DX lenses when it is actually useless.

Cheers,
Matti J.

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[Jono Slack]

My wide angle? It is there with 1Ds, if I need.

I assume that paying for it is no problem then?

No, not me. Changing my DSLR body once every 2 years. But for some
others, there might be a money factor present.

It was about "Canon
users stuck with crop" when in reality there are most levels of
freedom with Canon DSRL system having 1.6, 1.3 and non-cropped FF
sensor versions available. And Nikon variants were...?

But, what you're saying, is that if you want to use a 10D (nice
camera by the way) then you are pretty much committed (for ever) to
a widest angle of about 26mm - are you really happy with that?

No, not me. Changing my DSLR body once every 2 years ;-)

The real news is: I don't have to change my arsenal of lenses if
and when my next DSLR is FF.

Oh - unless you've invested exclusively in L glass, I think you will - I just don't think that cheaper lenses (especially wide angle) will cut it with FF

In that situation DX owners have a
dilemma. Invest more on DX series or sell them...?

How many DX lenses does one need? One, or at the most, two - this is not a huge hit, and it gives us exactly what we want right now.

HI Matti
I have no pain - I've got a perfectly serviceable D1x with fabulous
'out of the camera' shots and no smeary noise reduction.

Nikon cameras suffered some sort of smeary NR in the past? I just
didn't knew. Good for you, the problem is now solved.

Matti, my pictures are so awful that a little smeary noise
reduction can do them nothing but good

Oh, mi god.

Added to
which I have a nice 12-24mm DX lens that gives me real wide angle,
a good work flow, great Nikon software and some new bodies to be
announced soon.

I hope the DX-series of DSRLs will be made in the future to be used
with DX-lenses. A bad thing, those DX users are destined to use the
non-FF for a very very long time ;-)

Well, this is becoming a matter of religion

Religion? For me not.

When A has no more arguments, the whole argumentation of B is
labeled as being "religious" or something equally intellectual.
Like pulling a carpet under your feet. Thanks.

• you BELIEVE that full

frame is the best (even if you can't afford it),

Right there, Jono. And a truck load of arguments have been
presented to back it up.

whereas I BELIEVE
that I don't want full frame.

Whereas I believe, some day you will want one. Sooner or later. ;-)

Argument and discussion is completely
useless - I know I won't convince you of the error of your ways, or
vice versa.

Yes, I have not seen any particular evidence for "error of my ways".

But don't kid yourself into thinking that in my heart of hearts I
really know your right - because I don't!

No sweat, I believe you on this one.

I was just hoping for something special from the E1, and it looks a
little doubtful now.

Agree. Wonderfull specs, except for the crop factor.

I didn't think it had a crop factor - I thought that was the whole
point - lenses designed to match the sensor - no crop factor.

I meant the crop factor being the limiting factor for future
resolution increase for lens & sensor combinations vs. FF.

Cheers,
Matti J.

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

 

[alex wetmore]

What are you tallking about? With the Olympus, the lenses are
marked with 35mm Focal lengths and are effectively 35mm units with
a new mount.

You have to deal with a 2x FOV crop instead of a 1.5, 1.6 or 1.7 x
crop compared to a full frame sensor - That is even worse.

Sorry, but that makes no sense whatsoever. 35mm sensors have a crop
factor compared with 120 film for instance, and that has a crop
factor when compared to large format. EVERYTHING has a crop factor
when compared to SOMETHING.

The lenses for a 120 camera are not marked with 35mm Frame size
focal lengths, all the Nikon, Canon and OLYMPUS SLR glass is.

There is no such thing as a 35mm focal length. There is the focal length of the lens and the size of the image circle. The E1 requires a smaller imager circle (due to the 4/3 CCD) and thus shorter focal length lenses.

There is the equivelent focal length, but the E-1 lenses aren't marked with that. The 14-52 says 14-52, not 28-105. That is the true focal length of the lens.

The problem is exaserbated because even the P&S camera are quoted
with an equivalent 35mm zoom range when the actual range is much
smaller

Reviewers tend to do this to make it easier to compare cameras, but the cameras themselves are marked with the actual focal length. The lens on my Sony DSC-F717 says 9.7-48.5mm focal length on it. That is the true focal length, not the 38-190 number thrown around in reviews.

alex

 

[Jon Ragnarsson]

Matti: I will not have a lens "collection". Lenses are fare too expensive to "collect". I am still and will probably be what people call advanced amateur.

I will probably own 3-4 lenses max. Having to rethink my lens strategy just because my brand is going from 1.6/1.5 to "full frame" is just not an option.

But I am with Nikon on this one, they are delivering a very good service to all the people who have bought a Nikon DSLR from the beginning. The 17-55mm looks perfect as a all-around travel/first lens, just like the Olympus 14-54mm. What has Canon done for their 30.000 a month customers to make their life easier? Not much.

I will probably end up carrying a extra lens if I go with Canon. But OTOH, neither Canon or Nikon have made clear statement if/when they are going full frame. People are just guessing, Canon might try to go fullframe, because the have the 1Ds, OTOH, majority of their market is the D60 and 10D. Nikon has been very consistent with their 1.5 FOV, but who knows? Olympus has made some bold statements, but we all know marketers.. But at least their vision is quite clear, the 4/3 format or bust.

Meanwhile, I keep collecting intrests from my "SLR account". I think I wait for the rumoured 3D (if there is one) or digital version of the F100. If that fails, I guess I have to look really hard at the E-1 (It is the principle of the 4/3 concept, which I support 100%) and S2,D100,10D,*ist D...
J.

--
http://jonr.beecee.org/

 

[Matti J]

The real news is: I don't have to change my arsenal of lenses if
and when my next DSLR is FF.

Oh - unless you've invested exclusively in L glass, I think you
will - I just don't think that cheaper lenses (especially wide
angle) will cut it with FF

L glass where it is needed: 135/2.0 L and 70-200/2.8 IS L USM. And my 50/1.4 (Canon's reference lens) is famous for sharpness across the frame without L designation. And my Sigma 20/1.8 DG lens is designed for digital (FF or not) with its exit pupil far from sensor and thus light rays very perpendicular to sensor. I think they will cut enough with FF.

In that situation DX owners have a
dilemma. Invest more on DX series or sell them...?

How many DX lenses does one need? One, or at the most, two - this
is not a huge hit, and it gives us exactly what we want right now.

But won't the whole lens line up "benefit" from DXed image circle, by making them smaller?

Cheers,
Matti J.