Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] the debate

Subject: [OM] the debate
From: "Bill Pearce" <bspearce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 09:11:57 -0600
"Luminous Landscape presents empirical tests that are quite compelling."

Although I respect Reichmann's committment to actual testing, I must, again,
comment on his methodology. I don't consider the test scientifically valid.
He hasn't compared film vs. digital. What he has tested compares a digital
capture against a scanned film image. This is a flawed methodology that is
repeated again and again. Reichmann and others are testing cameras against
cameras and scanners.

I don't have a horse in this race, so I really don't care about the outcome,
but I also must comment on observations made on other lists. He is using a
film camera with a longer lens, that has a reputation for mirror slap
something like a drop hammer, at a slower shutter speed. It is mounted in a
less than advantageous way (see Gary Reese's lens tests for the results of
different mountings).

I'm still not convinced that one is better than the other, just different.
I'm not even convinced that one should ever be better than the other for all
uses. I do  think that Reichmann has an evangalistic need to promote digital
and Canon products, and is very good at spreading the word.

Bill Pearce


< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz