AG Schnozz wrote:
> Moose wrote:
>
>> It's all about the Image!
>>
>
> Wrongo. Sometimes is about GETTING the image.
I wasn't going to bite, but now you've pounded on the theme again in the
Horn Pond thread. Of course "all about the image" includes getting the
image, how not?
Anybody who has read any of my posts about noise at high iso should
remember that the key point over and over is the ability to get images
that can't be captured otherwise. The sample image of a jellyfish I've
linked to so often is carefully chosen because it is a beautiful image
that is only possible through clean, low noise high iso performance.
Neither IS, faster lens, tripod, flash nor any combination of them will
do the job because of low light level, thick, reflective glass and deep,
3D, moving subject. It's by no means the only image I've taken with the
5D that I could not otherwise have captured, just a particularly
striking example
<http://moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/5D/Jellyfish/_MG_0194.htm>.
Likewise, I took the Panasonic version of the E-330 to task for
eliminating two features, live view in A mode and movable LCD, in favor
of slick looks (Apparently, a different kind of image is everything to
them.). Again, my point was the image, and whether it can be captured or
not. As I recall, you agreed about the LCD, citing physical
circumstances where the 330 could get the image and the P could not.
Also, be fair. This started, and I replied to it, as a thread about a
specific newly announced camera body. I was responding to a post or
posts waxing enthusiastic about all sorts of announced features. My
point, which I still feel is valid, is that most of these features are
less important, not unimportant, just less, than the basic imaging
system capabilities.
Even more narrowly, I drew a comparison between the imaging quality of
the N bodies and the Sony alpha100 that use versions of 10+mp CCD chips
from Sony. Given similar circumstances, all these bodies should be
relatively equally capable of 'getting the image'. The question I raised
is about the quality of the image they would get. If, as I suspect will
prove to be true (based on prior camera bodies) P takes the S system
pretty much as is, I proposed that its other features wouldn't make it
competitive.
To go further where I've gone before, even if the P sensor motion based
IS works as advertised, it still only corrects for camera motion, while
higher iso capability corrects for subject motion as well. If noise
performance is no better than the alpha100, all the IS will do is get
them halfway back to where the competition is. It's not that I'm against
IS, I simply consider clean, low noise high iso performance to be the
logical first step, as it corrects two problems at once, with mechanical
camera shake compensation the logical second step.
Now I hope P manages N-like performance. Matched with the innovative in
camera IS, that would be spectacular. Not so good for Oly,
unfortunately, I suspect, but good in providing some competition to the
C-N axis of power. I think a market with several healthy competitors is
better for the user.
> Many of the
> best/world's most famous pictures were grainy atrocities that
> the modern day pixel-peeper would gag on. But the photographer
> "got the shot"--as imperfect as it may be. Probably my favorite
> example is the picture of Robert Kennedy after he was shot. The
> negative was so thin that it took hours for the darkroom
> technician to work his magic and using skill/tool in the book.
> The grain and densities of the image are all wrong--but the
> photograph is the definitive image from that tragedy.
>
Wonderful story, but I must ask what it's got to do with the subject?
Yes, a crappy image is better than no image at all for such an event.
But what does it have to do with what I was talking about? In a similar
circumstance today, the journalists would all be carrying C or N pro
bodies with super fast AF and high frame rates. Whoever pushed the
button at the critical time would get a series of well focused, well
exposed images to pick from.
> Clean pixels are only ONE factor in considering a camera system.
> If it was "all about the image" everybody would be shooting 4x5
> or 8x10.
>
C'mon... As above, I was making a narrow comparison of existing and
proposed new APC sensor size contemporary DSLRs. I did mention the 5D,
but only in the specific context of the camera used by the specific
person who made the post to which I replied. Mea sortta culpa. In
theory, I should have mentioned the 30D, if I mentioned C at all, but
the imaging qualities of the 5d and 30D are very similar.
You know that, although clean pixels are high up on my list, they aren't
everything. How many times have I pointed out slow response, in turning
on, in waking up, and in shutter/AF lag, in threads about various
digithingies? If the 5D were as slow to start up as the E-1 or 300D, I
wouldn't have one. If it's not ready, it can't get the image, and the
image is everything, to quote somebody. :-)
And you know I don't like big, heavy photo gear. If I can't stand to
carry it, it fails the "image is everything" test, cause I don't get any
images with it. That's how I got into OM in the first place, dropping
the Ftn like a (heavy) hot potato shortly after the OM-1 came out. The
1Ds could take pics better than an 8 foot by 10 foot view camera, and I
still wouldn't carry one - except perhaps for self protection in
dangerous circumstances. But I already have my dad's old F2a I could use
for that, and it's sunk cost.
> I consider your particular choice in 3rd-party digital backs to
> have an outstanding imaging system as well as a very decent AF
> system. It's even quite responsive. But, unfortunately, it
> lacks that special "something"...the intangible...which stands
> in the way for some of us. Or, it might not necessarily "stand
> in the way", but it doesn't become an enhancement to the
> personal vision. My OM gear causes me to see the scene
> differently than other cameras do. Part of it is familiarity,
> but part of it is that you see things in another dimension than
> what may be "reality".
>
And that is your experience and that of some others. It's not mine. Yes,
I sometimes sit around and alternate looking through an OM-1 viewfinder
and my DSLRs, and am blown away by the OM. But in the field, I just
don't notice the viewfinder, my attention is on what it shows, and none
of them seem to get in the way of that for me. We are all different, and
our experiences with cameras will reflect that. My realtive indifference
to viewfinder issues tha are important to others may ismply reflect the
20/10 visual acuity in my viewfinder eye. Or maybe it's all in my head.
;-) You find C bodies uncomfortable to hold for any length of time. My
physical configuration is different and I find them comfortable to carry
around for hours.
You rave about the location of the exposure compensation control on the
2s. And it IS better than the OM-4, but I find the control on the 5D to
be much better, I don't even have to change my grip or look away from
the viewfinder to see and change it. My bane is RF cameras. They cause
"me to see the scene differently than other cameras do" and "see things
in another dimension than what may be "reality" - in a really icky way.
That doesn't mean I think others shouldn't like them, just that I can
save enough money to pay for my next car. :-)
> Conversely, for you, this particular 3rd-party digital back has
> openned up photographic opportunities that have been hidden or
> denied to you with other systems.
>
Oh, so true! It isn't perfect. I can, and do, think of many ways it
could be improved. But, it gets in the way of capturing the image I want
less than any other camera I've ever used. So for you, it doesn't
enhance and for me, it does. I love my 5D BECAUSE it allows me to
capture the image AND because the image captured is nice and clean. I
knew with the 14th. shot I took with it, and one of the first couple
that I viewed full frame, that it's imaging capabilities were something
special <http://moosemystic.net/Gallery/MPhotos/Home/FFpoppy.htm>.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|