Ken Norton wrote:
> >At the risk of setting off another olio from Ken of information and
>
>> reports from experience relevant to some aspects of landscape
>> photography, but not to the specific question asked, semi-religious
>> rants and paranoid sounding responses to perceived calumnies aimed at
>> inanimate objects but emotionally responded to as though aimed at
>> himself, I will attempt an informative answer.
>>
Look Ken, I don't know at whom or what you are ranting. Is it just me?
Am I really THAT wrong and wrong headed? Am I just a convenient
surrogate target? Someone you can shoot at who will make a good fight
of it? Who or what are you really so very angry at?
Sure, Michael Reichmann is a bit of a loony sometimes. (By the way,
isn't he on a Nikon binge lately?) Sure, dpreview gets some things
wrong. But I never just spout their conclusions, particularly as I often
disagree with them. Absent the means to buy all these cameras and do my
own testing, I look around for folks kind enough to take and post
standardized subjects that allow direct comparison of images from
different cameras.
As it happens, Brian asked a very specific question about detail
resolution of cameras, that point being even more clearly stated in his
second post. So if you don't agree that that is a meaningful question
for a landscape photographer, why not post a reasoned and organized
discussion of what other factors he should consider and why.
If you disagree with my analysis based on the images I used, why not say
why and how you disagree, rather than this childlike ranting?
>
> No dispute from me. Canon has won. Game over.
Oh pshaw! Nikon is on a roll, Oly has done better in DSLRs lately than
in ages. I didn't say Canon is best in any overall way, nor even the
best landscape camera. I answered a specific question. And I believe my
answer was accurate. Again, if you disagree, show us.
I'd think you've been around long enough to know that the leaders in
various fields change with time. Who ever heard of LG? They just dropped
out of the sky, as far as I know. But their TVs get good reviews and I
have one of their phones. It works well and takes surprisingly decent
pictures, although I've never used it for that other than from
curiosity. Maybe five years from now we will all either be using LG
DSLRs or lusting after them.
I also said I believed the 5DII would be the most popular landscape
camera for a while. That doesn't mean it will be the best in all ways,
nor that the best landscape images will be taken with it. The
photographer still matters a great deal.
> Feel free to pick the 30D which Luminous-Landscape boldly declared to be
> superior to 35mm Provia. Or the 10D which rewrote what being better than
> 35mm Provia as all about. Or the 20D which not only beat 35mm, but was
> claimed to be better than 6x7 Provia or the 5D which was claimed to be better
> than 4x5 Velvia.
OK. Are you claiming his shots in the L-L article I linked to are
frauds? Did you actually look at them? You don't need to read his
opinions, just look at that d**n images. The 5D clearly does not resolve
more detail than 4x5 Velvia. Extrapolation from the available images
suggests that the 5DII may, in fact, end up doing so, or at least equal
it. AGAIN, I am not talking about ANY IQ factor other than resolution of
detail.
Back to E-3 and 5D, I ask the same question. Are you saying that the
images posted on dpreview are faked? I used them for my source because
they have recently started to publish images from RAW files, which I
consider a better indicator of IQ capability than JPEGs. Lenses seem
comparable, 50/2 DZ Macro and EF 85/1.8.
You can try it yourself. I downloaded the ISO 100 RAW derived samples
and compared them, both at native resolution and with the 5D images
downsampled to match the E-3. There's not a doubt. It's as clear as day.
The E-3 is just soft and fuzzy at 100% compared to the 5D. That doesn't
mean the E-3 is a crappy camera. It just means that on one aspect of
image quality, it is, not surprisingly, not quite as good as a much more
expensive camera with a much larger sensor. Why should that surprise
anyone, let alone upset them?
So Brian asked; what am I supposed to do? Lie to him?
> Now the 5Dmk2 is better than ANY other format of any kind in the entire
> history of photography!
>
You said it. I'm not aware of anyone else saying any such thing.
Hyperbole doesn't become you, at least not when you become it.
> Just which camp is espousing semi-religious claims of nirvana?
>
I just gather the data and draw simple conclusions. I don't particularly
like or dislike Canon, the company. If I were to rank the companies I
have some emotional attachment to, it would be Oly first and Nikon a
distant second. I'm sure not in love with the 5D, as camera. It's
missing several features that competitors have and I would love to have.
Ergonomically, it happens to fit my hand nicely, which is a blessing,
and I can find most of the important buttons most of the time.
Still, it's all about the image, and I'll put up with some inconvenience
for IQ. Yes, I know, I know, our criteria differ. But I tell you
straight, the 5D delivers on those IQ qualities that matter most to ME.
I spent lots and lots of time researching my next camera at that time.
In 2.5 years of use, I have never yet seen images from another camera
that have made me think I made a mistake. Next time I buy, I will go
through the same process. If another brand comes out on top, I'll buy it
- happy to have the best for me - and unhappy to have to find new
lenses. Tie, I go with the lenses I have and like.
So go excorciate someone else as a mindless follower. I don't know how
what % of those with Canon DSLRs are mindless followers led astray, but
I'll bet at least a noticeable proportion are not. Has it never occurred
to you that Canon may, at this time, make the best cameras for certain
people for certain applications? For others, nope. Certain sports and
other action, especially things like dance, D3. Entry level? You pick
'em. Small sensor mid to high end? So many good ones I wouldn't know
what to pick, if I didn't already have EF mount lenses, including
in-lens IS. But I'm not buying in those categories, so I'm not fully up
to speed on them.
> You'd have to be a complete idiot to not recognize the total superiority of
> the Canon 5Dmk2 over everything else in the world. Only fools would buy
> anything but this 2008/2009 version of the 30D, 60D, 10D, 20D, 5D...
>
What a load of codswallop!
> The Canon 5Dmk2 is now the official Landscape Camera for the 2009 shooting
> season.
Yup
> Anybody with a lesser camera should just stay home.
>
Or just be happy making images they like with equipment they like; and
not worrying about their neighbor's moral decay.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|