Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] OT: Recent debate on crop v FF - Mosse

Subject: Re: [OM] OT: Recent debate on crop v FF - Mosse
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2015 17:01:10 -0800
On 1/18/2015 1:09 PM, philippe.amard wrote:
Le 18 janv. 15 à 21:08, Moose a écrit :

On 1/17/2015 9:38 AM, Philippe wrote:
1600 for I wanted RAW, and it is the ISO limit of both bodies in RAW I think)

What? That can't be right.

I don't know the details but above a certain value, the ISOs are obtained digitally v analog - is it you who had an L1? JPEGs and RAWs don't have the same ISO highest values either. Newer sensors use tricks ;-)


Yesbut - OK, I checked; Raw goes up to ISO 6400, which is as high as I've ever 
used, or maybe higher.



 The D700 is 5.5 years older than the X-T1,

Perhaps a little less as the sensor was already in the XE-2

Oh, getting picky, eh? More checking - and the D700 sensor system is from the year older D3, to the gap holds or widens. :-)


So you are not just comparing FF to APS-C, but old vs. new tech. (I also have an old, 12 MP FF camera, Canon 5D, but the new stuff whups it on detail.)

Agreed, but the debate was between a D700 user (not me) and XT-1 (some former) 
owners.

Well, I was not to know that; no such details in your post here.


I'm not sure why more people don't use the wonderful comparison facilities in 
the dpreview tests.

/ Snip/

So I downloaded the Raw files, ran 'em through ACR*, stacked 'em and did some processing and comparing. <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/tech/X-T1_E-M1_D700/FON.htm>

Nice job :-)

Thanks!


They don't seem to say any more, but they used to use the best prime lenses available for each camera, stopped down short of diffraction. On a flat target, that should nail it.

Yup, I shot at 1.4 because one of the points that was debated was the DoF - 
Dpreview doesn't here.

Ah well, I didn't know that, either. Explains the test shot.


I know this started out as FF vs. APS-C, but that ship has, for now, sailed. The D750 resolves a great deal more fine detail than the smaller sensor cameras - no contest.

At 3 x the price tag for a difference that doesn't strike the viewer on screen most of the time - of course if we start cropping ... ;-)

/ snip/

Thanks for the post. I've been wondering about all the Fuji X love here, what with the larger sensor, but it appears I needn't, other than ergonomics and camera esthetics.

Sure. However, I didn't buy the XE-1, nor the X-T1; Alice thought I needed lighter gear and proceeded ... but I'm enjoying experimenting with them a lot
And were it not for the weight and bulk, I'd still be carrying the D700 or one 
of its successors ...

And I might still be shooting FF, but I agree with Alice, for me, if not for 
you. :-)

Thank you in any case for your informed review and enlightening opinion.

My pleasure, and I learned things. ;-)

Comparatively Informed Moose

--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/

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