> I'm not sure I understand why the current interest in FF. How many people can
> need that level of resolution?
Resolution is only part of the equation. Low-light performance (night
photography, or event coverage) is important to me. But also, I find
that full-frame has a certain rendering that I personally find
pleasing. Smaller sensors can mimic the look, but it's not always
natural. I've talked about the differences between the OM Zuikos 28/2
and 35/2. Two lenses with similar focal-lengths and apertures, but
completely different rendering traits.
Honestly, I think that 16-24MP is pretty much about the ideal range.
This gives me pixel sharpness to just about any realistic sized print.
I don't do bedspread sized prints and even if I did, I don't think
that my subject matter or my technique would hold up to that level of
output. File sizes of cameras beyond 24MP are just about unmanageable.
Especially with the quantity I shoot. For web display, just about
anything is fine. Other than a few niggles with the E-1 with
contrasting colors (rimming), that camera is still perfectly suited
for web display and social media. The DMC-L1 is actually about the
perfect camera for web display as the pixel count is slightly higher
and the rimming effect is reduced or eliminated.
I will need to continue my soul-searching efforts. The photography
world has been moving VERY rapidly to FF mirrorless, it's only Olympus
being left behind again to fend for themselves. I've been there, done
that, not really interested in fighting that battle again.
AG Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|