PhotoBanter.com

PhotoBanter.com (http://www.photobanter.com/index.php)
-   Digital Photography (http://www.photobanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   Two stories of why smaller systems might be better sometimes (http://www.photobanter.com/showthread.php?t=130356)

android May 14th 17 08:41 AM

Two stories of why smaller systems might be better sometimes
 
In article ,
RichA wrote:

https://petapixel.com/2017/05/12/pho...irplane-carry-
taken/

If it was m4/3rds, it could have been carry-on.


If it had been m4/3rds, then the gear would not have delivered files
with the expected quality. It was surely insured...

https://petapixel.com/2017/05/13/130...atters-ground/

If it was m4/3rds, it would have been 1/2 the weight, unlikely to have been
tipped over.


If it had been m4/3rds, then the lense would not have delivered files
with the expected quality. It was surely insured...
--
teleportation kills

Alfred Molon[_4_] May 14th 17 11:31 AM

Two stories of why smaller systems might be better sometimes
 
In article , android
says...
If it had been m4/3rds, then the gear would not have delivered files
with the expected quality.


Meaningless statement, since you don't know what the expected quality
is. Sometimes even a smartphone is sufficient.
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

android May 14th 17 11:40 AM

Two stories of why smaller systems might be better sometimes
 
In article ,
Alfred Molon wrote:

In article , android
says...
If it had been m4/3rds, then the gear would not have delivered files
with the expected quality.


Meaningless statement, since you don't know what the expected quality
is. Sometimes even a smartphone is sufficient.


This was pro gear to be used professionally, right?
--
teleportation kills

Alfred Molon[_4_] May 14th 17 12:52 PM

Two stories of why smaller systems might be better sometimes
 
In article , android
says...
This was pro gear to be used professionally, right?


There are m4/3 cameras suitable for professional use.
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

android May 14th 17 01:42 PM

Two stories of why smaller systems might be better sometimes
 
In article ,
Alfred Molon wrote:

In article , android
says...
This was pro gear to be used professionally, right?


There are m4/3 cameras suitable for professional use.


Oki...
--
teleportation kills

Alfred Molon[_4_] May 14th 17 02:11 PM

Two stories of why smaller systems might be better sometimes
 
In article , android
says...

In article ,
Alfred Molon wrote:

In article , android
says...
This was pro gear to be used professionally, right?


There are m4/3 cameras suitable for professional use.


Oki...


Thanks God. I was afraid this would have been the start of another of
our endless exchanges ;-)
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

android May 14th 17 04:29 PM

Two stories of why smaller systems might be better sometimes
 
In article ,
Alfred Molon wrote:

In article , android
says...

In article ,
Alfred Molon wrote:

In article , android
says...
This was pro gear to be used professionally, right?

There are m4/3 cameras suitable for professional use.


Oki...


Thanks God. I was afraid this would have been the start of another of
our endless exchanges ;-)


You can use any camera for professional purposes within its envelope of
limitations. The photogs of misfortune mentioned did, obviously chose
gear with wider such... :-ppp
--
teleportation kills

PeterN[_6_] May 15th 17 01:23 AM

Two stories of why smaller systems might be better sometimes
 
On 5/14/2017 4:12 PM, RichA wrote:
On Sunday, 14 May 2017 03:42:00 UTC-4, android wrote:
In article ,
RichA wrote:

https://petapixel.com/2017/05/12/pho...irplane-carry-
taken/

If it was m4/3rds, it could have been carry-on.


If it had been m4/3rds, then the gear would not have delivered files
with the expected quality.


What level of "quality" do people really need? How many people are producing huge prints any more?
That excuse really died five years ago.


People "need" what they want to think they need. As I posted earlier, I
will frequently take a major crop and blow it up to 12 x 18, or 16 x 20.
The small format would not make me happy. If I was physically capable, I
would probably use MF, but I am not, so I go as large as I can handle.
There will come a time when I can only handle smaller sensor cameras,
but that time has not yet arrived. Since you are happy with a small
sensor, great. But please don't try to impose your standards on me.

--
PeterN

android May 15th 17 05:55 AM

Two stories of why smaller systems might be better sometimes
 
In article ,
RichA wrote:

On Sunday, 14 May 2017 03:42:00 UTC-4, android wrote:
In article ,
RichA wrote:

https://petapixel.com/2017/05/12/pho...ar-airplane-ca
rry-
taken/

If it was m4/3rds, it could have been carry-on.


If it had been m4/3rds, then the gear would not have delivered files
with the expected quality.


What level of "quality" do people really need?


We're taking pro stuff here and that that customers ask for.

How many people are producing
huge prints any more?
That excuse really died five years ago.


???
--
teleportation kills

-hh May 15th 17 01:33 PM

Two stories of why smaller systems might be better sometimes
 
PeterN wrote:
RichA wrote:
What level of "quality" do people really need? How many people are
producing huge prints any more? That excuse really died five years ago.


People "need" what they want to think they need...


Well said.

I made a big print as a gift this past Christmas .. Cheetah portrait, slightly larger than
life size .. and more recently, I did a very heavy crop so as to identify a bird species - pic
wasn't great, but it served its purpose - and in retrospect, the crop effectively made it a
5000+mm equivalent while (supported) handheld, which far exceeded my expectations.


-hh


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
PhotoBanter.com