W Shumaker wrote:
>
> In the article he says "...roof of a parking garage overlooking
> downtown Toronto. This is a favourite testing site of mine...". OK
> so
> how much of his real photography is taking pictures like this?
>
> I upgraded from the LS-2000 (2700 dpi) to the LS-4000 (4000dpi) and
> I
> don't believe that the resolution gain was worth that much for most
> of
> my photography. (the z-axis gain is a different matter though.) When
> you factor in motion blur, depth of field limits to 3-d objects shot
> in
> low light, handheld shots, panned shots, ... somewhere between 2700
> and
> 4000 dpi is more than adequate for most of my photography. How many
> times have you really taken the time to aperture pre-fire your OM
> with
> on a dampended tripod? The real question is whether you were able to
> get the shot you wanted? Could you see it with the camera and did
> that
> moment happen or not?
>
I also upgraded from LS2000 to 4000ED, the different is big or small?
Up to your judge:
This is crop from a 2700dpi scan with LS2000 - original pixel
http://www.accura.com.hk/digicam/school-z-crop.jpg
This is the same shot scanned with 4000ED - original pixel
http://www.accura.com.hk/velvia.jpg
May be the different is smaller with handheld or negative but I prefer
to get the best scanner I can afford and to me it makes big different
to my shots for both resolution and noise.
C.H.Ling
________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan
service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working
around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|
