How do you define or describe "a look"? When is a camera capable of
achieving something beyond the specifications or your expectations?
This is a question I have often pondered. My A1 is heading off to
Sony for a sensor replacement and I've been looking over images taken
with it wondering if I should just replace the camera with something
different.
Something strange happens each time I do this. I see "a look" with
the camera which is very unique and unusual. This is the ONLY small
or medium format camera I've ever used which is able to achieve a 4x5
look. Part of it is the image h/w ratio, but there is something else
going on too. DOF? Possible. Response curves and dynamic range?
Again, possible.
Here are examples:
http://image66media.com/Gallery/GC01/gc2004_10
http://image66media.com/Gallery/GC01/gc2004_06
http://image66media.com/Gallery/GC01/gc2004_11
http://image66media.com/Gallery/IsleRoyale01/PICT2456163
http://www.image66media.com/articles.html
When shot side-by-side with my E-1 for landscape work, the A1
achieves a different image. Just as 35mm gives you a different look
than 4x5. The E-1 is a cross between 35mm and 645, whereas the
A1--even with the smaller sensor gives a look more like a 6x7 or 4x5.
To be fair, though, these characteristics have been attainable with
the outstanding RawShooter converter, but there's something going on
which I cannot explain.
Have others noted a simularity with their 2/3" cameras? Am I smokin
my shorts again? Have I inadvertantly stumbled upon a
camera/converter combination that exceeds anything the designers ever
imagined? Is there a dog?
AG
____________________________________________________________________________________
Any questions? Get answers on any topic at www.Answers.yahoo.com. Try it now.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|