Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Back to: Some interesting commentary on sensor size, pixel pitc

Subject: [OM] Re: Back to: Some interesting commentary on sensor size, pixel pitch and resolution
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 08:02:39 -0400
Also an interesting test but something different than the other.  The 
first test had to do with diffraction and pixel pitch and attempted to 
show that small pixels are inherently inferior to large pixels like 35mm 
is inferior to medium format.  The D3 and the 5D are about as close as 
you can get to the same pixel pitch.  This test has to do with improved 
sensor performance and not immutable physical phenomenon like 
diffraction.  But it's too bad that he didn't use the same lens on the 
previous test.

Chuck Norcutt

Moose wrote:
> Wayne Harridge wrote:
>> Yeah, if he really wanted to do a reasonable comparison he could have used 
>> the same Nikkor on the 5D (with an adapter).
>>   
> He did. <http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3/vs-5d-180mm.htm>
> 
> Closer up, indoor subject. Although the difference may be less, the 
> direction is the same. The 5D reveals more, clearer detail at lower 
> ISOs, with the balance shifting towards the D3 as the ISO goes really high.
> 
> Nobody has noted it here yet, but the dpreview D3 tests appeared 
> yesterday and guess what? They show pretty much the same thing. Will 
> anybody really see a difference in even large prints? Maybe, in really 
> big ones. But I thought it was refreshing that he prefaced it all with a 
> disclaimer that all the nits about to be picked make little or no 
> difference in practical use.
> 
> In that way, I relate to him. In spite of myself, I'm interested in the 
> minutia of the technical side of photography. I often know that it 
> doesn't make a practical difference in the photos, but that's not the 
> only thing interesting to me. I often find the techie stuff interesting 
> in and of itself. And then - I bought a 5D several months before he did, 
> for much the same reason. And I knew with the first few images out of it 
> that big really was better.
> 
> While the page that started this thread is shows more difference, it's 
> also with different subjects, most of the comparisons are of larger vs. 
> smaller sensors and the overall point is different. Focusing on one 
> comparison pair out of many seems unfair to me. His overall point was 
> about ways in which he finds larger film formats and larger digital 
> sensors to have IQ advantages over smaller ones - and why he thinks it 
> is so. I thought his examples and analysis were interesting and informative.
> 
> I appreciated the link. I haven't been over in his site for a while, 
> mostly as it was rather Nikon centric last time I looked. Do I agree 
> with everything he says? Nah. But I find his enthusiasm for the image 
> refreshing and his opinions, even when I disagree with them, thought 
> provoking.
> 
> It's interesting to me that so many of the most interesting people 
> writing on the web about photography are people with agendas, blind 
> spots, strong opinions and a real interest in simple, practical tests, 
> flawed as they always are. Two who are serious, volume oriented pros 
> stand up for getting a camera and settings that will deliver the goods 
> they sell using a streamlined, JPEG based, minimal time and cost work flow.
> 
> I'm not particularly interested in that, as I have no clients or 
> deadlines and find that RAW gives me more flexibility. But if I were in 
> the volume business like KR or Will Shorter, I'd be learning everything 
> I could from them about efficiency in workflow.
> 
> Michael Reichmann is another opinionated guy who writes based on his own 
> experience without regard for what others may think. Sometimes I agree 
> with him, sometimes I don't. But I'm seldom bored and I often know more 
> after reading him than before.
> 
> Mike Johnston? I have no idea what he sees in much of the photography he 
> likes. A fair amount of it looks like crap I'd dump if it were mine. But 
> there are obviously others who see that something I don't, and not just 
> his readers, but print and book buyers. So I read his blog, figuring one 
> day I may 'get' it - or not.
> 
> Moose
> 
> ==============================================
> List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
> 
> 
> 

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

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