I agree with all that you write in that post, Ken.
But I repeat: I was merely remarking on the Moose's link to DxO's review of the
E-M5. That organ said good things about the camera, but heavily qualified, so
the review wasn't really that complimentary in the wider view of things.
I'm impressed that your Pro friend gets remarkable results from the E-3. I
suspect that anyone with the requisite skills could do so and I aspire to such
skills.
Chris
On 1 Oct 2012, at 16:43, Ken Norton <ken@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I mean that, for instance, my K-5 gets better scores than the much newer
>> E-M5.
>
> We've really gone far past the point of diminishing returns. Over the
> past two years, the new cameras are all using sensors with such
> exceptional high-ISO performance and high-enough pixels that there is
> little reason to complain about any of them. In the area of noise,
> they are so far beyond my existing cameras that it's pretty silly. The
> typical P&S gets better results in that regard.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|