Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by digitalandfilm, Mar 10, 2013.
People don't buy Leicas for the sensors.
I really can't stand DXO Mark... *leaves before I go on a rant*
I think you're right.. they buy it for:
Why so much hate against Leica shooters
No hate.. I'm not a hater.. there are plenty of them on here.
Just pointing out the quality of the m4/3'rds as compared to a high-end camera.
You need to check that LARGE print stuff.. not me.
If you don't like me, use the ignore user function.. otherwise, quit the :hissy:
Had to match your LARGE RED DOT & now my font is re-sized in my previous post to the forum default :smile:
And Sony Nex-N is better than all MFTs.....
at half the price.
You need lenses too....
I know a lot of Nex users have been actively using legacy glass- both foreign and domestic. The Nex with a MF Flektogon is popular, as well with other legacy stuff.
This has been flying all over the net. Every insecure photographer at DP Review loves this stuff. As someone who actually has an extensive investment in both Leica and the E-M5 I'll say this.
1. The single base numbers above don't tell the whole story and they don't represent how the cameras perform in the real world.
2. Not everyone cares about high ISO performance. SOme people just want the best performance possible at base ISO. And there the M9/M-E still goes head to head with the best.
3. There IS a difference between the Kodak CCD sensor in the M9/M-E and any current CMOS sensor.
4. Based on DXO scores almost every top end 35mm camera beats the pants off every medium format camera, but you don't see the Phase One owners dropping their IQ 180's for a D800.
5. Almost all currently available sensors are capable of sensational results in the right hands.
6. Shooting with a rangefinder is like nothing else. Sites like DXO ignore evertything about a camera system except a single component. Handling, shooting technique, build quality, lens selection.
7. mFT shooters who have been told our cameras were crap because they don't do CAF and have different DOF carachteristics should know better than to right off a system because of a single denominator.
At base ISO, which is where I shoot 90% of the time there's simply no comparison between an M9 and any m43 camera. And that doesn't mean I'm saying one's better than the other. I'm saying there's no way to really compare them. They're too different to each other. It's like comparing a 10" hunting knife to a scalpel. They both cut stuff, but that's about it.
I'll pay $100 for this jpeg, where can I send you my money?
Joking aside, if I won the lottery...
Camera technology has gotten to the point where sensor differences only show up at the extremes of shooting. For %95 of most peoples shooting, the sensor differences will be invisible, and the qualities of the glass will be what effects their photos.
At the other end of the spectrum, the NEX7 has a fantastic sensor that will resolve better than almost all of it's native lenses. Which camera do you think will produce a better picture.
Finally (and I realize not everyone looks at the world like this)... a Corvette may produce better numbers than a Ferrari, but at the end of the day it's still a plastic Chevy, not a handmade Italian work of art (and please don't get me wrong, the Corvette is a fantastic car).
Oh how original... another one that needs their insecurities stroked.
Nikon entry level D5100 is also ranked higher than the our cameras... at 1/2 the cost. I think people here are perfectly fine creating photography despite it.
To whom are you referring to?
That'd be me. I'm very insecure.
I would love, love, love to have one of those crappy Leicas and a couple nice lenses.
The only thing holding me back, other than my CFO/wife, is that the red dot would raise expectations on the quality of my output, resulting in severe disappointment later. I need to get a point-and-shoot skin to put on my E-PM2.
at the end of the day the camera is just a mechanism to capture a photo. Too much angst is expended in beliving a better camera will make you a better photographer.
I am a lucky person.. I live with a leica shooter and she lets me use her cameras and lenses.. The lenses are uniformly excellent, but then again for my photography the premium micro 4/3 lenses do a damn fine job. My OMD spanks the M9 on high ISO... though she now has a monochrome so the playing field has changed a little ( she hasn't let me out with the monochrome yet )
Shooting a rangefinder is a very different experience... almost auto nothing..heavy, uncomfortable in the hand, yet simple to understand, and I am beginning to see the advantage of seeing outside the frame and no shutter lag. It to me is amore considered approach
I may have got this with the OMD... but I was more confident I got it with the M9
L1001133 by kevinparis, on Flickr
beyond that here are a few other images... some are M9, some are OMD
L1001147 by kevinparis, on Flickr
P3040110 by kevinparis, on Flickr
Blow out or blown up by kevinparis, on Flickr
L1000914 by kevinparis, on Flickr
Now I don't make a living taking pictures, I don't make big prints. I dont actually pixel peep... I barely understand half the nuances people seem to see in the technical aspects of cameras. Do I like shooting Leica... most of the time yes.... it makes me concentrate and think. Would I buy one as my prime camera? ... probably not unless I was much more confident in my photography. The choice of camera is a personal thing... but what I have discovered is that if you are someone who does photography as essentially a pastime, then the limiting factor on your photography is not the camera
Hah, +1... count me in for a cruddy Leica too! :tongue:
I think all this does is underscore how little DxO scores (or any charts/tests scores) mean without context.
I look at those results as interesting.. and I have heard that the m4/3rds sensor has completely leveled the playing field with the APS-C sensors, and these results seem to indicate that.
Camera bodies have become almost disposable, but lenses are where it's at.
I have shifted to put more weight on the lens performance, and less on bodies and sensors. In addition, I will get out and shoot more.. and spend less time talking about it.
To my secret critics (you know who you are) continue to babble on about ETTR and MTF, and whose "in" your group or circle and whose "out". I will continue to shoot and progress.
I could care less about who has a Leica and who doesn't.. If I had that kind of disposible income, I wouldn't hesitate to own one- but I don't and I'm not bitter or resentful towards those that have Leica bodies/glass.
If you have problems with what I write and post, simply use the *ignore* button.. because at least those that respond do so because they are not petty or insecure.