M43 and the siren call of FF

pdk42

One of the "Eh?" team
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
6,641
Location
Leamington Spa, UK
Yup. Troll or True Believer, we'll never know. I have a master's in electrical engineering and spent most of my college days working in broadcast and recording control rooms, but I have learned that settled science, objective measurements, and blind tests are inadmissible in discussions with a lunatic fringe audiophile. And that's all I have.

I once interviewed to be president of a small boutique maker of magic audio boxes. They had space in a building that for some reason had a very old room-size cooler, heavily insulated and with a very heavy door. This was their listening room, to which they proudly ushered me for A-B comparison listening to their magic box. What I learned was that all the audiophile ears that had listened in this wonderful room were unable to detect that the difference between A and B was that the stereo channels were reversed! It wasn't a job that I could ever have taken. What they needed was a huckster, not an engineer.
This is the reason why drug testing is done using double blind testing. Confirmation bias, placebo etc are all to easy traps to fall into.

The photographic equivalent is to take a shot and print it (or display it full-screen on a monitor or projector) and then ask someone to judge it without any knowledge of the kit used to take it. This happens all the time in photographic clubs and from my experience the kit used to take a shot matters not one iota. Peering at shots at 100% res with the knowledge that your latest 42Mp FF beast has taken it will only result in confirmation bias.
 

Speedliner

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Mar 2, 2015
Messages
2,668
Location
Southern NJ, USA
Real Name
Rob
This is the reason why drug testing is done using double blind testing. Confirmation bias, placebo etc are all to easy traps to fall into.

The photographic equivalent is to take a shot and print it (or display it full-screen on a monitor or projector) and then ask someone to judge it without any knowledge of the kit used to take it. This happens all the time in photographic clubs and from my experience the kit used to take a shot matters not one iota. Peering at shots at 100% res with the knowledge that your latest 42Mp FF beast has taken it will only result in confirmation bias.
True in average size prints and if uncropped. More detail for cropping or printed large or viewed on a high def screen, a difference may be more noticeable.

Why all of this talk about formats anyway. Isn't it fun to have more than one camera if you can afford it? Don't Nikon shooters often have one for sports/wildlife, one for portraits/landscapes, an old favorite, a new marvel?

Want more detail to crop? Want more detail so smaller parts of the frame retain detail, want more DR for a dramatic landscape...why not, funds willing. Why is it always a contest between right and wrong, or mine and yours.
 

AlanU

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
488
As it was mentioned above, when doing a blind listening session, those who claimed that they could "hear" the difference did very poorly. I suspect that you wouldn't do much better. No one would. I wish I still had that article. Anyway, please keep spending your hard earned $$$ - it helps the economy. Another gentleman by the name of Dr Hsu out of CA who is an MIT graduate uses the cheapest receiver, CD player and lamp cord wires to demo his speakers/subs at HiFi shows. Has been doing it since the early 90s. Many times his setup is favored over multi mega systems. Than the reviewer finds out the what was used to demo the system. So much for high end cables etc...

Now as far as your picture with the 70-200? I'm being as honest as I can: I don't see anything special in this example. Now you may have a multi thousand dollar setup, but on my 27" 5k iMac I really don't see anything special about this picture. Could be my eyes though. Have you seen Peter Zelewski's work? He uses a Leica and those colors/contrast are very pleasing to my eye. So it isn't like I can't see or anything, but your shot unfortunately is not doing it for me. I mean I just don't see what it is that supposed to be so much better.
I was once like you. That was until a friend of mine dropped off a lot of high end equipment for me to borrow and analyze at my leisure. With no cash outlay or justification in my decisions of what sounds "better". The more accurate way to describe is what changed the sound signature to my preference. I change hardware for dramatic huge improvements but wires is more of a fun fine tuning hobby. Just think my totems are reasonably priced at 8g's.

I was using monster cable and Energy rca/interconnects and I went back and forth. I sat stationary with my ears in the identical position throughout the same test. The sound difference was not subtle between different cables being changed. I called this test BS until I literally sat through the entire audition blindly. Cheap interconnects do not have as much detail with my high resolution setup.

If you've read I already confirmed how cost of wire is not the determining factor. It's the differences in capacitance, inductance and resistance of the wired in between the two components. Just so happens I have preference to my "free" wires (Olflex) and my $1000 pair virtually sound the same but my pair of kimber cable 4tc and 8tc sounded different. The difference is more based on science rather than hoopla fantasy land.

The big difference is that I actually conducted many tests in my own home/room acoustics. I did not reaad and believe. I literally performed as scientific as I could. One thing noted was I found audible differene more with interconnects and speaker wires were not a big substantially different. I haven't even discussed power conditioning/isolated transformer sonic differences (pro studio's put emphasis on isolated transformers for their production work).

HSU is known for subwoofers. His bookshelf speakers are inexpensive units for less critical home theater application and not even in the realm of hifi. I don't doubt he can use cheap stuff......to display his low frequency subs.

Back to camera stuff. Leica images are more 3d and gritty with noisier bokeh and edgy contrast. The rendition is unlike most camera gear out there. I'm not even discussing the $$$$ difference either :)

Canon mk2 zooms are remarkable in a way that every focal length produces prime lens quality. The micro contrast/sharpness rivals many older generation prime lenses. The difference from an older Canon 35L pro level prime lens to a new 35Lmk2 you will notice a substantial difference as you post process. Same goes for virtually all of the Canon line as they change to Mk2 newer generation lenses.

The difference from the old Canon 24-70L f/2.8 to mk2 is almost like comparing the IQ of a 14-140 mk2 vs a zuiko 12-40 f/2.8. I think any M43 person can relate to that example. The zuiko 12-40 and panny 12-35 is pretty darn good in easy light conditions....I will not dispute that.

My photo examples are gently treated Raw files and nothing more. Not elaborate glorified colour treatment or manipulation for a portfolio "money shot". Simple real life example really. This is where one must understand the difference in showcase portfolio "moneyshots" to regular images for documentation purposes. The compressed jpg images on this webpage do not give these images a chance to display micro contrast differences between two lenses. No way I was trying to present portfolio examples of those two images LOL!!!!

At the end of the day putting files in print changes the whole debate on pixel peepers. Most cannot tell the difference between an iphone image printed 4x6 compared to a m43, ff etc.

Yesterday was Victoria day in Canada. Took the family out and I tested my gh3 yesterday with my 12-35mm in a restaurant and I hit a wall at iso 3200. I cleaned up the noise with minor plastic skin. This is what I commonly see in this type of lighting. Different camera formats have totally different noise signatures with more intact Raw files. This is what I encounter as I go from different gear in similar lighting conditions. This should not be new info/news to anyone using M43 platform as a primary system. This is the beauty of owning different tools.
 

Jonathan F/2

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Aug 10, 2011
Messages
5,027
Location
Los Angeles, USA
:popcorm2:...well i'm not. Indeed A7 series have a powerful dynamic range and ISO performance but somehow their build it with many flaws.

First, my suspect, the distance between sensor and lenses were somehow not perfect. The G Master lens is special build lens with sophisticated design. But not perform well.
First Hands-On Look At the Sony FE 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Lens | Fstoppers
The web said it's sharp, my eyes said......sorry compare to 45mm F1.8 this is not.
Then this Carl Zeiss...
REAL Real World Review: Sony Zeiss Sonnar T* FE 55mm f/1.8 ZA Lens |
Sharp? not also as my eyes sees it.
The problem with a lot of these reviewers is that they're piss poor photographers with zero editing capabilities. You're better off getting raw files of a particular lens/camera combo and apply your editing presets.
 

pdk42

One of the "Eh?" team
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
6,641
Location
Leamington Spa, UK
Never have so many words been used to say the sum of sod all

I feel sorry for his family :)

Hope I never get stuck in a elevator in Vancouver

K
You Scots and your wee sense of humour!!!! In any case I thought you said this:

I have got the picture... I will try and keep my lips sealed and civil :)
K
I guess in your defence you were provoked!!!
 

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
I'm starting to see a pattern here, so this is my last reply about this. First, you don't know me at all, or what I believe - I simply mentioned that real pro reviewers shy away from doing blind listening tests because they will fail. There have been tests and we know the outcome. Btw, your test was anything but scientific. Maybe you meant to say subjective. Double blind test would be the only scientific one. Can you imagine a drug company telling the participants whether they were taking the actual drug or placebo in a trial? Lol! In any case please do us a favor in the future, if you make a claim, post an example that verifies it? I hate for you to have to write a whole story to explain it.

I was once like you. That was until a friend of mine dropped off a lot of high end equipment for me to borrow and analyze at my leisure. With no cash outlay or justification in my decisions of what sounds "better". The more accurate way to describe is what changed the sound signature to my preference. I change hardware for dramatic huge improvements but wires is more of a fun fine tuning hobby. Just think my totems are reasonably priced at 8g's.

I was using monster cable and Energy rca/interconnects and I went back and forth. I sat stationary with my ears in the identical position throughout the same test. The sound difference was not subtle between different cables being changed. I called this test BS until I literally sat through the entire audition blindly. Cheap interconnects do not have as much detail with my high resolution setup.

If you've read I already confirmed how cost of wire is not the determining factor. It's the differences in capacitance, inductance and resistance of the wired in between the two components. Just so happens I have preference to my "free" wires (Olflex) and my $1000 pair virtually sound the same but my pair of kimber cable 4tc and 8tc sounded different. The difference is more based on science rather than hoopla fantasy land.

The big difference is that I actually conducted many tests in my own home/room acoustics. I did not reaad and believe. I literally performed as scientific as I could. One thing noted was I found audible differene more with interconnects and speaker wires were not a big substantially different. I haven't even discussed power conditioning/isolated transformer sonic differences (pro studio's put emphasis on isolated transformers for their production work).

HSU is known for subwoofers. His bookshelf speakers are inexpensive units for less critical home theater application and not even in the realm of hifi. I don't doubt he can use cheap stuff......to display his low frequency subs.

Back to camera stuff. Leica images are more 3d and gritty with noisier bokeh and edgy contrast. The rendition is unlike most camera gear out there. I'm not even discussing the $$$$ difference either :)

Canon mk2 zooms are remarkable in a way that every focal length produces prime lens quality. The micro contrast/sharpness rivals many older generation prime lenses. The difference from an older Canon 35L pro level prime lens to a new 35Lmk2 you will notice a substantial difference as you post process. Same goes for virtually all of the Canon line as they change to Mk2 newer generation lenses.

The difference from the old Canon 24-70L f/2.8 to mk2 is almost like comparing the IQ of a 14-140 mk2 vs a zuiko 12-40 f/2.8. I think any M43 person can relate to that example. The zuiko 12-40 and panny 12-35 is pretty darn good in easy light conditions....I will not dispute that.

My photo examples are gently treated Raw files and nothing more. Not elaborate glorified colour treatment or manipulation for a portfolio "money shot". Simple real life example really. This is where one must understand the difference in showcase portfolio "moneyshots" to regular images for documentation purposes. The compressed jpg images on this webpage do not give these images a chance to display micro contrast differences between two lenses. No way I was trying to present portfolio examples of those two images LOL!!!!

At the end of the day putting files in print changes the whole debate on pixel peepers. Most cannot tell the difference between an iphone image printed 4x6 compared to a m43, ff etc.

Yesterday was Victoria day in Canada. Took the family out and I tested my gh3 yesterday with my 12-35mm in a restaurant and I hit a wall at iso 3200. I cleaned up the noise with minor plastic skin. This is what I commonly see in this type of lighting. Different camera formats have totally different noise signatures with more intact Raw files. This is what I encounter as I go from different gear in similar lighting conditions. This should not be new info/news to anyone using M43 platform as a primary system. This is the beauty of owning different tools.
 

oldracer

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
2,538
Location
USA
... this is my last reply about this. ...
Wise, @50orsohours, wise.

I have attempted to have a rational discussion with guys like this in the past and it is exactly what they do not want. The mathematics of low-frequency signal transmission? Pfft! Objective test results? Pfft! Double blind tests? Pfft. "Let me give you some anecdotes to show that my ears are superior to all of your science."

I had to laugh when I came to this: "Leica images are more 3d and gritty with noisier bokeh and edgy contrast." "more 3d," "gritty," and "noisier bokeh" rank right up there with speakers that are "romantic and intimate." Completely unassailable if your only weapons are science and logic.
 

AlanU

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
488
Wise, @50orsohours, wise.

I have attempted to have a rational discussion with guys like this in the past and it is exactly what they do not want. The mathematics of low-frequency signal transmission? Pfft! Objective test results? Pfft! Double blind tests? Pfft. "Let me give you some anecdotes to show that my ears are superior to all of your science."

I had to laugh when I came to this: "Leica images are more 3d and gritty with noisier bokeh and edgy contrast." "more 3d," "gritty," and "noisier bokeh" rank right up there with speakers that are "romantic and intimate." Completely unassailable if your only weapons are science and logic.
Why don't you look at some Leica images and describe the photos in your scientific methodology. Photography is art so I do not know how you would describe the characteristics of Leica images??? I think a Leica shooter can relate to some of my description of how Leica renders. Leica has a very unique contrast look. Renders unlike any format out there.

No personal attack needed here. Just curious what your approach is on visual art. I describe things as I see it....
 

AlanU

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
488
Agreed. And to bring back OT to my post that may have started some of this, the claims that FF has a siren's call to its 'better colour and dynamics' that can be easily seen in casual images, posted here at about 1 MP and 8-bit colour, is a classic case of confirmation bias.
Are you discussing post processing treatment of RAW files as far as colour is concerned?

Dynamics? are you talking about dynamic range?
 

Wisertime

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 6, 2013
Messages
2,823
Location
Philly
Real Name
Steve
FF vs m43 always devolve into this sorta stuff. I'm surprised it hasn't been moved to the back room forum yet
Some of this would be funny if it wasn't serious.

It comes back to the analogy of buying a Ferrari vs a Honda accord. The Honda is reliable, economical and does 95% of what the Ferrari does. Both get you from point A to B. We'd all love to drive the Ferrari, but then again you wouldn't take the Ferrari on just any road (I'm thinking PA potholes and narrow alleyways) or out in the rain/snow. The Honda handles it all.
 

Jonathan F/2

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Aug 10, 2011
Messages
5,027
Location
Los Angeles, USA
To be honest after jumping through the different sites of Amin's forum-sphere, Mu-43 probably has the least tolerance for other system talk. I don't think this thread suffers from confirmation bias, it's just the usual old grouches that come on here to troll and not contribute anything objective.
 
Last edited:

Turbofrog

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Mar 21, 2014
Messages
5,362
To be honest after jumping through the different sites of Amin's forum-sphere, Mu-43 probably has the least tolerance for other system talk. I don't think this thread suffers from confirmation bias, it's just the usual old grouches that come on here to troll and not contribute anything objective.
I would say that both sides of the argument are equally guilty of your last point.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom