- Mar 17, 2011
- Southwest Virginia
- Real Name
Right, I got that. So like I thought, spreading FUD to make a better argumentAs tkbslc said, there's no penalty to using CDAF lenses on a PDAF sensor camera.
No lens in the M4/3 system has motors designed for PDAF-only systems. They are all CDAF compatible. The lenses he was referring to are for Olympus' dead SLR system that are no longer being sold or serviced.
The problem only arises when you use old-tech lenses that are designed solely to be used on PDAF bodies, and you try to use them on CDAF bodies. PDAF lens on PDAF body is fine, CDAF lens on CDAF body or PDAF body is fine.
The sentiment is ridiculous, but spend a few minutes on the DPReview forum or 43rumors comment section and you'll see that the people he or she is describing absolutely exist. This forum is shockingly sane relative to what you get in some of the other m43 communities.
exactly why I ditched those two and moved to here.The sentiment is ridiculous, but spend a few minutes on the DPReview forum or 43rumors comment section and you'll see that the people he or she is describing absolutely exist. This forum is shockingly sane relative to what you get in some of the other m43 communities.
It depends. I just posted a couple of hours ago in the rumours thread about the 'new' high pixel count mft sensor.What about the IQ though...is the Canon that much better?
I have EM1X and 40-150 and 300 and due to go on safari next June (was meant to be this year but...) and am trying to convience myself not to take my 5d3 and 100-400 Mark 2.
Good reply sir. I shot some squirrels and swapped between Olympus and Canon.... the Canon looked better...or at least some thought it better. Others not. Still got more testing to do.It depends. I just posted a couple of hours ago in the rumours thread about the 'new' high pixel count mft sensor.
The current 20MP one already challenges MFT lenses, and presents cropping issues with 4K. It is the equivalent of having a 75MP FF sensor as far the glass resolution goes. That is how demanding it is on glass. The Canon 5DMK4 that I showed earlier is a 30MP device. Is it higher IQ? I dunno - maybe. Is IQ=MP? So what's going on?
Again - It depends. If you are going to make prints(even big ones) or put it up on the web, the IQ difference won't matter unless you crop often. If you are looking for posterity and 8K or IMAX, then it maybe matters because it gives you the opportunity to crop a lot? Using it for video? 16MP may be fine for several years to come.
If you frame your images well - maybe it doesn't matter.
If you crop like mad(I know I do), then maybe it does in the modern formats we display them on.
This is why folks say pixel peeping is wasting time. It may have more pixels, but your format/medium won't ever display them all any time soon. What you need to do as a pro is fill that medium for now and the immediate future. Are 8K TV's going to be in every household and sports bar next year? That seems unlikely. Right now there are 50X more 4k TVs in circulation than 8K. How many of us here have 4K tvs(vs monitors)? Some claim 8K by 2025 will have 1/2 the market. I know the prices have come way down, but I also know my satellite service had an upcharge just for 1080 as little as 8 months ago, and Eurosport STILL often broadcasts matches in 720!
Ever tried to send a full sized typical 24MP image file in facebook or gmail? Much of the time, you can't. Think it's a coincidence most cameras are 24MP+ now, but most media services force you to down sample? The bandwidth/cost affectiveness isn't there...yet.
There's also the question of whether the IQ makes a difference if you don't ever get the shot in the first place.