Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 45 of 45

Thread: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

  1. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,566
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 129 Times in 89 Posts
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by padrepaul77 View Post
    Lovely, Don - what camera did you shoot this with? Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

    All the best,
    Paul
    Thanks Paul. A 1D3 and 400mm f5.6. I bought the body about 3 years ago. It was mint and cost the same as a new E-5 at that time.
    Cheers,
    Don

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,566
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 129 Times in 89 Posts
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by saichiez View Post
    Might interest you to be aware that you can visit Nikon and Canon forums and find many people contemplating "Jumping ship" and some of those are contemplating Olympus EM5 and the EM1.

    There is no platform, none that I know of anyway, that can give you the reach of the 4/3-m4/3 system. In fact if your using the system the way it should be used... with native lenses and dump your 4/3 lenses (I didn't note if you are using only m4/3 lenses), you will get the best return on investment with the lenses designed for the micro system.

    You may go cross platform and find used lenses, but the money you spend for lenses like the Canon L lenses will still be a more signiicant price.

    I visit a few other forums. Those on other platforms are also grousing about the same problems you mention.

    I wonder if your expectations are just a bit to high regarding the images you expect to collect on birding and wildlife.

    Now that I've insulted you... let me take another tack.

    If I were going to jump from Olympus to another platform, it would be to NIKON and NOT!!! Canon.

    Nikon has finally taken the leap to removing the AA filters, which Olympus pioneered a few years ago.

    Canon is STILL SMUDGING sharpness with old low pass AA filter technology. That's an absolute deal breaker for me at this point, after discovering the increase in image sharpness found in the E-PL1.. the first weakened AA filter from Olympus. They moved on from their in dealing with the shortcoming in images of strong AA filtering.

    That puts the eligible NIKON bodies at the D800E, The D7100, and the D5300 that just came out. The D5300 must have AF-S lenses (no inbody focus motor)....

    That means, there are no eligible second or third generation used camera's without AA filtering. That's BIG in my estimation, and that's documented on the internet. However, nobody wants to admit how significant that one change is, as it truly negatively impacts used and refurb attractiveness in the market. So you're not hearing much about the new change, and Canon is entirely blowing off this one new feature. Not even a hint of when Canon with get their S_it together on the AA filter.

    As confirmation, Canon's new cheap FF offering, the 6D, has big problems with "moire" in video, in spite of the fact that they are ignoring the low pass AA filter. For those wanting video... the Canon FF that is recommended is the 5DIII...much better video than the newer 6D.

    So, for me, we're in a waiting game again, while other platforms get their act together, whereas, if the "reach" is a big factor when relative to price/budget, there's just nowhere to go outside Olympus.

    Switching platforms is also a big deterrent to "mastering" a system.

    Tha's my post and I'm stickin' to it!!
    LOL. Please explain why my old 1D3 Canon, which I assume has a filter, 10mp, ALWAYS produces noticeably cleaner images, capable of much larger and cleaner cropped results than my E-M1?
    I don't normally point that out, because my E-M1 has lots of other desirable attributes, but I would not like to see others influenced by your ideas to their disadvantage! Nothing wrong with Nikon either
    Cheers,
    Don

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,135
    Thanks
    58
    Thanked 22 Times in 17 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0
    Real Name
    Tom

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by saichiez View Post
    If I were going to jump from Olympus to another platform, it would be to NIKON and NOT!!! Canon.

    Nikon has finally taken the leap to removing the AA filters, which Olympus pioneered a few years ago.

    Canon is STILL SMUDGING sharpness with old low pass AA filter technology. That's an absolute deal breaker for me at this point, after discovering the increase in image sharpness found in the E-PL1.. the first weakened AA filter from Olympus. They moved on from their in dealing with the shortcoming in images of strong AA filtering.
    Whether the camera has an AA filter or not, and whether it is weak or strong would be the last point on my list of things to consider when switching systems. Father Paul passion in photography is birds. So the most important features for that photo is low noise at high ISO and pro-grade level auto-focus. Which rules out D800E, D7100 and D5300 in my view. A Nikon D4 would be my choice in this case.

    I have used and tested various Canon cameras (350D, 30D, 50D, 60D, 7D, 5DMkII, 5DMkIII and 6D) and I have never felt the AA filter mattered at all. Then again I don't rate camera performance when looking at the photos at 100% on the screen. I print at A3 size (11x16.5") or larger and if that result is good enough, then I am happy.

    If I had been heavily into landscape photography,and printed at sizes of 3ft in with or larger; then I would consider a high-Mpx no AA-filter sensor.
    flickr | "God made the integers; all else is the work of man" - Leopold Kronecker

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NH, USA
    Posts
    2,592
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 30 Times in 26 Posts
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Baldwinson View Post
    Thanks Paul. A 1D3 and 400mm f5.6. I bought the body about 3 years ago. It was mint and cost the same as a new E-5 at that time.
    Cheers,
    Don
    Since we are talking a lot about BIF, I just want to mention here that this Canon 400mm 5.6 lens that Don used is considered one of the best BIF lenses you can get (when used with a Canon body, I should think). padrepaul77 is considering the lenses that give more reach like the 500 and 600, but the 400 is specifically mentioned on a lot of forums as being dynamite for BIF. And, of course, it is by far the best bang-for-buck lens in the Canon "L" lens line, costing only about $1200 (I got mine used for $1050). So, padrepaul77, if you do consider jumping, you might consider the 400 as an additional lens even if you do get a 500 or 600. With the bucks you are talking about, another $1000 here or there...
    Rich
    Olympus E-M10; Panasonic GM5
    m4/3 lenses: Oly 75-300; Oly 14-42 f3.5-5.6 II R; Oly 17 f1.8; Oly 40-150 f4.0-5.6 R; Oly WCON-P01 adapter; Rokinon f7.5 fisheye; Sigma 19 f2.8; Pan 20 f1.7; Pan 12-35 f2.8; Pan 12-32

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,145
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 117 Times in 102 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    The 400/5.6 is light, has fast, quiet AF, is sharp wide open, and can take a 1.4 TC and still auto-focus on the better bodies. Only down side is lack of IS, but that is not so important with BIF anyway, in fact, it can get in the way. On a side note, the Mk III generation TCs are a huge improvement on the TC front, using a spherical lenses and all but eliminating CA. You don't get them thrown in for free, but they blow the earlier TCs out of the water, not that the Mk IIs are bad. So that adds up to 560mm of hand holdable glass, weighing in at about 1/3 of a 500/4 Mk I and at about 1/4 the price.
    I have been considering a 500/4, but since I have the 400/5.6 and a not bad Kenko 1.4 DGX TC to go on my 5DII, and since I find the E-M1 very nice to use on my 600mm scope, I want to give it a fair try and use the Canon rig for stuff that is either too close or too fast for the scope. I have done further testing with the scope, and there the E-M1 is the hands down winner over the Canon, both in IQ and above all, in ease of use.

    Results on a separate thread.

    The new Tamron 150-600/5-6.3 zoom might be worth a closer look! Impressive and not expensive.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NH, USA
    Posts
    2,592
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 30 Times in 26 Posts
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel Bradley View Post
    I have the 400/5.6 and a not bad Kenko 1.4 DGX TC
    ...
    The new Tamron 150-600/5-6.3 zoom might be worth a closer look! Impressive and not expensive.
    I have the same Kenko TC for use with the 400. Works very well even on my 60D, including autofocus.

    I was going to mention that new Tamron lens myself, although considering that padrepaul77 seems to be into high-end lenses, I didn't. It will be interesting to see how well it compares to a lens like the 400 5.6. I think that perhaps compared to say a Bigma it is quite good (wouldn't be too difficult!), but against the higher-end lenses, it may not be as sharp. But it will be interesting when more reviews become available. Maybe I'll get one myself!!
    Rich
    Olympus E-M10; Panasonic GM5
    m4/3 lenses: Oly 75-300; Oly 14-42 f3.5-5.6 II R; Oly 17 f1.8; Oly 40-150 f4.0-5.6 R; Oly WCON-P01 adapter; Rokinon f7.5 fisheye; Sigma 19 f2.8; Pan 20 f1.7; Pan 12-35 f2.8; Pan 12-32

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    923
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by RAH View Post
    Since we are talking a lot about BIF, I just want to mention here that this Canon 400mm 5.6 lens that Don used is considered one of the best BIF lenses you can get (when used with a Canon body, I should think). padrepaul77 is considering the lenses that give more reach like the 500 and 600, but the 400 is specifically mentioned on a lot of forums as being dynamite for BIF. And, of course, it is by far the best bang-for-buck lens in the Canon "L" lens line, costing only about $1200 (I got mine used for $1050). So, padrepaul77, if you do consider jumping, you might consider the 400 as an additional lens even if you do get a 500 or 600. With the bucks you are talking about, another $1000 here or there...
    Yes, those are good points. I know sometimes I get obsessed with reach and length, but I'm going for the 800 mainly because of the value I can get. I found a used one that is at a great price that is currently on hold for me. And while I love birds in flight, I'm also shooting a lot of perched birds as well. For the other long lens, I'll be getting the 100-400 as well which is a nice lens. I use the 70-300 a lot for sports and also for closer birds like bitterns.
    Father Paul

    Olympus EM1
    70-300, 9-18, 12-60, 50-200, Olympus Zuiko 300 f2.8, EC 14 & EC 20, shutter remote, FL 50

    www.fatherpaul.smugmug.com

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NH, USA
    Posts
    2,592
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 30 Times in 26 Posts
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Yes, the 100-400 is a nice lens too. I debated long and hard about which to get, finally deciding on the 400. But there are running religious wars that go on about this topic on Canon forums. (Actually, the people on the POTN forum are very nice, much like most people here).
    Rich
    Olympus E-M10; Panasonic GM5
    m4/3 lenses: Oly 75-300; Oly 14-42 f3.5-5.6 II R; Oly 17 f1.8; Oly 40-150 f4.0-5.6 R; Oly WCON-P01 adapter; Rokinon f7.5 fisheye; Sigma 19 f2.8; Pan 20 f1.7; Pan 12-35 f2.8; Pan 12-32

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Saskatoon, Sask.
    Posts
    2,883
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    Real Name
    Don

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    In Canadian dollars..

    Nikon D7100 ~ $1100.
    80 - 400mm ~ $2730
    TC 17 E11 ~ $400.
    Class 10 card ~ $100.

    Full frame, shot through dirty window

    "Chickadee Tongue" (iso 1000)



    "Turn around, darn it !" (iso 1600)



    Perhaps more appropriate to this thread, without the TC17E11.

    "Magpie Launch". Cropped to 4/3 ratio. (iso 1250)



    Not a BIF but..... D800, iso 4000. 24-70mm F2.8 @ 60mm.



    Cheers, Don
    From E-510/E-30/E-3/E-5 to Nikon D7100 and now D7200/D800/D500
    Don Kondra - Furniture Designer/Maker
    Product Photography
    Birds and other stuff


  10. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    923
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Kondra View Post
    In Canadian dollars..

    Nikon D7100 ~ $1100.
    80 - 400mm ~ $2730
    TC 17 E11 ~ $400.
    Class 10 card ~ $100.

    Full frame, shot through dirty window

    "Chickadee Tongue" (iso 1000)



    "Turn around, darn it !" (iso 1600)



    Perhaps more appropriate to this thread, without the TC17E11.

    "Magpie Launch". Cropped to 4/3 ratio. (iso 1250)



    Not a BIF but..... D800, iso 4000. 24-70mm F2.8 @ 60mm.



    Cheers, Don
    Hey, nice picture. Two questions: work at a Catholic institution as that's a crucifix on the wall, and what's in the photographer's hand? Looks like a lovely micro brew
    Father Paul

    Olympus EM1
    70-300, 9-18, 12-60, 50-200, Olympus Zuiko 300 f2.8, EC 14 & EC 20, shutter remote, FL 50

    www.fatherpaul.smugmug.com

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,135
    Thanks
    58
    Thanked 22 Times in 17 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0
    Real Name
    Tom

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by padrepaul77 View Post
    Hey, nice picture. Two questions: work at a Catholic institution as that's a crucifix on the wall, and what's in the photographer's hand? Looks like a lovely micro brew
    It looks like a Grolsch to me - A popular Dutch pilsener, better than Heineken and Amstel
    flickr | "God made the integers; all else is the work of man" - Leopold Kronecker

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,566
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 129 Times in 89 Posts
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by RAH View Post
    Yes, the 100-400 is a nice lens too. I debated long and hard about which to get, finally deciding on the 400. But there are running religious wars that go on about this topic on Canon forums. (Actually, the people on the POTN forum are very nice, much like most people here).
    One other point about the 400F5.6. The form factor. It is longish but smallish in diameter. I shoot BIF handheld, as do most I would say, and I find the form factor excellent for this. Not only because the lens is relatively light, but with my left hand under the lens near the front, it is very easy to 'steer' and point at fast moving objects. Like a rifle. My 4/3 150mm F2 which weighs more is the exact opposite of the telescope rifle-like shape, and less easy. I have never regretted choosing the 400f5.6 over the much heavier and bulkier F2 or F4 lenses.
    I have the Canon Mk2 1.4 extender, and like Daniel says, it does not get close to the Oly 1.4x. Another thing, it cannot be fitted to the shorter lenses like the Oly extenders can. But then, I would rarely use it anyway.
    Paul, one thing to keep in mind, images from the 1D series bodies are very kind to cropping, another reason I don't bother much with the 1.4x. I imagine the 5D would be similar.
    Cheers,
    Don
    Last edited by Don Baldwinson; 02-09-2014 at 05:40 PM.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,278
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
    Feedback Score
    17 (100%)

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    I had the Bigma. One day I noticed a rattle and it quit auto focusing and a gear fell out of the rear. I wasn't overall impressed with it either as far as sharpness.



    Quote Originally Posted by zippski View Post
    A far, far cheaper method for your decidedly non-pro purposes is to stick with the E-5, search around for a used 4/3 Sigmonster, and don't crop. 12 beautiful MP and it works. A lot of folks don't realize that to crop a 36MP D800 to the same FOV as a 4/3 camera mounted with a lens of similar focal length leaves only 9MP, not 18MP (think of a FF "picture in picture" screen divided into quarters - one quarter represents 4/3). Same principle with Canon APS-C -the math is not 1.6 divided by 2 in terms of dividing pixels/mm of reach.

    Yes, 4/3 Sigmonsters are still around. I *almost* pulled the trigger on a used Sigmonster I found in Calgary just before Christmas, but the combination of me being newly p*ssed a Olympus for abandoning us, and mostly, the fact that I was way over budget on my house renovations, put the brakes on that purchase. I'm still looking.

    In reality, outside your 300mm, your gear ain't worth much in trade, even the used EM-1.

    Sigmonster is the cheaper way to go, and 1600mm is about the practical limit before atmospheric haze begins to degrade images anyway.

    Leigh
    zippski


  14. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Saskatoon, Sask.
    Posts
    2,883
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts
    Feedback Score
    23 (100%)
    Real Name
    Don

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by padrepaul77 View Post
    Hey, nice picture. Two questions: work at a Catholic institution as that's a crucifix on the wall, and what's in the photographer's hand? Looks like a lovely micro brew
    Yes, I'm Roman Catholic and that is my mothers crucifix and rosary above the door. The crucifix is a two part, the front comes off the cross and there is a set of candles inside...

    Quote Originally Posted by tomsi42 View Post
    It looks like a Grolsch to me - A popular Dutch pilsener, better than Heineken and Amstel
    Good catch and it sounds like you are intimate with the brand

    It was my first taste and I have to agree with your accessment...

    Cheers, Don
    From E-510/E-30/E-3/E-5 to Nikon D7100 and now D7200/D800/D500
    Don Kondra - Furniture Designer/Maker
    Product Photography
    Birds and other stuff


  15. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,135
    Thanks
    58
    Thanked 22 Times in 17 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0
    Real Name
    Tom

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Kondra View Post
    Good catch and it sounds like you are intimate with the brand
    Yeah, I have had a few in my lifetime I think I tasted my forst Grolsch in the 90's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Kondra View Post
    It was my first taste and I have to agree with your accessment...
    It's a nice Pilsener; nice refresher after a few of those tasteful hoppy microbrewery ales.
    flickr | "God made the integers; all else is the work of man" - Leopold Kronecker

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    923
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Kondra View Post
    Yes, I'm Roman Catholic and that is my mothers crucifix and rosary above the door. The crucifix is a two part, the front comes off the cross and there is a set of candles inside...



    Good catch and it sounds like you are intimate with the brand

    It was my first taste and I have to agree with your accessment...

    Cheers, Don
    Thanks - I'm familiar with those crucifix sets as well with the candles inside, my grandmother and mom and dad both have one too. Again thanks for sharing the info and the pics - love the magpie!
    Father Paul

    Olympus EM1
    70-300, 9-18, 12-60, 50-200, Olympus Zuiko 300 f2.8, EC 14 & EC 20, shutter remote, FL 50

    www.fatherpaul.smugmug.com

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Latvia
    Posts
    1,186
    Thanks
    198
    Thanked 194 Times in 146 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by saichiez View Post
    There is no platform, none that I know of anyway, that can give you the reach of the 4/3-m4/3 system.
    Actually, the difference between Canon APS-C and 4/3 is rather small. Canon is a 1.62x crop and 4/3 is a 2x crop. That means in order to equal a 300mm lens on 4/3 you only need a 370mm lens on a Canon 7D.
    Olympus E-M1 Mk II
    7.5mm f/2.0 - 12mm f/2.0 - 17mm f/1.2 - 17mm f/1.8 - 25mm f/1.8 - 45mm f/1.8 - 56mm f/1.4 - 9-18mm - 14-150mm II

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Hokkaido, Japan
    Posts
    2,989
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Feedback Score
    0

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by RAH View Post

    I can tell you that after having used this Canon combo for a while, I almost felt like writing Olympus a letter thanking them for NOT producing the E-50 and "forcing" me into the Canon camp. It's just so much better for wildlife photography.
    I'm chuckling at this, because I often have similar thoughts. When I had focus accuracy problems with the E-3, I thought it was the worst thing that could have happened to me photographically. After two years, I finally gave up trying to get the issues solved and traded the E-3 for a D700. It was hands down the best photo gear purchase I have ever made. I don't do much wildlife photography, but I do require accuracy and excellent tracking ability for shooting whippets, and in this respect the D700 is worlds above anything Oly I ever used.

    I used to be a perpetual upgrader when I was shooting Oly. I bought four models in the space of two years, always hoping for the next camera to be "Mr. Right," but all I ever got was incremental improvements in AF and image quality. In contrast, I bought the D700 four years ago, when it had already been out for a year, and still I am in no hurry to upgrade. It is that good. It is by no means a perfect camera, but it just gets out of my way and lets me take pictures. After all these years, I still sometimes find my jaw dropping at the things it can do, even at 8 fps. I'm sure the D800 is even better (though it has a lower frame rate), but I'm content to stick with the D700 for at least a year or two longer.

    Meanwhile, I see people who had similar requirements to me as far as AF and who followed a similar upgrade path with Oly, and many of them have gone on to buy each new iteration -- the E-30, E-5, and E-M1 -- but still they don't seem quite satisfied. So yes, sometimes I want to thank Oly for "blessing" me with two faulty E-3s!

    All this is not to say that Olympus is an inferior brand. It's just that photography is so much more fun when you are using the right tools for the job, especially when you are doing a very specialized type of shooting.

    As much as I love using Nikon, I'm not particularly interested in "selling" it. For a bunch of reasons I'd lean more toward Canon if I were heavily into birding, but I'll leave those recommendations to the wildlife experts.

    Julie
    Last edited by windsprite; 02-10-2014 at 06:33 AM. Reason: punctuation


  19. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NH, USA
    Posts
    2,592
    Thanks
    57
    Thanked 30 Times in 26 Posts
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    Quote Originally Posted by windsprite View Post
    All this is not to say that Olympus is an inferior brand. It's just that photography is so much more fun when you are using the right tools for the job, especially when you are doing a very specialized type of shooting.
    Yes, I agree. I feel a little bad about this thread because it seems somewhat like Olympus bashing. But as I have stated, I am ready to jump back in, buying an E-M10 very soon. So it depends on how you want to use the equipment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmunds View Post
    Actually, the difference between Canon APS-C and 4/3 is rather small. Canon is a 1.62x crop and 4/3 is a 2x crop. That means in order to equal a 300mm lens on 4/3 you only need a 370mm lens on a Canon 7D.
    I agree. When I bought my 60D, I wondered whether its 18mp file size (5184 x 3456) would be enough to compensate for the 1.6 factor vs 2.0 factor with my old 10mp E-520, using the same focal length.

    So I took some shots using the 2 cameras, both at 50mm, from the same position (tripod). The full-size results are here:

    E-520: http://www.rahsoft.net/10mp_vs_18mp/A8044219.JPG

    60D: http://www.rahsoft.net/10mp_vs_18mp/IMG_0020.JPG

    You can experiment and see that if you crop the 60D image down to 3648 x 2736, the 60D more than compensates for the 2x crop factor on a 10MP camera. If you crop it to 4032 x 3024, you will see that it is very similar to the results you would get from a 12MP camera like the E-5 (which would look the same as from the E-520, but would be 4032 x 3024 instead of 3648 x 2736).

    I am sure that some will say that the details are not the same after cropping a higher-res image down to the size of a lower-res sensor. I am not arguing this one way ot the other. All this shows is that an 18MP 1.6 factor camera is essentially equivalent to a 12MP 2.0 factor camera in the apparent "magnification" you get for a given focal length.

    Edit: Of course, if you used a newer Olympus 16MP camera like the E-M1, the 2x factor would once again trump the 1.6 somewhat for the same focal length, even with a newer 20MP Canon, I should think. Regardless, there isn't all that much difference between 1.6 and 2.0 factors.
    Rich
    Olympus E-M10; Panasonic GM5
    m4/3 lenses: Oly 75-300; Oly 14-42 f3.5-5.6 II R; Oly 17 f1.8; Oly 40-150 f4.0-5.6 R; Oly WCON-P01 adapter; Rokinon f7.5 fisheye; Sigma 19 f2.8; Pan 20 f1.7; Pan 12-35 f2.8; Pan 12-32

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    839
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)

    Default Re: For those that jumped ship and changed systems...(contemplating)

    But it doesn't trump the 24MP sensor on the newer Nikon APS-C bodies. The pixel density on the D7100 (and the other new bodies) is about the same as the 16MP u4/3 sensors. Rumor has it that Nikon will release a new D7x00 body with the new expeed 4 processor which should improve high ISO performance even more.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •