Hellkeeper wrote:Will the better Quality of FX outrule the benefits of the 1,5x Crop?
Hellkeeper wrote:Have to stay with Nikon as we got lot's of Nikkor Lenses - don't want to buy all new Lenses ... ;-)
Would be most interested if we should stay with DX (D7100 / wait for D400) or go for FX? (D600/D800)
Andreas
Artisan New wrote:. . . . . as some research on the Web shows.
Destiny wrote:Actually Leifs. I find that question and comment rather rude to be honest..
Destiny...
leifs wrote:In this part of the forum, "Hardware", I expected it to be about pano-hardware. Not about camera hardware like Nikon vs Canon etc
leifs
leifs wrote:In this part of the forum, "Hardware", I expected it to be about pano-hardware. Not about camera hardware like Nikon vs Canon etc
mediavets wrote:leifs wrote:In this part of the forum, "Hardware", I expected it to be about pano-hardware. Not about camera hardware like Nikon vs Canon etc
leifs
The sub-title of this Hardware section of the forum reads:
"In the panorama field, hardware is also part of the success. You can discuss here about it : camera, computer, pano head, anything"
klausesser wrote:The pros and cons of cameras, lenses, heads, software and so on very well DO belong to the theme "panorama-shooting".
Klaus
Artisan New wrote:The point is, what are you shooting
leifs wrote:klausesser wrote:The pros and cons of cameras, lenses, heads, software and so on very well DO belong to the theme "panorama-shooting".
Klaus
pros and cons of cameras can be discussed elsewhere. millions of forums.
lenses for panos, heads, software are relevant to this forum,
actually it would be a lot more interesting to learn pros and cons of Photomatix, Oloneo, Lightroom, DXO etc than dozens of posts about 5Dmk3 and D800.
and ofcourse it must be interesting for members of this forum to learn about robotic heads for shooting panos. pros and cons.
leifs
leifs wrote:klausesser wrote:The pros and cons of cameras, lenses, heads, software and so on very well DO belong to the theme "panorama-shooting".
Klaus
pros and cons of cameras can be discussed elsewhere. millions of forums.
lenses for panos, heads, software are relevant to this forum,
actually it would be a lot more interesting to learn pros and cons of Photomatix, Oloneo, Lightroom, DXO etc than dozens of posts about 5Dmk3 and D800.
and ofcourse it must be interesting for members of this forum to learn about robotic heads for shooting panos. pros and cons.
leifs
leifs wrote:pros and cons of cameras can be discussed elsewhere. millions of forums.
leifs
Artisan New wrote:Ah, yes, if it is discussed in civilised manour. But personally I don't like being called exotic just because I use a competent micro 4/3. A format that is used by photographers like Terry Richardson (Bill Richardson's son) to shoot Vogue covers. The pros and cons of every type of camera are more then obvious and need not to be discussed. Now there are some advocates of FF that are a bit like advocates of Leica (an exotic German camera maker well knows for even more exotic prices for hardware that is IMHO as obsolete as the Fukushima nuclear plant). They rave about the virtues of their sensors and never talk about the negative aspects. I owned a Nikon F5 (about as big as a D4) and I must say when I went digital I knew exactly what I didn't need. And when micro 4/3 came along despite it's shortcomings it was the only way my photography would work for me. Now as you can see I also own a truly professional analog camera (bought for penny's) and I must say the Olympus OM-D make me (and I can only talk about my experience of course) forget that. Both Michael Johnston and Ctein (from the Online Photographer are rather critical people and both use OM-D's as well), Ctein being on of the best printers in the USA (printing for people like Jim Marshal). But hey, feel free to carry on using FF, I could not care less. I rather live with the limitation of a camera I can afford and that fits my photography then dream about the IQ of a camera that I don't can nor more important wanna afford (to much risk in the field, since I don't work with a crew but on my own). I don't know but I guess weight is a factor as well.....an OM-D with a 75 1.8 mm ( a brilliant lens Leifs I'm jaelous), weighs in at around 700 grams. A Nikon D800 with an equally brilliant 135 weighs double that and it's a 2.8 versus a 1.8. A 135 1.8 for a FF....well lets not get carried away. I guess I made my point and as Susan Linssen from Seedling always sang:
I guess I made my points and I'm sorry if you missed them all. ((c) Seedling, 2001).
Greets, Ed.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests