Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/06/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Yep, I'd have to agree with you. It's akin to listening to an outmoded philosophy argument that doesn't know it's time had come and past. Slobodan Dimitrov Studio G-8, AGCC http://sdimitrovphoto.com On Jun 25, 2005, at 5:01 AM, B. D. Colen wrote: > Well one thing I find both amusing and revelatory about it is what > it says > about Putz's lack of understanding of pretty much anything having > to do with > photography in the real world. While I do not for a minute contend > that the > Olympus E-1 comes anywhere near the Canon D20 or EOS1DMK2 in terms > of low > noise level- would that it did!- to contend that the camera is " > not usable > at ISO 400 and higher and even excellent programs like Noise Ninja > cannot > cope with the massive noise the E-1 generates" shows a complete > lack of > understanding of what one gets when shooting film at high isos, to say > nothing of digital. > > I have been using the E-1 almost exclusively for about two years now - > shooting everything from street stuff to weddings, to a book > jacket, to > operating rooms - and I rarely use it below400 iso, and probably > use it at > 800 the majority of the time. At 800 I sometimes use Noise Ninja, but > certainly not more than half the time - if that, although I always > run it if > I shoot at 1600 - and I have yet to have a client of any kind say > "what's > this noise?" or "why is this so 'dirty?' Or "what's with the grain." > > (Keep in mind that virtually everything I've posted at the gallery > over the > past year or more has been shot digitally, most with the E-1, some > with even > smaller sensor cameras that Erwin would rightly describe as really > noisy, > and yet only very rarely has anyone said anything about noise - and > it's not > as though there aren't people on this list who wouldn't love to > criticize. > ;-) ) > > What Erwin has revealed here is his view that for photography to be > acceptable, images must be shot on the finest grain film available, in > bright light. And while there is nothing wrong with shooting under > those > conditions, they hardly define photography. > > Now, will Olympus be able to reduce the noise generated by the > small 4/3 > sensor and will they be able to do so while going from a five to an > 8-10-or > 12 meg sensor? I wish I new. > > B. D.* > > *Reminder - I am sponsored by Olympus and get free equipment from > them. > > > > > On 6/25/05 7:08 AM, "Scott McLoughlin" <scott@adrenaline.com> wrote: > > >> I could hardly follow this article. Bigger lenses? That's not what >> Oly >> is claiming about their 4/3 sensor - right? >> >> Is he talking about sensor/negative format, or something >> particular to >> digital sensors? If so, the evidence provided in the article is >> somewhat >> shy compared to many of his other articles. >> >> Many folks prefer the performance of certain 135 format lenses on >> APS-C sensors. The Nikkor 35/2 AFD comes to mind for example. >> >> Is Puts talking about some theoretical truth to which material >> reality to which material reality has not yet caught up? >> >> I just couldn't quite follow this particular article, which >> rambled on >> and on, and contradicted alot of "received wisdom" I've read to date. >> >> What am I missing? >> >> Scott >> >> animal wrote: >> >> >>> http://www.imx.nl/photosite/comments/c014.html >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >