@VianEsterhuizen Aside from being a born again twit, Ken is also a large format film shooter. His concept of resolution, detail, and printable is about as skewed as it can get. When you shoot 4x5 film, then drum scan it at 300ppi, the results are insane compared to a relatively rinky-dinky 1" sensor or less.
When ken compares "film", he is never talking about 35mm film. It is always large format, or maybe one of the larger medium format film types.
That is about as unfair a direct comparison as one can get.
He is also wrong about M and S raw formats vs. native RAW.
They may at times look crisper, but they contain a lot less detail than the native RAW.
I shot mRAW for a while when I first got my 7D.
For one, it is not actually a RAW format. It is more like a JPEG than anything, and our post-processing latitude is similarly limited, although not as severely.
Detail in the mRAW, while sometimes it did look crisper, I wouldn't call it as detailed nor necessarily as sharp as the original RAW.
well, I probably wont be buying a new body till the end of the year regardless
I'm either going to buy an insanely expensive lens this year, or rebuild my deck with composite material, custom deck lighting, and a nice trellis covering the house-side half of it...which will cost nearly as much as the lens.
Either way, I wouldn't have money to buy any new camera until the end of the year, or the beginning of next year.
The 7D performs better with a better lens...but playing with the 5D III...even though birds are smaller in the frame...it just performs better.
Those larger pixels really do mean much lower noise.
From the RAWTheraPee 3.0 Documentation:
PP3 files
If you have saved the above output file next to your raw, you might notice that there's a third file
called DSC_1000.jpg.pp3. This is a little text file that describes exactly what edits you made to your
photo. Just open it in an editor ...
I'm no where near as good as the pros who sell their work
and I just don't have any visibility
all of the bird and wildlife photographers who are actually making money in the business are actually really making money off of instructional photo tours
IPTs, which cost anywhere from $3000 to $10,000 per person, with a minimum of 5 to 7 people, and an average load of 15 to 25 people, is where the money is in bird and wildlife photography...basically, planning regular kick-ass trips all around the world to the best hotspots
dpollitt, speaking of "smart" dogs, my dog is really smart: when I go to take my coat and shoes on to go out she goes crazy, wags tail around me, eager to come with me, but as soon as she sees I reach for my bike helmet, she stops and goes back to the sofa :)
It's all about the micro contrast. Look at the posts about aps-c versus full frame and then extend that difference to medium and large format sensors.
When do the differences between APS-C and full frame sensors matter, and why?
Following the theories on oversampling, it is better to sample at ...
with the viewcamera mockup they can tilt te focal plane
and using medium format or higher they can capture yummy details that a small sensor cant.
and you might not consider FF small, but all is relative. there's always something worse and something better, smaller, larger, more or less details needed etc...
From the RAWTheraPee 3.0 Documentation:
PP3 files
If you have saved the above output file next to your raw, you might notice that there's a third file
called DSC_1000.jpg.pp3. This is a little text file that describes exactly what edits you made to your
photo. Just open it in an editor ...
It's all about the micro contrast. Look at the posts about aps-c versus full frame and then extend that difference to medium and large format sensors.
When do the differences between APS-C and full frame sensors matter, and why?
Following the theories on oversampling, it is better to sample at ...
