Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 567
Results 61 to 68 of 68
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,421
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    So If I put a 6.1 MP image from a Minolta 7D up against a SONY 24.6 MP there is NO difference, right, as we blow those puppies up and create a nifty 4' x 8' poster.
    4x8 poster ? lol yeah mate...ok...thats 48x96 inches if my math is correct. NOBODY does this sort of size mate. lmao and if they did do it we're talking a fully pro shooter whos using medium format or at the very LEAST a d3x/1Ds, not some piddley toy like an a850/900. palease.

    its like someone buying a 4wd cos some salesman says to them that its so good off road you can navigate everest when both the salesman and the buyer know full darn well that there is ZERO chance of it ever happening.

    no wonder you love sony, you;re a marketing mans favourite person. a sucker for hype and corporate marketing speak.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554
    Regardless of the argument, the a850/a900 shoot the same resolution as the d3x or the 1Ds MkIII. The image resolution is going to be the same, progression by progression.

    It is pure foolishness and folly to think otherwise.

    The shoot-outs are in ... the game is the same. Save some money ... shoot with a SONY. Geesh. Is that a "money-tree" you have got growing in your backyard or something?

    I spent several hours, tonight, discussing his very subject with several other students, as they are planning to purchase Full Frame cameras for the advanced classes. We examined, over and over, the attributes of all of the cameras and their associated high end lenses. These are some serious purchases, to be sure, so you really want to get it right, the first time.

    The fact is the least chancy purchase is the SONY system. The next is the Canon system and finally, if you have a money pile somewhere available to you, you can arguably decide on the Nikon system. The outlay in just pure cash is as we have detailed in earlier posts, in this thread. You can have a heck of a range of optics using the SONY system and still not exceed the basic Nikon equivalent system. It is all financially factual, despite your constant pleading that "it is worth it."

    I am hard-pressed to see it, myself, and I am doing this EVERY SINGLE DAY, surrounded by every kind of camera system available, from Medium format Hasselblads, Leafs and Mamiya to 35mm format Canon, Nikon & SONY. Each has its strengths ... and drawbacks. More often than not, it is the particular setting that decides the winner and even then ... it is rough.

    So, again, if saving some dough is important to you ... you have the facts. It is pretty clear where the BANG for the BUCK lies.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 04-09-2010 at 12:07 AM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,421
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    Regardless of the argument, the a850/a900 shoot the same resolution as the d3x or the 1Ds MkIII. The image resolution is going to be the same, progression by progression.

    It is pure foolishness and folly to think otherwise.

    The shoot-outs are in ... the game is the same. Save some money ... shoot with a SONY. Geesh. Is that a "money-tree" you have got growing in your backyard or something?
    so what if its the same resolution ? thats only one part of the puzzle. there are LOADS of examples of cameras that have the exact same resolution that have vastly different results. same can be said of any consumer product. there are 2.8 lens and there are 2.8 lens'. there are 3L v6 engines and there are 3L v6 engines. there are steaks and then there are STEAKS. anything you biy, ANYTHING has varyng degrees of quality and performance...ANYTHING. just cos it weighs the same, the specs are the same, the engine capacity is the same etc doesnt mean squat.

    one day you may learn that specs are only an indicator, not a defintive answer to output quality. i really dont know why this is so difficult for you to understand Don ??
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554
    Okay, perhaps there is a trade-off ... I still want to know how you justify $5000-$7000 for the minuscule advance you might get from it?

    Comparison after comparison boils it down to ties in so many ways ...

    Again, the best way would be to shoot the same situation with all of them and sort through the remains. See which can handle it the best. Again, reminded that situations change with the wind.

    Perhaps one of these upcoming school projects can reveal it, because it is rather dumbfounding. Hype is lost on me ... as you say, let's see some results. I truly fear that I may need to upgrade the zoom lenses to the SONYs do this correctly. That's another $5000 in cold, hard glass!
    Last edited by DonSchap; 04-09-2010 at 12:18 AM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,421
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    I still want to know how you justify $5000-$7000 for the minuscule advance you might get from it?
    do you think people in the market for a d3x are SERIOUSLY looking at sony as an alternative ? come on...be serious Don. its not even an option they're looking at.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    Question D3 or not D3 ... such a question ...

    Well, unless your selling images ... the financial aspect of this one may be a little more than some people can stomach.

    Also ... I not am suggesting any kind of conversion, but more a quick way to solve a problem without selling off property!

    Most people, early in school, have limited financial involvement in their equipment. They had either been borrowing it from the the school or may have a couple of lenses at home, married to a $500 APS-C body. Chances are, those lenses are not the hottest ones around, either.

    SO, here comes the time to .. well, up the ante. Market forces are in play ... and you have to consider the well-positioned SONY system (<- click here for the inside skinny), when you make this decision, just to keep from breaking the bank. Like I might have suggested, if the financial aspect is of no consideration ... then this entire discussion is of little use. SERIOUSLY
    Last edited by DonSchap; 04-09-2010 at 06:37 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,421
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    SO, here comes the time to .. well, up the ante. Market forces are in play ... and you have to consider the well-positioned SONY system, when you make this decision, just to keep from breaking the bank. Like I might have suggested, if the financial aspect is of no consideration ... then this entire discussion is of little use. SERIOUSLY
    now you're making sense; a decision to go with sony is one made for "bang for buck" purposes. thats actually where i started this part of the conversation before you took a few little back alleys and diversions. then you convoluted the arguement by trying to compare the sony FF cameras to the pro canikon bodies which is clearly done do misrepresent the actual cost differences.

    i believe though that jim addressed the financial aspect in this post. http://www.dcresource.com/forums/sho...9&postcount=42

    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Guelph, Ontario
    Posts
    1,903
    Finally a light t the end of the tunnel.

    You guys must do this love/hate thing just to get your posts count up!
    Canon EOS 7D

    flickr
    FLUIDR

Posting Permissions

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