Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Morningstar - I did not belittle anything, so I would appreciate not putting words in my mouth. I have had my work printed at that size from a single frame from my D800, and some even a bit larger from multiple images stitched into a pano. I routinely printed my work at 24x36 from a D70s, D200, D300 and eventually a FF D700 with no lack of quality.

Truth is, no one pixel peeps a 40x60, so 122 dpi is more than adequate at the normal viewing distance of 8 ft, which really only needs 36 ppi to give a sense of sharpness.

Your comment suggests that you might not be familiar with how this works, but here is an easy to follow guide.

http://www.pointsinfocus.com/tools/minimum-resolution-calculator/

FYI - at one point I owned the Olympus PenF back in the 60s. Do you know what that was?

I have shot with the Olympus OMD M5 and Pentax Lumix GX1 with the Panasonic 45-150 and the 100-300. I was pretty impressed with the optical quality of these lenses, and images that were produced with the shorter lenses as well.

My takeaway on these on M4/3 cameras is that while they are pretty amazing at what they can do given the sensor size, they in no way compare to what can be done with even a 5 yr old D700 full frame camera - they lack the low light performance, dynamic range and color depth of the big boys.

Do I sense a bit of envy intermingled with denial here? This is all in response to your original comment about trading your m4/3 for FF.

Perhaps you should not be "belittling" FF cameras, no matter how much you love your M4/3 and how well it suits you. Such a camera could never work for me for most of the work I do.

What you might consider is that as opposed to sounding like "someone who likes the latest, newest, bestest, most expensive toys" I just might be someone who has downsized from medium and large format film (Mamiya RB67 and Sinar F Pro 4x5) and find the tradeoffs ok to live with on a D800 and just not acceptable on a m4/3 camera for the landscape, wildlife and botanical fine art photography that I do.

My advice to you is to not believe everything you think, and above all, ask before you make any assumptions and launch personal attacks without any basis. That is just bad form and completely unprofessional.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Morningstar - when you print at 40x60 for gallery or exhibition and that print gets sold for $3000 - obviously someone must want it.

As far a M4/3 not being suitable for quality work, here is an interesting link:

http://www.bestmirrorlesscamerareviews.com/2013/08/23/13-amazing-professional-photographers-who-use-mirrorless-cameras-on-the-job/

And then there is this guy from Japan:

http://www.moriyamadaido.com/english/

who works exclusively in small camera formats like m4/3 and whose work routinely sells for $5K or more per print.

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

If I waited to purchase a FF camera, I'd still be shooting film (which means only shooting on special occasions). The day I bought my Nikon D40 (a CS camera), I've taken it everywhere. Without examining the EFIX data, people who look at my photos (I do print many of them) can't tell whether they are CS or FF.

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

Also check: mingthein.com , and his review of the OMD-EM-1; and when you have the time, check his artwork. Impressive! The EM-1 is a uniquely capable camera that defies traditional concepts of low-light/ noise performance and 4/3 sensors. It also is uniquely capable when all of the goodies are put together: no anti-aliasing filter, high MP count (16MP), TruePic7 software for the picture-processing engine, and some of the finest glass available on this planet. The images can be quite something special to behold, coming from a small-sensor camera. That's certainly not to disparage anyone shooting full-frame or medium or large format!
Ming Thein has been quite successful creating some wonderful images with the D800, D800e, and OMD-EM-1.
Check out his website.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Lukan - I am familiar with Ming - he is one of the better, no-nonsense bloggers out there and a pretty good shooter.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Photoman022 - I would be able to tell in a NY minute - :)

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

Gene, do you think you'd be able to tell if shot by an OMD EM-1 vs a FF? The dimensions there are directly comparable, unlike those of an APS-C.
I ran an experiment (but the "control" was pretty loose) of some pics from my EM-1 with similar pics from the A99, and the A99's "dimensions" and "scale" were a little more realistic. The EM-1's pretty close. The interesting thing was matching focal lengths between the two formats. Also, I have to say, that Oly 12-40 f2.8pro glass is right there with the CZ 24-70 f2.8, very comparable indeed.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

sure - I have done it many times - all I have to do is to look into the shadow areas, and at some of the finer texture and details - piece of cake really. Remember, as a mentor, I see tons of images from a variety of cameras, new and old - not to mention the fact that I have owned and or used several dozen digital cameras in a variety of formats - and I do agree with you, the Olympus does set the bar pretty high for cropped sensor camera. At least that is what I have seen so far, both with the M5 I used for a trip once, and the work of some of my students who bring me work to critique.

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

Where do you teach?

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Lukan - I mentor one on one. However I used to teach at Purchase College - an arts and performing arts school that is part of the State University System of NY.

I have clients in Arizona, Maine, Washington State, and locally - fellow members of the photo club that I participate in.

For the "distance learning" guys, I leverage dropbox for file sharing, and teamviewer and the telephone for online show and tell sessions. With teamviewer I can teach a group (in demo or lecture mode), or interactively share my screen and the students screen - with either or both controlling either screen.

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

I feel that your input has been invaluable, and I thank you for sharing your time and knowledge with me. You are a resource that I am referring to in the other thread.

Terra Australis Loc: Australia

Not quite correct. The image size will be exactly the same, the only difference will be image area.



No. DoF is determined by circle of confusion, aperture and final magnification. Focal length affects image size only.

wingclui44 Loc: CT USA

I don't understand what's the different of 'Image size" to "Image area" as you mentioned.

The circle of confusion is the result of the aperture; the final magnification as the same as image size is determined by the focal length of your lens as well as the distance between your camera and the object.

The DoF is affected by three factors: the aperture of the lens; the distance from the camera to the object and the focal length of the lens!

Terra Australis Loc: Australia

The image size or magnification is determined by the focal length of the lens. the image area is determined by the size of the sensor.



Not entirely. It is determined by how sharp the image is at the focal plane.



The focal length has no bearing given that the C of C, the aperture and the final print size. And of course the distance to the subject is the same.

Often confused but a test will determine this to be true.

I have proven this to my students many times over the years.

Oliver.

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

Sensor size determines the 35mm equivalent of the mounted lens's focal length. It's the basis of APS-C and micro four thirds systems.