Lol, no not odd, just more disciplined than me for sure. Call it lack of experience, but I tend to move a little faster when I'm not purposely setting up a tripod and finding the best framing for a landscape scene.
Yeah I have a converted EM-5 and love it, I’d love a full frame but the mtf gives me gorgeous 11x17’s on 13x19 paper. I had thought about a converted DSLR but my concerns proved correct, although an additional Focus filter will correct most dslrs mirrorless seems the way to go
I am using a Nikon D810 (11 lenses) and a Olympus E-M1 (8 lenses). Both have their purposes. If size and weight are not an issue, the Nikon is the “go to” and if it is an issue, the Olympus wins. Both systems are terrific and the IQ iis great. There are differences, of course, but I have used both to produce excellent results. The most important factor in making great images is the index finger on your right hand, and the processor that controls it.
I have an 11x17 hanging in my office, 13x19 paper on a Canon Pixma 100. I don’t know if it posted but at 11x17 it’s terrific. Shot with a 3.5 mpix, Fuji S-1 Pro or a Nikon Coolpix 5000 (5mgpix) I don’t remember, the lower one is the Fuji for sure
Of course. but to obtain the maximum quality from those good lenses, with some room for cropping and enlargement, 16MP is my personal minimum. Yes, you can make good prints with a lower resolution body, but my personal minimum, based on the cameras I've owned, is 24MP. As I said above, it's an individual choice. Why spend money on lenses capable of resolving much more than the sensors on your camera.
I’ve found that even 6 mgpx is enough for a damn fine 13x19 print, my old Fuji S1-Pro, RIP
Andy
Of course. but to obtain the maximum quality from ... (show quote)
Some of us, BUCKO, have handicaps which prevent us from responding in a timely manner, but we also, BUCKO, like to feel and sense of contributing, no matter how late, BUCKO.