My personal preference for aspect ratio is whatever lets me get cheap
picture frames. It's pretty easy to get 8x12 prints but not as easy to get a
cheap frame to hold it.
I suspect the difficulty with orientation is a side affect of the smaller
image my eye sees. For awhile I was amazingly consistant at needing a 1
degree clockwise rotation to get things level. Lately I've over come that
problem. I'm just as likely to need a counterclockwise rotation :-(
I've been wondering how many people would prefer a C*non 5D as it is, or the
equivalent camera using the Olympus/Kodak sensor technology. The tradeoff
being more resolution vs. low noise at high ISO speed etc. For me right now,
being familiar with an 8MP E300, I would go for more resolution. In reality
at the 12MP level (assuming the appropriate aspect ratio), I might be
completely satisfied and choose features other than resolution to improve.
If Oly comes out with an almost 12MP or better camera in the spring, I would
probably be pretty quick to get one especially if it is a $700 camera rather
than $1500 camera.
-jeff
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Wiliam Wagenaar" <wiliam@xxxxxxxxxx>
Jeff Keller wrote:
-----
>(too bad C*non didn't re-think the aspect ratio)
-----
Well actually the aspect ratio is one thing L like least on my E-1. Since I
use the E-1 I am having trouble keeping the horizon level, a problem I never
(well allmost never) experienced with my OM's.
Wiliam
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|