I suspect that Olympus' "problem" is that they saw film as the
competition. Once they had results better than 35mm film they thought
they were OK and that 4/3's was OK. They failed to note that Canon and
Nikon were the real competition.
Chuck Norcutt
Richard Lovison wrote:
> I made an 8x10 of one of the Great Blue Heron images yesterday. It was
> cropped and after a bit of math I figured the uncropped image would have
> been around a 12x16 image. I was in shock when I realized this as the
> quality of the image is outstanding, certainly far better than anything I
> could achieve with ISO800 film. I know that part of the reason for this is
> the high resolution of the Takahashi refractor and I did choose to use Noise
> Ninja to reduce a bit of the noise though I only used a setting of 3 on the
> Luminance Strength where 10 is the default... very little smoothing was
> done.
>
> I believe I mentioned earlier in this forum that I felt Olympus achieved its
> objective of creating a camera that produced results that rivaled or were
> slightly better than those produced by 35mm film. I feel stronger than ever
> about this now. I know that there are differences between a digital image
> and one produced from film and we could argue till the cows come home on the
> pros and cons of each and which medium is better but I don't think anyone
> can argue the fact that Olympus produced one heck of a camera in the E-1. I
> wonder what the future will bring?
>
> Richard
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|