Yes, they are pleasing. I got a panasonic LX2 several years ago. It has a
16:9 sensor, so to get the mild pano effect, you are using the full sensor,
not cropping. It's the other format options that are cropped. I still love
it, but only at lower iso's. I don't know what brought this on or why it
ended with the LX3, but I've always been a little suspicious that they were
using a sensor designed for video or hdtv.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Whitmire
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2011 1:14 PM
To: Olympus Camera Discussion
Subject: Re: [OM] Definition of "Normal"
Yup. 8x10 dates back to large format days. These days it's more likely to be
8x12, or 6x9, which is 2:3 Aspect ratio. Now the little P&S cameras are
starting to give AR choices, including 16:9, which is what a lot of new
television sets are. I wonder if the 16:9 aspect ration will begin to emerge
as a preferred ratio for photographic prints? I've done a couple that way,
and I have to admit they're rather pleasing to the eye.
--Bob
On May 11, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
> My point is, that even though 8x10 is no longer a popular print size,
> the optical traits regarding it (as well as the rules regarding DoF
> which are output-based) still apply to images of other sizes.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|