On 3/6/2016 4:13 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
... the problems with DR and artifacts should be a function of the sensor which should be the same on both cameras.
Not entirely. The Raw output makes a big difference. I know some will say it shouldn't make much difference with these
tiny sensors. My experience is that it does. On the TGs and my Panny ZS40, it makes the difference between marginal and
good.
In any case, if it doesn't do fine in sun or modest light it will go back. Maybe the TG-4 does better in the noise
department by shooting at F/2 all the time.
No, it doesn't do that, although it may be biased to wider apertures at the wide end than the 8xx series. That 1 2/3
stop advantage for the TG-4 is at the wide end. At the long end, it's only 1/3 stop.
On 3/7/2016 3:08 AM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
Of my several cameras the one that gets practically no use is the one that doesn't support raw. That began to bother
me about the TG-860. Along with your other warnings I began to realize this was not the right camera. I canceled the
order with Adorama. I'll get a TG-4 when I get a better price deal in the future. Thanks for the warning... it made
me think about a more general purpose camera than simply something that's waterproof.
Oh good! I was just looking at some images and thinking about whether to post some examples. Now I can relax. I don't
know for sure why, but JPEGs from the TG-4 are generally better than those from the TG-850. And Raw from the TG-4 is
much better than its JPEGs.
Here's what happens if you have a TG-4. ;-)
<http://olympusamerica.com/images/home/photo/9.jpg>
Relieved Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
|
