[wim]

It's not discussing a photo. To me, it's the "can you tell the difference??" part of this thread. Who cares, really? In a forum like this with maximum picture sizes around 1000 pixel width one needs to accentuate the differences. There are - if pixel count is nearly identical. It has been demonstrated million times - so why again, why another time and what of thsi comparison is interesting for others?


What in toni-a's comparison is at least new, not to talk of "better" than the comparisons which were done decade ago?


It's great if he is happy about his new 7D II, but that body was already sold in 10.000s A part of this forum - as I see it - is finding new gear, situations, concepts, lenses, ideas and talk about to others, maybe to get new impulses or debate about something new like equivalence or how much DR is already overkill. ^_^


In normal daylight, with sensors of the same generation and the more or less only manufacturer (for Canon mostly Canon, for others mostly Sony), similar MP count and with comparable lenses it's difficult if not impossible to see a difference. But if I see the first difference already in different colors, I already suspect problems with white balance or RAW conversion - that makes the comparison rubbish to me.

Come on, Joju.


What you express here is your opinion. This is indeed a forum, and thetefore any type of (polite and respectful) discussion within the interest and focus of the site is allowed and welcome.


If you do not like a specific subject, just ignore it, no need to diss anybody or be so negative.


BTW, you are more negative lately than usual, IMO. Just keep it cool please.


Kind regards, Wim


P.S.: Photozone is Klaus' site. He is the one to determine what is allowed or not, it is not your prerogative, I am afraid, so please leave it be ...