11-18-2010, 09:06 AM
Hello Jenbenn,
I see the huge disproportion between good images that passes the PZ forum and endless discussion that compares two almost identical thinks. E.g. e.g FF vs DX Canon vs Nikon etc etc.
Here is example is example of 5 pages long thread:
[url="http://forum.photozone.de/index.php?/topic/412-are-full-frame-advantages-disappearing/"]Novel Volume1[/url]
Honestly I’ve seen this year two good landscapes from Klaus /Peru/ and some good images from you.
It annoys me a little bit.
What I’d like to see more is discussion about
What makes one image to standup above the snapshot?
What is the optimal size? E.g How big is Mona Liza by Leonardo vs. how big is the big Mac?
I’m curious to hear what do you think?
Greetings,
Miro
PS. Back to your question.
As already knows in photography there is no wrong way. Buy what you like. What would be the most suitable for your setup, think about ergonomics and your own taste.
The pure performance seems to be almost identical.
I see the huge disproportion between good images that passes the PZ forum and endless discussion that compares two almost identical thinks. E.g. e.g FF vs DX Canon vs Nikon etc etc.
Here is example is example of 5 pages long thread:
[url="http://forum.photozone.de/index.php?/topic/412-are-full-frame-advantages-disappearing/"]Novel Volume1[/url]
Honestly I’ve seen this year two good landscapes from Klaus /Peru/ and some good images from you.
It annoys me a little bit.
What I’d like to see more is discussion about
What makes one image to standup above the snapshot?
What is the optimal size? E.g How big is Mona Liza by Leonardo vs. how big is the big Mac?
I’m curious to hear what do you think?
Greetings,
Miro
PS. Back to your question.
As already knows in photography there is no wrong way. Buy what you like. What would be the most suitable for your setup, think about ergonomics and your own taste.
The pure performance seems to be almost identical.