[LFLee]

I would guess, 2,4 6 are from full frame camera.
The first and last set are pretty easy to tell, 3, and 4 set is not.

At small aperture such as these, it is not easy to separate. And #1 and #5 are both...either bad processing or camera shakes..

[normhead]

You'd like me to think that, wouldn't you?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2y40U2LvKY

Mind games all around... that's one of my favourite clips of all time by the way.... that and "inconceivable"..."I don't think you're using that word correctly. I don't think you know what it means." As spoken by Andre the Giant.

---------- Post added 08-20-14 at 04:18 PM ----------

I would guess, 2,4 6 are from full frame camera.
The first and last set are pretty easy to tell, 3, and 4 set is not.

At small aperture such as these, it is not easy to separate. And #1 and #5 are both...either bad processing or camera shakes..

Proof that just using a tripod isn't enough. As for the processing, none of these images is done to professional standards, these are our "post the pictures of your trip on Photobucket " standards.

[BrianR]

The arrows on that set are because they are both photobucket screen caps... actually they all are (I figured out how to avoid the arrows on the others.), that way whatever Photobucket does to them is constant among the images. I do put a little time into these things, retired as I am.

Just joking

I'll guess FF are 2, 4 and 5.

[aleonx3]

I honestly can't tell definitively, but I will take a guess... FF are 2, 3 and 5.

[normhead]

Wooooo hoooooo BrianR gets the cupie doll
2,4, and 5 it is....
although I was sorely tempted to wait until someone got them all wrong...

without doing a definitive comparison, I'm guessing every image was thought to be an FF image at least once, the average was probably about 2 thirds right, one third wrong... not bad.

[BrianR]

Sweet! For what it's worth I was more guessing based on which I thought were taken by you.

[normhead]

Sweet! For what it's worth I was more guessing based on which I thought were taken by you.

I don't know how you got that last one. Brian asked me where he was supposed to stand, so his tripod was right next to mine, and my image was sharper. I noticed this year both he and his brother, who is actually more of a keener than he is, (his brother already has a D810), were using remote controls with their cameras on tripods. I've never found that to be necessary on a K-3. Must be some kind of Nikon thing. I just use the 2 second timer.

[chaza01]

2,4,6 ff?

[normhead]

2,4,6 ff?

See above... 2,4,5

[stevebrot]

that way whatever Photobucket does to them is constant among the images

As in...none of the images are as uploaded to the site?


Steve

[normhead]

As in...none of the images are as uploaded to the site?


Steve

As in the images have been uploaded to Photbucket,displayed on Photobucket and screen capped. It takes time but hey...

[jsherman999]

Just curious - these are incredibly small and seem to be screen captures (judging by the arrows left in two,) landscape shots taken at high aperture. How could anyone tell the difference between aps-c, FF, micro four-thirds, medium format, or P&S with this comparison?

If you're trying to show: "screen captured 4x6-sized f/8 near-hyperfocal images - format just doesn't matter for those!" then mission accomplished

Here's my own, sorry to squat in the thread Norm but which was taken with what format:

[Rondec]

Just curious - these are incredibly small and seem to be screen captures (judging by the arrows left in two,) landscape shots taken at high aperture. How could anyone tell the difference between aps-c, FF, micro four-thirds, medium format, or P&S with this comparison?

If you're trying to show: "screen captured 4x6-sized f/8 near-hyperfocal images - format just doesn't matter for those!" then mission accomplished

Here's my own, sorry to squat in the thread Norm but which was taken with what format:

I think that's probably Norm's point, though. If you aren't printing/viewing really big and aren't shooting at particularly wide apertures, there aren't huge differences in formats. Of course, it is possible to find photos where the difference is obvious, but some proponents verge on the point of saying that full frame is better, no matter what printing size. Full frame makes mediocre lenses better, while APS-C makes good lenses worse or, so I have been told.

[BrianR]

I don't know how you got that last one. Brian asked me where he was supposed to stand, so his tripod was right next to mine, and my image was sharper. I noticed this year both he and his brother, who is actually more of a keener than he is, (his brother already has a D810), were using remote controls with their cameras on tripods. I've never found that to be necessary on a K-3. Must be some kind of Nikon thing. I just use the 2 second timer.

The last was the iffiest, but I was fairly confident on the first two pairs and someone had already guess 2, 4, 6. I didn't want to plagiarize and risk the ruler

The 2-sec timer did the trick with my k100d, but with my k5iis I'm glad it has a true mirror lock up with the wireless remote for longer delays. I could probably do with a beefier tripod though.

[normhead]

Just curious - these are incredibly small and seem to be screen captures (judging by the arrows left in two,) landscape shots taken at high aperture. How could anyone tell the difference between aps-c, FF, micro four-thirds, medium format, or P&S with this comparison?

If you're trying to show: "screen captured 4x6-sized f/8 near-hyperfocal images - format just doesn't matter for those!" then mission accomplished

Here's my own, sorry to squat in the thread Norm but which was taken with what format:

I totally agree Jay... I'm doing this just for some fun, you probably remember my own tests on IR images where I decided you could't tell the difference between a k-5 and a D800 until about 3600-3800 pixels across, and then there is a noticeable difference and the added detail of the large sensor comes into play. You still have the issue of whether the final print looks better, if you're printing large, which I haven't seen resolved, at least not to my satisfaction. Based on previous work, I'd guess anyone with a 4000 pixel width on their monitor would be able to easily pick out APS-c and FF.

I'd also point out though that applies to optimum use. Looking at my pictures and the two guys I took out this year, where a lot of pictures were taken from the boats, the SR on my K-3 made it the better performer for some images. And as I said above, I can't understand why Brian's picture of the water fall is softer than mine. We were both set up on our tripods two feet apart. IN the first series, I don't like Brian's composition, but he really nailed it technically. My guess is printing large, his would be the better image. And that to me is real hi res advantage. It seems to be harder to nail the shot, and you're going to miss more images than using a smaller format. But if you do nail the image, you've got more to work with in terms of resolution, low light performance etc. Of course that's just a general observation.