FF v M43....printing BIG! 5Dmk4/Omd 1mk2

surfar · 11-09-2018, 01:14 AM

Some interesting observations here and with Januarys big Olympus to come!

Youtu.be

t

aurele · 11-09-2018, 02:08 AM - **1 Like**

Unless you do "ultra-prints" (huge prints @600dpi), you'll never see big difference. Well, some people might (@Digitalis maybe ? ) with trained eyes. But the good news is most people who buy prints won't ever notice.

biz-engineer · 11-09-2018, 02:15 AM - **1 Like**

Practical differences between two adjacent format are never as clear as black & white. And when shooting in good light, the differences are even smaller. Also, depends on how fast is the lens, when smaller sensors are used in combination with faster lenses, the difference of image quality gets smaller. But it's a bit like comparing a small car and a big car for driving downtown, since the speed is limited below the max speed of each car, there is not advantage of using the big car and the smaller car is easier to park. Compare the two cars when driving 500 miles of highway, the bigger car will made a lot of difference for the whole journey: you'll arrive earlier at destination with the big car, it'll be safer, and you'll be less tired when arriving. Anyway, we should always consider the personal interest of the person doing the video, he is teaching photography, therefore his interest is to have as many students as possible including people with smaller cameras, spending the money on camera equipment or spending the money for attending workshops are competing activities. Anyway, full frame is the sweet spot for stills, wide variety of glass, lots of f1.4 lenses available making it possible to shoot at low ISO more often than with other systems. Full frame isn't the cheapest, but deliver the best image quality for the money.

---------- Post added 09-11-18 at 10:23 ----------

Originally posted by aurele

Unless you do "ultra-prints" (huge prints @600dpi), you'll never see big difference. Well, some people might (@Digitalis maybe ? ) with trained eyes. But the good news is most people who buy prints won't ever notice.

The prints in the video are too small. The video is aimed at hobbyists by someone offering workshops for hobbyists, hobbyists seldom print and they seldom print large. The OP is also a hobbyist. If you have a m4/3 camera it feels good to watch the video. If you have a medium format system, you probably never have time to watch the video, because you are too busy with commercial jobs, and setting up the workshop for the amateurs of m43.

**Rondec** · 11-09-2018, 03:45 AM

Originally posted by aurele

Unless you do "ultra-prints" (huge prints @600dpi), you'll never see big difference. Well, some people might (@Digitalis maybe ? ) with trained eyes. But the good news is most people who buy prints won't ever notice.

I have always said that the biggest thing you see with larger sensors is that you get less noise and more dynamic range for a given iso. I can push a K-1 image a fair amount, even up to iso 800. I can't do that with APS-C images above base iso. This will show in a final image at most sizes if you do much post processing. It really isn't about resolution so much as these things.

If you shoot out of camera jpegs then different formats are pretty similar.

**BarryE** · 11-09-2018, 07:08 AM

There's a grain of truth in this video, but it's a grain. In ideal situations there is no perceptible difference in the output of A1 (33") prints taken with a K3 and K1 - true, but the photo world is not ideal. When noise, DR, low light etc is taken into account A1 size prints do differ when the conditions are less than perfect. The choice of paper, the rendering intents etc, can all assist it narrowing any differences. Where the difference shows is in the tonal definition and the subtle variations. So in my opinion this video is misleading.

**Winder** · 11-09-2018, 08:35 AM - **3 Likes**

The video is comparing Canon to Olympus, so we have a m4/3 sensor that is a generation or two ahead of the Canon FF sensor. Fuji does the same thing when they say they can match FF performance with an APS-C. They are talking about matching the quality of Canon FF which isn't the same thing as matching the quality of a K-1, D850, or A7R3. Obviously Canon quality is more than good enough for professional work. People have been making large prints for years with digital cameras. I have seen some 12MP images from a Canon 5D original that looked amazing printed at A3+ and with the right software you can print a lot larger. Professionals didn't just start making large prints in the last few years. People act like its just not possible to do unless you have a 30+MP FF.

Kunzite · 11-09-2018, 12:42 PM

Interesting comparison.
Different subjects, the FF is the 30MP Canon with an AA filter, the format I was uniformized by cropping the Olympus, obviously different lenses (12-40 f/2.8 on the Olympus, 24-70 f/2.8 Mk I on the Canon), no mention of settings, and who knows what else.

And the conclusion is that, in broadlight, the FF didn't pull ahead.

**Sliver-Surfer** · 11-12-2018, 07:26 PM

If you shoot mid day sun in the tropics like he does you wouldn't notice much of a difference. You could get the same results with a pro Point and shoot..Move it indoors, or Golden/Blue Hours or outside the tropics, and you will really see the difference on print between the formats. 3 out of 4 pics look to have completely blown skies and Highlights...Maybe he's trying to save some ink.

11-09-2018, 02:15 AM - 1 Like	#3
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,293	Practical differences between two adjacent format are never as clear as black & white. And when shooting in good light, the differences are even smaller. Also, depends on how fast is the lens, when smaller sensors are used in combination with faster lenses, the difference of image quality gets smaller. But it's a bit like comparing a small car and a big car for driving downtown, since the speed is limited below the max speed of each car, there is not advantage of using the big car and the smaller car is easier to park. Compare the two cars when driving 500 miles of highway, the bigger car will made a lot of difference for the whole journey: you'll arrive earlier at destination with the big car, it'll be safer, and you'll be less tired when arriving. Anyway, we should always consider the personal interest of the person doing the video, he is teaching photography, therefore his interest is to have as many students as possible including people with smaller cameras, spending the money on camera equipment or spending the money for attending workshops are competing activities. Anyway, full frame is the sweet spot for stills, wide variety of glass, lots of f1.4 lenses available making it possible to shoot at low ISO more often than with other systems. Full frame isn't the cheapest, but deliver the best image quality for the money. ---------- Post added 09-11-18 at 10:23 ---------- Originally posted by aurele Unless you do "ultra-prints" (huge prints @600dpi), you'll never see big difference. Well, some people might (@Digitalis maybe ? ) with trained eyes. But the good news is most people who buy prints won't ever notice. The prints in the video are too small. The video is aimed at hobbyists by someone offering workshops for hobbyists, hobbyists seldom print and they seldom print large. The OP is also a hobbyist. If you have a m4/3 camera it feels good to watch the video. If you have a medium format system, you probably never have time to watch the video, because you are too busy with commercial jobs, and setting up the workshop for the amateurs of m43. Last edited by biz-engineer; 11-09-2018 at 02:24 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Olympus OMD EM1 weather sealing	bessa-66	Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc.	2	06-09-2017 08:22 AM
Getting into printing on MacOSX, printing software/pipeline?	bobbotron	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	3	03-23-2017 02:35 PM
KP size compared to Olympus OMD EM5 II	jgmankos	Pentax KP	3	03-06-2017 06:29 PM
Olympus omd em ii, anybody have it? Thoughts	amp	Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc.	33	02-28-2017 03:24 PM
Sensor Difference: Which is closer? APS-C to a M43 or M43 to a Digital Camera	rustynail925	Photographic Industry and Professionals	6	09-09-2012 05:36 AM

11-09-2018, 02:08 AM - 1 Like	#2
aurele Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Paris, France Photos: Albums Posts: 3,210	Unless you do "ultra-prints" (huge prints @600dpi), you'll never see big difference. Well, some people might (@Digitalis maybe ? ) with trained eyes. But the good news is most people who buy prints won't ever notice.

11-09-2018, 03:45 AM	#4
Rondec Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 23,038	Originally posted by aurele Unless you do "ultra-prints" (huge prints @600dpi), you'll never see big difference. Well, some people might (@Digitalis maybe ? ) with trained eyes. But the good news is most people who buy prints won't ever notice. I have always said that the biggest thing you see with larger sensors is that you get less noise and more dynamic range for a given iso. I can push a K-1 image a fair amount, even up to iso 800. I can't do that with APS-C images above base iso. This will show in a final image at most sizes if you do much post processing. It really isn't about resolution so much as these things. If you shoot out of camera jpegs then different formats are pretty similar.

11-09-2018, 07:08 AM	#5
BarryE Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Hampshire, UK Posts: 1,146	There's a grain of truth in this video, but it's a grain. In ideal situations there is no perceptible difference in the output of A1 (33") prints taken with a K3 and K1 - true, but the photo world is not ideal. When noise, DR, low light etc is taken into account A1 size prints do differ when the conditions are less than perfect. The choice of paper, the rendering intents etc, can all assist it narrowing any differences. Where the difference shows is in the tonal definition and the subtle variations. So in my opinion this video is misleading.

11-09-2018, 08:35 AM - 3 Likes	#6
Winder Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,611	The video is comparing Canon to Olympus, so we have a m4/3 sensor that is a generation or two ahead of the Canon FF sensor. Fuji does the same thing when they say they can match FF performance with an APS-C. They are talking about matching the quality of Canon FF which isn't the same thing as matching the quality of a K-1, D850, or A7R3. Obviously Canon quality is more than good enough for professional work. People have been making large prints for years with digital cameras. I have seen some 12MP images from a Canon 5D original that looked amazing printed at A3+ and with the right software you can print a lot larger. Professionals didn't just start making large prints in the last few years. People act like its just not possible to do unless you have a 30+MP FF.

11-09-2018, 12:42 PM	#7
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 13,667	Interesting comparison. Different subjects, the FF is the 30MP Canon with an AA filter, the format I was uniformized by cropping the Olympus, obviously different lenses (12-40 f/2.8 on the Olympus, 24-70 f/2.8 Mk I on the Canon), no mention of settings, and who knows what else. And the conclusion is that, in broadlight, the FF didn't pull ahead.

11-12-2018, 07:26 PM	#8
Sliver-Surfer Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,558	If you shoot mid day sun in the tropics like he does you wouldn't notice much of a difference. You could get the same results with a pro Point and shoot..Move it indoors, or Golden/Blue Hours or outside the tropics, and you will really see the difference on print between the formats. 3 out of 4 pics look to have completely blown skies and Highlights...Maybe he's trying to save some ink.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search