|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-03-2012, 02:09 AM
|
| |
Sure, but you have to keep in mind that you have people running multiple systems as well as people who may not even own a Pentax anymore, and it is nice for them to be able to chat about other cameras without someone rushing in to defend Pentax' honor within five minutes.
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
10-02-2012, 11:48 PM
|
| |
Is there a reason so many threads on this subforum end up with someone dashing in to white knight Pentax?
It's the NON-Pentax forum, so why not let people chat about those cameras without having to "prove" Pentax is better constantly?
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
09-26-2012, 01:05 AM
|
| |
Sorry, m43 lenses are "lower quality"?
And which APS-C cameras provide something similar to e.g. a GX1 with a 20/1.7 lens, while retaining the same size?
|
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
09-25-2012, 06:44 AM
|
| |
Well, having started out with film (and still using some) I have to say that the E-M5 does not lack for anything when it comes to practical use (for me). Since the shadows can be massively boosted without introducing uglies it has more than sufficient DR for any scene I could imagine shooting. But of course, everyone has different needs.
Hell, for most of my shooting my very outdated 1DsII suffices:
 |
|
Forum: Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands
09-25-2012, 01:43 AM
|
| |
First off, I do not mean to diminish Pentax's accomplishments in getting such a huge dynamic range out of the K-5.
However, the OM-D has a greater dynamic range than cameras like the 5D mark III, and I really do not see people having too much trouble shooting landscapes with those... it is easy to get too caught up in numbers when fact is that all these cameras are more than sufficient for the vast majority of shooters. Or would you deem the 5D III insufficient for landcape shooting too?
|
