[ Rubbish Thread ] Why so many people use canon rather than olympus?
- Thread starter mimin5zidane
- Start date
- Status
night86mare
Deregistered
you can give the guy a warning.
after all, he is obviously flamebaiting. :thumbsup:
if it helps, i report post already. :cheergal:
Oly5050 posted a good read at http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=701262 
There are strengths and weaknesses in all systems.
Cameras and lens are merely tools.
Let's not loose sight of the end-product.
and the simple joys of enjoying what really matters.
There are strengths and weaknesses in all systems.
Cameras and lens are merely tools.
Let's not loose sight of the end-product.
and the simple joys of enjoying what really matters.
mimin5zidane
Member
ok, i am the one who started this thread. I didn't expect anyone to side either Oly or Canon. I was just wondering why people use canon more than Oly and i got my ans. Anyway, please do not be rude in ur comments. We should just let the pictures do the talking.
There's no sensor format (notice I didn't say brand name) that is the be all and end all of photography.
I started with 6x6. Then went to 110 (FourThirds sized). Then to 135/35mm. During that time I also did some work with a "process camera" (it's taller than a human being that uses upto a 36"x24" negative, or 90cmX60cm for those who only know metric). If you want to see a process camera check out:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/1238404-lg.jpg (note the size of the camera compared to the dollar bill someone stuck to the bellows support)
Today I'm back to FourThirds size because of the benefits of smaller lenses (due to 2x multiplier).
For me it's always been about the best tools for the job.
I started with 6x6. Then went to 110 (FourThirds sized). Then to 135/35mm. During that time I also did some work with a "process camera" (it's taller than a human being that uses upto a 36"x24" negative, or 90cmX60cm for those who only know metric). If you want to see a process camera check out:
http://gallery.photo.net/photo/1238404-lg.jpg (note the size of the camera compared to the dollar bill someone stuck to the bellows support)
Today I'm back to FourThirds size because of the benefits of smaller lenses (due to 2x multiplier).
For me it's always been about the best tools for the job.
mabmy
Senior Member
That reminds me of large format,but this one seems more like XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXL format :bsmilie: but seems like you have a long history with cameras and I agree with best tools for the job, lets all keep this discussion civil alright?
Just to explain a little more about a process camera, to the left of the camera (not shown) there would be a door that you walk into the back of the camera and adhere the sheet of film to a vacuum plate; after the film was exposed you'd stay in there and develop the film.
Of course it's not the largest camera in the world...this is one of my favourite pics:
http://www.bigshotz.co.nz/images/grlcam.jpg
Then again, how about this large digital camera:
http://www.fakefaces.co.uk/images/lookalikes/past-appearances/fullsize/97-IMG_0193.JPG
The first one,I would say.... "KEEP THAT THING YOU CALL A CAMERA AWAY FROM ME!!!I DON'T WANNA GET CRUSHED!!" and the second one would be "Is it Halloween already?" :bsmilie:
But it sure is interesting to see cameras that size work, I can only imagine the work needed to take and develope one of those images:think:
JW73
Senior Member
Have to disagree
..the latter is getting exciting with the m4/3 . The older 4/3 format dslr maybe boring. The giants DSLRs are very saturated already. Looking at DSLR development, it will definately slow down. Other formats like m4/3 or the sony E mount will have more rooms to improvement. Let's see.
Last edited:
night86mare
Deregistered
come in 10 years ago, there will be this discussion...
100 years down the road, there will be another discussion. :bsmilie:
Oh my gosh, I come back to CS after a few days and this is still going on? Oops, I contributed to the thread anyway... Hehehe...
Anyway, just to lightly correct a fellow brother somewhere above:
Olympus only makes super light and small kit lenses and lower end DSLRs. Once we start looking at the E-XX and E-X, as well as the SHG lenses, the whole argument about lighter and smaller is lost! I think it is a smart move for Olympus to focus on their m4/3.
Why?
They appeal to the masses from there (if they get their stuff right), and rake in the money, which in turn translates to more R&D (to get their stuff right) and more marketing (to appeal to the masses). It should also allow them to boost their research a lot more because the m4/3 *SHOULD* be able to have faster product recycle times. You can see how fast Olympus has improved in the span of a few months from the first m4/3 camera to their current EPL1.
I just hope they can improve by leaps and bounds when their new E-X series is out because if it disappoints me, I'm going straight to Nikon to satisfy my low-light (ISO3200 and more) needs and speedlight needs.
I think they really should do that.. Its amazing sometimes to see a small and narrow device like an endoscope produce a video feed of such high quality.. However, the down side is medical equipment generally isn't that affordable.
the SHG lenses are as so for a reason,that much I can say
IMHO, Olympus SHG lenses are a major reason for choosing FourThirds. I really hope Olympus will continue to develop the FourThirds line.
The FourThirds system is still a young system compared to Canon EOS over 50 million lenses shipped and according to Canon's marketing #1 DSLR maker in Asia. Possible reasons why people choose Canon are established track record and a legacy system is a safer choice.
Since you can't say that much, this post of yours is meaningless, isn't it ?the SHG lenses are as so for a reason,that much I can say
pretty much :bsmilie:
- Status
Similar threads
