Do you want to display on a TV. Post online? Print? 4x6 inches? 4x6 feet?
I can not answer these questions completely. A little bit of everything perhaps? The reason I am even asking the questions is that I'd like to concentrate my photo time on one camera system, and right now I have three.
First there is the Canon SX50, basically a point-and-shoot, but with a 50x optical super-zoom lens. An incredible 24mm-1200mm equivalent. Unfortunately autofocus can be very slow and the sensor size is miniscule, just 3% the size of a full-frame 35mm sensor.
Recently I acquired an Olympus OM-D E-M10, a mirrorless DSLR-like camera. With a 600mm equivalent telephoto, this system weighs about half as much as an actual DSLR, even an APS-C sensor size. The Oly has a Micro Four Thirds sensor which is 26% the size of a full-frame 35mm sensor. Still not very large, but much larger than the sensor in the SX50.
My first DSLR was, and is, a Sony SLT-A55, upon which I usually have a Sigma 120-400mm zoom (600mm equivalent). Its APS-C sensor is a little less than half the size of a full-frame 35mm sensor.
Three powerful systems. Three completely different size sensors. And, of course, three completely different uses.
Now you may have a glimmer of understanding why I'd like to answer the question: why do I photograph?
 |
| SX50 |
If the answer is to just post photos to be viewed on a computer screen, or perhaps make 4x6 or 8x10 prints, the Canon SX50 is probably all I'll ever need (although Sony has a 63x optical zoom!). Here is an example of what the SX50 is capable of. Hand-held, 1/640 second, 1200mm equivalent:
If portability with maximum image quality is the goal, then the E-M10 is the camera of choice.
If the absolute maximum image quality is the priority then the A55 is the choice, unless, of course, I go out and get a full-frame camera!
Questions, questions, questions, and so few answers...
In my next post I give some possible answers.
No comments:
Post a Comment