原帖由 zeroken 於 2008-10-16 03:39 發表 
老實講.E+數碼年代.色水好固然之係好..但唔滿意.ㄧ樣可以靠後期.並唔係咩罪大惡極GE問題..相反ㄧ個系統係有好多其他因素.好似4/3本身佢都5係用色水做賣點.佢賣點係直射入光.減少黑角.色散.因為焦距X2.所以長焦有優勢..防塵防水鏡多..機身防震除塵強勁..反反MON加LV...呢D先係特點
而5係ㄧ為圍住高ISO.低光表現黎講...
high ISO performance is really a major point for user to consider before purchase... (maybe just me)
one of the reason people don't buy OM is lack of FF sensor and poor high iso performance...
if OM can make FF sensor, i do have interest to switch, as i love wide to normal prime lens very much... but you can see they don't have planning of FF sensor yet... and the 4/3 sensor is even smaller than APSC, it's physical limitation that the noise is relatively higher because of the pixel density... also, the deeper depth of field is another week point... i can't say swallow depth of field = good pic but you can have more flexibility for creation with depth of field
if the selling point of OM is color, you guys should understand it's really subjective, people may like vivid, but not all of us love it... let's see henry's red flower photo above, OMG, i feel that the red color sticks together...
while iso performance is more objective, you can really compare amount of noise produced at the same situation from the testing labs
[ 本帖最後由 initials 於 2008-10-16 07:46 編輯 ] |
簡體版
訂閱頻道
訂閱電子報
發表於 2008-10-16 03:29
| 
iso640-1600, f1.4-2.8, 1/5- 1/250 
