Yes, the level of defensiveness there is quite extreme.
You're right of course. And I do that (post photos) over on L-mount-forum.com. I don't post photos on the m4/3 forum because if they are not birds in flight taken with an OM camera, there is nil interest.
I just haven't quite weaned myself off the m4/3 forum because it's a circus and I can't help but reply. I expect that it will be forced soon when I join the ranks of those who have been banned.
The DPR M43 forum is the Crack Cocaine of photo forums. It became a habit when I used M43, and then posted on the weekly thread. There is a small vocal group who turn the place into an entertaining circus of the absurd. It is difficult not to reply to the idiocy that gets posted in certain threads. Yes, facts get you banned by the surly ringmasters who love to crack the whip against facts. I tried not to got involved, but sometimes it was just to much, and then the inevitable ban arrived.
But it is easy to get sucked into this stuff. It was not until I picked up a demo Z7, and actually shot some frames with it, that I understood that M43 is not the wonder solution that some people claim it to be. This thread that I copied to my Blog got me banned. I thought it was pretty balanced, explaining the advantages of both systems.
As most photographers that migrated to the use of multiple formats, 35 mm, 6x6, 6x7, 6x45 and large format 4x5 and 8x10 will tell you they did it for a reason as each format provides unique features. From the fast street or photojournalistic capabilities of 35 mm to the majestic beauty of large format landscapes - different formats provide different pros and cons. There is a reason Ansel Adams, Clyde Butcher, Bruce Barnbaum, etc. only used large format for their majestic landscapes. There is a reason W. Eugene Smith and Robert Capa used 35 mm to bring the news to Life Magazine and to the tables of the American people in photographs.
There is no one format that does everything well. However, the larger format one can effectively use for the job - the better the image quality. Or as one of my former girlfriends cooed, size really does matter. đ
Exactly, I used 5x4 for static subjects where I wanted maximum image quality, or where I wanted to use lens movements. 120 was a bit in the middle, and I used 135 for my performing arts photography.
But digital cameras are a bit different, I can use my FF camera for almost everything from static Architecture to action. The advantages of each format are a bit more subtle.
Oh, dear, it's started up again. I am resisting the temptation to join in;
I remember Humansvillain - he's usually quite a reasonable kind of guy. He seems to be asking a reasonable question - which is
And the answer is 'yes, they will be identical'. There is a simple reason for this - when you set an ISO it defines what will be the 'correct exposure' - in fact ISO is inversely proportional to the 'correct exposure' at that ISO - and remember that exposure is light intensity times exposure time at the plane of focus. The real question that is left unasked is how do you choose which ISO to use.
f/8 is always f/8, but the exposure triangle is just about meaningless.
Anyhow, I might have responded to him, but I'm keeping away from DPReview at present - I think I'll get severely trolled if I were to show up. So, if anyone wants to politely answer his question, why not?
I'm not "resisting temptation" -- I'm not even looking. Were I were to attempt to "join in", I would be censored/censured since "everyone already knows" (including, apparently, the OP who asked). Even if we were to allow an exception for the OP, their question was already answered by someone else just as good, if not better, than I could answer, so there's no point in me replying, too (although, apparently, that rule only applies to me, since there will obviously be tons of replies from other people who were not similarly censored, especially those giving incorrect responses).
Especially true is that posting corrections to others' incorrect responses (either in part or full) is absolutely "unnecessary" and unwanted. In short, correcting misinformation is no different than spam since, as already stated, everyone already knows, anyway.
I am pleased to report that Bill Ferris has jumped in to help clear up the misconceptions. The thread has remained civil so far, and not a peep from the moderators! Praise be!!
Civil, despite attempts by one or two to start a war. The lack of moderators' peeps likely helps that. Generally they only inflame things.
Yes, I am surprised that TC did not post anything in that thread. It hasn't filled 8 pages and is not locked. Maybe something has been learned.
Have
A
Nice
Day
.
Ta. I didn't know that one.
