Jump to content

michael_mckee

Members
  • Posts

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. <p>It's a tough call. The Sony A7R II has the best resolution at 42 MP, but Sony built the flange distance too close and most third party wide angles do weird things on the edges. Yes you can crop the edges out but then you lose the extra resolution and have a less reliable image size.<br> The Fuji has lower resolution but will give you more reliable edge results with third party wide angles. The new 24MP Fuji sensor will give you pretty much the same image quality as the Sony A7R full frame 24 MP sensor at ISO 6400 and below. I went with Fuji because I have some old Zeiss glass, particularly the 15mm Distagon 2.8 that just gives a rendering that I love.</p>
  2. <p>The simple answer is no. There is no way that a two dimensional representation can come close to being in nature. With all the tricks of composition and Photoshop, a photo is still only a record that can but approximate the view and few do that. The most popular landscape photos represent a scene that few actually see. That lovely early morning light is only seen by photographers. Colors are never accurate, not really, and often amped up in post. Why do so many landscape photo carefully omit any trace of human presence? It's always there, of only the trail hiked in on.<br /> Then there's the simple fact that the feel of the wind, the scent of earth or grass or pines or water is totally absent. We miss the sound of the running stream or the breeze through the pines.<br /><br /></p>
  3. <p>Hi all, first time on the forum.<br> I suppose my path is a bit different. I shot professionally with film, newspaper and corporate events, and had a B&W studio for my personal work. I had to quit that when I grew very sensitive to developing chemicals. Digital let me back into the game. That was 15 years ago. I shot landscapes and cityscapes for a time but have gone back to my roots of more documentary and portrait type work.</p>
×
×
  • Create New...