pellicle
New member
everyone who knows me knows that I think differently ... sometimes this results in me making comparisons which others find illogical
Back when I used film I felt that there was always more in there than I could get out, when I started looking at RAW images from my Nikon Coolpix 5000 camera back in 2003 or so I was thinking that "wow ... if only I had this pixel density in a bigger sensor"
Well it occurred to me that per square cm of sensor that a G1 represents about 5500 dpi scan while a Canon 5DMkII represents about 4000 dpi
I've been waiting to get my hands on one to compare it to my G1 at a per cm basis
I did that today, and I've posted my thoughts on that here.
I think that one of the interesting findings is that the cameras both cost about the same per Kg ... about €1100 / Kg.
Another is that the micro 4/3 really does give smaller lenses ...
both similar angle of view, both image stabilised ...
After playing with the Canon for an hour or so I'm really glad I'm taking my G1 on my holidays to Italy / Spain / France in a few weeks... and not a 5DMkII
Back when I used film I felt that there was always more in there than I could get out, when I started looking at RAW images from my Nikon Coolpix 5000 camera back in 2003 or so I was thinking that "wow ... if only I had this pixel density in a bigger sensor"
Well it occurred to me that per square cm of sensor that a G1 represents about 5500 dpi scan while a Canon 5DMkII represents about 4000 dpi
I've been waiting to get my hands on one to compare it to my G1 at a per cm basis
I did that today, and I've posted my thoughts on that here.
I think that one of the interesting findings is that the cameras both cost about the same per Kg ... about €1100 / Kg.
Another is that the micro 4/3 really does give smaller lenses ...
both similar angle of view, both image stabilised ...
After playing with the Canon for an hour or so I'm really glad I'm taking my G1 on my holidays to Italy / Spain / France in a few weeks... and not a 5DMkII