no, it is only always cheaper In the most cases it only will be ok, but not even or better.…The cheaper model is always better.…
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
no, it is only always cheaper In the most cases it only will be ok, but not even or better.…The cheaper model is always better.…
I'm on the same page. I work with numbers every day (writing engineering software) and I know how easy it is to misinterpret numbers. If I'm going to compare image quality I won't look at numbers, I'll look at pictures. Numbers aren't always the complete picture. Pictures are the complete picture.... Who would care for dxo as long as we have eyes to see. I dont waste my time with such numbers...
Yes, I agree ... they are amazingIf S2 owners were not so quick to defend, then why all the S2 photographs to show how amazing they are. Although, the thread title is D800e vs S2, there's no production models with prime lenses yet to compare it to the S2. They're two different camera formats,(sort of) so what's to compare other than the fact that there close in MP's and approximately $35,000 difference in price for just one lens S2? I demoed an S2 for a possible purchase, I had it for a week. I loved the form factor, and weather sealing, my intent was to use this for portraits and landscapes, but there was little room for cropping, if needed, and the colors were to "crunchy", and needed dialing back right out of the camera. Having an H4D/40, I couldn't justify what seemed to me a 35mm camera on steroids, and I guess that's why all the comparisons. The S2 is a fantastic camera, for what it is, but I admittedly kept comparing it to a 35mm, and that's exactly why I decided against it. Those who did, you have a fine camera, but let's be honest about these comparisons.
Johnny,If S2 owners were not so quick to defend, then why all the S2 photographs to show how amazing they are. Although, the thread title is D800e vs S2, there's no production models with prime lenses yet to compare it to the S2. They're two different camera formats,(sort of) so what's to compare other than the fact that there close in MP's and approximately $35,000 difference in price for just one lens S2? I demoed an S2 for a possible purchase, I had it for a week. I loved the form factor, and weather sealing, my intent was to use this for portraits and landscapes, but there was little room for cropping, if needed, and the colors were to "crunchy", and needed dialing back right out of the camera. Having an H4D/40, I couldn't justify what seemed to me a 35mm camera on steroids, and I guess that's why all the comparisons. The S2 is a fantastic camera, for what it is, but I admittedly kept comparing it to a 35mm, and that's exactly why I decided against it. Those who did, you have a fine camera, but let's be honest about these comparisons.
Not as I understand it—numbers have no impact on reality at all; at best they are one of the descriptions humans have of reality. They are able to represent aspects of what we perceive, to be sure, but the experience is primary or, more accurately, we postulate that there is Reality (Wilden) and reality (individual experiences of it). Helpful reading here is Korzybski and others ("the map is not the territory" guy).it is at the heart of my scientific believes that generally 'numbers' have a deep impact on reality and that they are able to represent a strong part of what we perceive
Well, they both have mass and neither of them is for sale in a produce stand.Not as I understand it—numbers have no impact on reality at all; at best they are one of the descriptions humans have of reality. They are able to represent aspects of what we perceive, to be sure, but the experience is primary or, more accurately, we postulate that there is Reality (Wilden) and reality (individual experiences of it). Helpful reading here is Korzybski and others ("the map is not the territory" guy).
and, Bob, just why is that raven like a writing desk?
Not as I understand it—numbers have no impact on reality at all; at best they are one of the descriptions humans have of reality. They are able to represent aspects of what we perceive, to be sure, but the experience is primary or, more accurately, we postulate that there is Reality (Wilden) and reality (individual experiences of it). Helpful reading here is Korzybski and others ("the map is not the territory" guy).
and, Bob, just why is that raven like a writing desk?
The other way around based on the Venusians I have met.isn'nt it that scientists are from venus and philosophers from mars?
peter
i knew someone would say this--(((( anyway, i have tried.The other way around based on the Venusians I have met.
-bob
hi kit,markowich; it's all good fun, and it's possible to be both a scientist and a philosopher; my science research led me to philosophy. Cheers, Kit
Ask that in "Other Discussions" ... I think it would actually be a very interesting subject.Now this is a better discussion. Maybe a more enlightening thread question would be: How does your profession impact your gear choices and ultimately, your photography?
I really prefer the look of wet plate collodion.But neither of them beats Film!!!
(Just thought this topic needs a little shot in the arm, take it away boys...)
:watch: