06-19-2012, 01:53 AM
[quote name='wim' timestamp='1340045435' post='18960']
Possibly, yes. Not entirely sure about this, as I do think that most processing is done at jpeg conversion time.
Looking at the (raw) images of the GF2, I must say they remind me of my old 350D, although it has 50% more areal resolution, and a smaller sensor. That is not bad. And the newer cameras are better, some say as good as the 5D II.
Kind regards, Wim
[/quote]
Thank you, Wim. Yes, it is not bad, providing that the camera can deliver good images.
After some experience with my GF1, I am quite impressed by it. The images produced by it are better than that I have imagined. In raw format I can recover more than 1.5EV highlight details, this is what I have expected for a DSLR. Yes, the low light performance is not as good as my D700, but this is within my expectation.
BTW, I find that I starts to like the 4:3 image format since it gives me some new perspectives: with proper composition you can get more forgrounds and/or more clouds in the sky.
Best regards,
Frank
Possibly, yes. Not entirely sure about this, as I do think that most processing is done at jpeg conversion time.
Looking at the (raw) images of the GF2, I must say they remind me of my old 350D, although it has 50% more areal resolution, and a smaller sensor. That is not bad. And the newer cameras are better, some say as good as the 5D II.
Kind regards, Wim
[/quote]
Thank you, Wim. Yes, it is not bad, providing that the camera can deliver good images.
After some experience with my GF1, I am quite impressed by it. The images produced by it are better than that I have imagined. In raw format I can recover more than 1.5EV highlight details, this is what I have expected for a DSLR. Yes, the low light performance is not as good as my D700, but this is within my expectation.
BTW, I find that I starts to like the 4:3 image format since it gives me some new perspectives: with proper composition you can get more forgrounds and/or more clouds in the sky.
Best regards,
Frank