Larger sensor just a luxury?

[Dao]

So EW, please tell us in details why you think FF is luxury?

Would you tell me how you can achieve the result with a aps-c camera as someone using a 85mm f/1.2 lens shoot at f/1.2 with ff camera?


I am fully aware that for 2 different format size, that has the same FoV and same physical aperture size, they can achieve the same DoF. (Provided that the f number or focal length are different)

 

[EchoingWhisper]

So EW, please tell us in details why you think FF is luxury?

Would you tell me how you can achieve the result with a aps-c camera as someone using a 85mm f/1.2 lens shoot at f/1.2 with ff camera?


I am fully aware that for 2 different format size, that has the same FoV and same physical aperture size, they can achieve the same DoF. (Provided that the f number or focal length are different)

Okay, to make it clearer, a M4/3 equivalent of 50mm f/2.0 is 25mm f/1.0.

 

[Village Idiot]

Derrel,

I agree with you. The fact the matter is if I need to shoot FF with the 85mm at f/1.2 with that FoV and DoF, it is not luxury. It is using the right tool to do the right job.

EW kept saying that lens is not made for APS-C, if ....

I don't know. Maybe I better stay away from this thread. It's all good. Hoping nobody feel bad or anything in this thread. It is just a friendly discussion.

(Also, English is my 2nd language)

Damn right! We learn 'Murican over here first!

 

[Village Idiot]

I think the biggest issue is if the OP thinks APS-C sensors are the best and most frugal sensors out there and only wants to use APS-C glass, he's going to have a problem. Even when I was shooting with a 30D I was using EF lenses and the only EF-S lens in my house was a kit lens sitting on a shelf. Nikon has more DX lenses than Canon has EF-S, but either way the faster lenses that most likely have better IQ and similar focal lengths are not going to be crop glass.

A larger sensory is just a luxury if you consider it that. I use the quality and perfomance my camera gives me over a crop sensor for creating images for clients. There isn't a crop sensor camera that would provide what I want in a camera. It's not a luxury to me.

 

[EchoingWhisper]

I think the biggest issue is if the OP thinks APS-C sensors are the best and most frugal sensors out there and only wants to use APS-C glass, he's going to have a problem. Even when I was shooting with a 30D I was using EF lenses and the only EF-S lens in my house was a kit lens sitting on a shelf. Nikon has more DX lenses than Canon has EF-S, but either way the faster lenses that most likely have better IQ and similar focal lengths are not going to be crop glass.

A larger sensory is just a luxury if you consider it that. I use the quality and perfomance my camera gives me over a crop sensor for creating images for clients. There isn't a crop sensor camera that would provide what I want in a camera. It's not a luxury to me.

I used to wrong words. Hehe, shouldn't have written it as luxury...

 

[EchoingWhisper]

I think the biggest issue is if the OP thinks APS-C sensors are the best and most frugal sensors out there and only wants to use APS-C glass, he's going to have a problem. Even when I was shooting with a 30D I was using EF lenses and the only EF-S lens in my house was a kit lens sitting on a shelf. Nikon has more DX lenses than Canon has EF-S, but either way the faster lenses that most likely have better IQ and similar focal lengths are not going to be crop glass.

A larger sensory is just a luxury if you consider it that. I use the quality and perfomance my camera gives me over a crop sensor for creating images for clients. There isn't a crop sensor camera that would provide what I want in a camera. It's not a luxury to me.

Another way to think of it is that 35mm is the middle ground for size and resolution, that's why many camera manufacturers build it as a professional system, especially in digital. It doesn't necessarily mean crop sensor ain't good, its just because that 35mm had a long history and its not too big or low res-ed.

 

[Village Idiot]

I think the biggest issue is if the OP thinks APS-C sensors are the best and most frugal sensors out there and only wants to use APS-C glass, he's going to have a problem. Even when I was shooting with a 30D I was using EF lenses and the only EF-S lens in my house was a kit lens sitting on a shelf. Nikon has more DX lenses than Canon has EF-S, but either way the faster lenses that most likely have better IQ and similar focal lengths are not going to be crop glass.

A larger sensory is just a luxury if you consider it that. I use the quality and perfomance my camera gives me over a crop sensor for creating images for clients. There isn't a crop sensor camera that would provide what I want in a camera. It's not a luxury to me.

Another way to think of it is that 35mm is the middle ground for size and resolution, that's why many camera manufacturers build it as a professional system, especially in digital. It doesn't necessarily mean crop sensor ain't good, its just because that 35mm had a long history and its not too big or low res-ed.

Crop sensors aren't bad, they just don't perform as well in low light given the same amount of pixels and the same tech in the camera, they don't provide the DOF that portrait photographers and a lot others are looking for at any given length, and if you're not specifically looking for extra reach, it gets you where you want to be with your lenses.

A canon 17-40 f/4 is nothing special on an APS-C sensor. It's an upgrade to the kit lens imho. If you toss it on a FF camera though, it because a fantastic lens.

And the reason I don't have an even larger sensor than I currently do is because of money. If prices were all the same, I'd take a medium format digital camera with a good set of primes over my 5D MKII 7 times out of 10.

 

[EchoingWhisper]

I think the biggest issue is if the OP thinks APS-C sensors are the best and most frugal sensors out there and only wants to use APS-C glass, he's going to have a problem. Even when I was shooting with a 30D I was using EF lenses and the only EF-S lens in my house was a kit lens sitting on a shelf. Nikon has more DX lenses than Canon has EF-S, but either way the faster lenses that most likely have better IQ and similar focal lengths are not going to be crop glass.

A larger sensory is just a luxury if you consider it that. I use the quality and perfomance my camera gives me over a crop sensor for creating images for clients. There isn't a crop sensor camera that would provide what I want in a camera. It's not a luxury to me.

Another way to think of it is that 35mm is the middle ground for size and resolution, that's why many camera manufacturers build it as a professional system, especially in digital. It doesn't necessarily mean crop sensor ain't good, its just because that 35mm had a long history and its not too big or low res-ed.

Crop sensors aren't bad, they just don't perform as well in low light given the same amount of pixels and the same tech in the camera, they don't provide the DOF that portrait photographers and a lot others are looking for at any given length, and if you're not specifically looking for extra reach, it gets you where you want to be with your lenses.

A canon 17-40 f/4 is nothing special on an APS-C sensor. It's an upgrade to the kit lens imho. If you toss it on a FF camera though, it because a fantastic lens.

And the reason I don't have an even larger sensor than I currently do is because of money. If prices were all the same, I'd take a medium format digital camera with a good set of primes over my 5D MKII 7 times out of 10.

Oh, again, I suggest you to read this - http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...larger-sensor-just-luxury-12.html#post2498739. With the same entrance pupil diameter, two lenses (in two different format) with the same equivalent focal length would produce the same depth of field and amount of light.

 

[o hey tyler]

Another way to think of it is that 35mm is the middle ground for size and resolution, that's why many camera manufacturers build it as a professional system, especially in digital. It doesn't necessarily mean crop sensor ain't good, its just because that 35mm had a long history and its not too big or low res-ed.

Crop sensors aren't bad, they just don't perform as well in low light given the same amount of pixels and the same tech in the camera, they don't provide the DOF that portrait photographers and a lot others are looking for at any given length, and if you're not specifically looking for extra reach, it gets you where you want to be with your lenses.

A canon 17-40 f/4 is nothing special on an APS-C sensor. It's an upgrade to the kit lens imho. If you toss it on a FF camera though, it because a fantastic lens.

And the reason I don't have an even larger sensor than I currently do is because of money. If prices were all the same, I'd take a medium format digital camera with a good set of primes over my 5D MKII 7 times out of 10.

Oh, again, I suggest you to read this - http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...larger-sensor-just-luxury-12.html#post2498739. With the same entrance pupil diameter, two lenses (in two different format) with the same equivalent focal length would produce the same depth of field and amount of light.

Yes, but the point is that there's aren't lenses for APS-C cameras that replicate what you're speaking of. Using your example, there's no 25mm f/1 lens for a M43 camera.... And I doubt there will be. Which is why the accessibility of full frame cameras and using EF or FX lenses is a benefit.

 

[Dao]

In theory, I can drive my car at 300 mph. So flying from St. Louis to Chicago with commercial airline is just a luxury when I need to get there in an hour.

 

[bazooka]

Oh, again, I suggest you to read this - http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...larger-sensor-just-luxury-12.html#post2498739. With the same entrance pupil diameter, two lenses (in two different format) with the same equivalent focal length would produce the same depth of field and amount of light.

I think I understand what you are saying now.... how about this example....

Canon 40D (x1.6 crop)
50mm @ 30mm aperture. 30 = 50/x. x=50/30. So f/stop is ~1.7.
Subject distance is 5 feet.
Depth of field is .19 feet.

5D Mk2 (FF)
Equivalent focal length is 80mm.
x= 80mm/30mm aperture... x= ~2.7
Subject distance is 5 feet.
Depth of field is ~.19 feet.

Notice that the density of the light is not the same. The crop lens must be capable of transmitting much more light than the full frame. To put it another way, if you have a lens at 2.8 on a full frame, and the same lens at 2.8 on a crop, the 2.8 lens on a full frame is capable of much smaller DoF. Is this getting close to what you are asking?

 

[Village Idiot]

Another way to think of it is that 35mm is the middle ground for size and resolution, that's why many camera manufacturers build it as a professional system, especially in digital. It doesn't necessarily mean crop sensor ain't good, its just because that 35mm had a long history and its not too big or low res-ed.

Crop sensors aren't bad, they just don't perform as well in low light given the same amount of pixels and the same tech in the camera, they don't provide the DOF that portrait photographers and a lot others are looking for at any given length, and if you're not specifically looking for extra reach, it gets you where you want to be with your lenses.

A canon 17-40 f/4 is nothing special on an APS-C sensor. It's an upgrade to the kit lens imho. If you toss it on a FF camera though, it because a fantastic lens.

And the reason I don't have an even larger sensor than I currently do is because of money. If prices were all the same, I'd take a medium format digital camera with a good set of primes over my 5D MKII 7 times out of 10.

Oh, again, I suggest you to read this - http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...larger-sensor-just-luxury-12.html#post2498739. With the same entrance pupil diameter, two lenses (in two different format) with the same equivalent focal length would produce the same depth of field and amount of light.

Oh, again, I suggest you find me a lens that I can use on an APS-C canon that's equivalent to the 24-70 f/2.8 on a FF DSLR that gives me the same DOF, apertures, distortion characteristics, and IQ.

Theory is all well and good and you can twist numbers around all you want, but until you start making your own lenses, it doesn't matter how much match you attempt to do to make a crop sensor look more appealing to you.

Olympus makes a 35-100 f/2 that's equivalent in FOV to a 70-200, most of which are f/2.8 constant aperture lenses. At f/2 and 100mm, it's still going to have a larger DOF than the 70-200 @ 200mm shooting with an f/2.8 aperture. Sure, you could find a 200mm lens to put on a 4/3 sensor, but then your field of view would be at 400mm compared to a FF camera.

Online Depth of Field Calculator

 

[Helen B]

I did mention the practical aspect of available fast lenses once or twice a while back. Maybe it didn't sink in.

Yes, but the point is that there's aren't lenses for APS-C cameras that replicate what you're speaking of. Using your example, there's no 25mm f/1 lens for a M43 camera.... And I doubt there will be.

Actually, there is already a 25 mm f/0.95 designed for M4/3 - that's why I used it in my example. There are also very fast zooms that will almost cover M4/3, like a 16-44 f/1.1, 9.5 - 57 f/1.6 and 10-100 f/2.2.

I thought we'd been over all this before...

Best,
Helen

 

[o hey tyler]

Actually, there is already a 25 mm f/0.95 designed for M4/3 - that's why I used it in my example. There are also very fast zooms that will almost cover M4/3, like a 16-44 f/1.1, 9.5 - 57 f/1.6 and 10-100 f/2.2.

I thought we'd been over all this before...

Best,
Helen

Sorry Helen, I haven't read the entire thread front to back like you have. Don't have the time, or care to.

It seems that for the price of a 25mm f/.95 I could get a 5Dmk1 and a 50mm f/1.8 (or used f/1.4) for the same price, shoot it at f/2 and get the same effect... But also have access to less prohibitively expensive lenses to get the same effects on a M43 camera (and they'll also autofocus.)

I can't find information on either of the other lenses you listed.

 

[zcar21]

Are you saying that if there were equivalent lenses for ff and crop sensor, dynamic range, noise, price, color, etc. will be the same for both formats? Resolution is already agreed on, so we're good, but for the rest I wouldn't believe it until I see it.