24 Mpixel FF vs 16 Mpixels sans AA filter

Started Sep 13, 2012 | Discussions thread
Voff
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,428Gear list
Like?
Re: So, where's my...
In reply to Jorgen E, Sep 16, 2012

Jorgen E wrote:
nd 16MP respectively.

Furthermore, if you want an equal lens for APS-C, it's still highly unlikely an APS-C version will be cheaper. Take the workhorse 300/2.8 as an example. To provide you with the same DoF isolation, you would nee something like a 200/1,8 for APS-C. Another example would be the standard 70-200/2,8. What would a 45-135/1,8 zoom cost? A 300/4 prosumer tele? What would a 200/2.6 set you back?

The small DOF of fast telephoto lenses is a problem, not a solution. Virtually all long lens shooters would have appreciated one stop more DOF at F:2.8.

Enough DOF is an absolute (depending on output size). Thin DOF is not; it is a matter of aestetics. One stop difference is usually not visible and whats to prefer is a matter of opinion.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow