Why insist on FF format?

Started Sep 22, 2012 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Forum ProPosts: 12,947
Re: Why insist on FF format?
In reply to howardfuhrman, Sep 23, 2012

howardfuhrman wrote:

If weight, bulk and cost were not considerations, I would probably have a FF DSLR. If I had wings I might be able to fly. I don't have wings, I cannot fly. Weight, bulk and cost will continue to be key considerations for practically all buyers of digital cameras.

It was not that many years ago that some people in the forums were contending that investing in cameras with APC sensors was not wise because they argued that the price of FF would fall and eliminate the APC market. The price of both FF and APC DSLR's have come down, but the low end FF body is now cost roughly three times or more entry level APC's.

APC mirrorless cameras have done an unbelievable job of reducing the size of camera bodies practically to the size of m4/3. Further Canon, Nikon and Sony may reduce the size of FF body sizes. But the size of most APC and FF lenses are and will remain very large in comparison to comparable m43 lenses.

There is a sweetspot for FF lenses - primes between 20-85 mm at 1.8-2.8. These lenses are neither big or expensive. On the extreme ends, the difference vs m43 is much larger, but the range 20-85 is probably the most useful for the majority.

I do not expect FF DSLR's to disappear. As prices drop I believe that their market will increase. There are professionals and many others that want and/or need the fastest camera with the best IQ cameras that can shoot relatively noise free at high ISO's. I expect that technology will narrow the IQ gap between FF and smaller sensor cameras, but the IQ gap will always exist.

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