Why insist on FF format?

Started Sep 22, 2012 | Discussions thread
SergeyGreen
Contributing MemberPosts: 582
Like?
I was not thinking of DoF in fact ..
In reply to tgutgu, Sep 23, 2012

tgutgu wrote:

Unfortnately that is not true, if you were thinking of DOF. Wether shallow or large DOF is an advantage completely depends on the situation. The smaller the sensor you have greater DOF, which I regard as a huge advantage in most situations. Fast primes often can just get enough DOF, when you need to shoot wide open in low light, like in churches, whereas shooting wide open with FF can be a complete fail because of not enough DOF.

When you need more DoF you stop the lens down, and if it is dark bump the ISO accordingly. What do you do when it is the other way around, when you do no need to isolate your subject, carry a bazooka?

Each sensor format have special characteristics regarding DOF, none of them is per se an advantage or disadvantage.

Advantage is when you can do both sides, disadvantage is when you can only do one. Its about DoF since you mention it, although I was not talking about DoF specifically in my previous post.

This shallow DOF equivalence debate is mostly hoax.

Its conspiracy don't you know, with lots of unknowns :).

FF still has an advantage in the cleanness of images.

Aha, any ideas why?

It can achieve extremely shallow DOF at its extremes, while small sensors can achieve large DOF at its extremes.

It can be overused, yes.

-- hide signature --

-sergey

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