|
Re: with low light performance of the 5n, what is the appeal of full-frame?
In reply to ennemkay,
6 months ago
|
ennemkay wrote:
the reason i bring it up is that, when comparing the m43 vs. nex, even though dof and iso differences are only about a stop, the two systems are the same price, so choosing nex for that extra stop still makes sense. but ff systems are WAY more expensive, so that extra stop and a half of dof and iso doesn't seem to have proportionate value.
1 1/3rd stop for APS-C, 5 stops for FF.
DoF is very different too. As is FOV for legacy glass.
Aside from being a lot more expensive, FF gear is also bulky = heavy.
An FF Nex takes the bulk out of the camera, especially the metal frame bodies. Adapters weigh very little.
--
Cheers,
Henry
| Post (hide subjects) | Posted by | When | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | 1 | ||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | 1 | ||
| 6 months ago | 1 | ||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | 1 | ||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | 1 | ||
| 6 months ago | 1 | ||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | 1 | ||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago | |||
| 6 months ago |