Is Full frame still the most versatile?

Started Mar 31, 2013 | Discussions thread
69chevy
Senior MemberPosts: 1,534
Like?
Re: mFT has eveything FF has except .... Re: Is Full frame still the most versatile?
In reply to Martin.au, Apr 2, 2013

Mjankor wrote:

69chevy wrote:

microFT has pretty much everything Nikon and Canon have except the ability to do focus tracking across the frame effectively.

Don't forget the ability to accurately focus instantly, shoot in incredibly low light with less noise, produce stunning enlargements at 20"x30", achieve much shallower DOF for the same FOV, and shoot wider angles.

Arguing over DOF advantage is expected, but don't forget sports shooters who rely on it. Not for artsy fartsy creativity, but for isolation.

Add this to the better IQ (some may argue) of a FF DSLR, and it becomes clear which camera can do more (versatility).

I'll give you the two benefits gained from a larger sensor - low light with less noise and shallower DoF, but the rest of your post is bollocks.

Really? So you think a sensor needing a 17x enlargement of it's pixels to produce a 20"x 30" print will be on par with pixels needing a 4.5x enlargement? Did you forget the sensor is nearly 4x smaller?

Do you really think a M 4/3 camera can out focus a 5d3 with an f2.8 lens on it?

These are the only two points you "didn't give me".

I would love to see a 20" x 30" print from a M 4/3 of any moving object shot at 300mm. I am sure it would be lovely.

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