Is Full frame still the most versatile?

Started Mar 31, 2013 | Discussions thread
tko
tko
Forum ProPosts: 10,456
Like?
hyperbole
In reply to jonrobertp, Apr 2, 2013

The sad truth is a FF kit may only weight a little more. There's a lot of hype of weight, like the below exaggeration.

18 cuft fridge with electric cord compared to an ice chest?

An exact comparison is whether a 170 lb male would want to carry 2 lbs (172 lbs total) or 4 lbs (174 lbs total)

That's a 10% weight difference. One that a healthy person shouldn't even notice. But you get a lot more than 10% improvement in performance.

What ???   lol...they most certainly do...have a LOT to do with the tool. Do you carry a floor jack in the trunk of your car ?   Do you take an 18 cu.ft. fridge with you on an afternoon picnic ?

Small is nearly always better...in many items, including most photographic equipment. (except reflectors)    etc....

Small = lower performance by definition unless you're backpacking. Small = slower lens, less flash power, less battery life, fewer controls, slower operation.

What size car do you drive? What size house do you live in? What size fridge do you have?

Clearly, there is not agreement here on this thread as to how the OP defined his term "versatile".

Definition of VERSATILE : having many uses or applications <versatile building material>
I don't see convenience in the definition. Neither is cost. Just the lens selection alone for FF makes it more versatile.
Versatile doesn't mean lowest weight, or most convenient, or more bang for the buck. A knife isn't more versatile just because you can smuggle it into a concert easier.
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