Sensor Size & Versatility

Started Apr 2, 2013 | Discussions thread
EinsteinsGhost
Senior MemberPosts: 8,901Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to Biggs23, Apr 3, 2013

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

Right, and the camera type that's most able to take photo in the widest variety of conditions is a FF system. Hot, cold, wet, dry, bright light, low light, fast action, complete stillness, controlled lighting, natural lighting, indoors, outdoors, etc.

Not really. If that were true, FF owners wouldn't be looking into additional cameras.

By that logic, the owners of MILC cameras wouldn't be looking into additional cameras, either. Your argument works against you as much as it works for you.

Chances are, most are either one-camera buyers or people with DSLRs who also buy MILCs (I'm in the latter category). And having experienced, analyzed pros and cons, and observed developments since NEX-3 was launched in 2010, I can safely bet on being just fine with just NEX-6 as a do-it-all system. It won't be as pocketable as my little Panasonic P&S was (which found no use after I got the NEX-3 and gave it away). It won't match high end DSLRs in many aspects of photography. But, it can deliver a lot of everything, getting darn close to anything and everything practical.

Do they not? For that matter, if I had taken the typical FF DSLR to an NBA game with a fast 300mm, I would have been an utter nuisance to the people sitting behind me (if I were to be able to get away with carrying such system into the arena to begin with).

And of course, to deal with twice as much weight... hand held.

Who cares about extra weight?

I do. I also see others do it. The NBA arena would.

Seriously, what's this obsession with weight? Regardless, as I mentioned to another poster, you're talking about a specific subset of photographic conditions. By that standard I could talk about a few months ago where I was shooting wolves in Yellowstone and needed 1000mm+. (I shot with a 500mm on a D800 and cropped by 50% or more.) In that scenario your system is less versatile, right? But as I said, that's a very specific subset of shooting so making your entire case based on it would be foolhardy.

I would suggest that when you need such focal lengths, you might be better off using crop mode to have a greater optical reach.

Idealism and reality often differ.

Your posts do show that to be correct.

I'm glad you didn't miss it. I say what I believe in.

For that matter, do you think zoom lenses are more versatile than prime lenses?

Overall, yes, although a strong argument can be made for prime lenses being versatile as well. The most versatile solution is to come equipped with both.

For someone claiming a strong grasp of English language, you sure know how to make convoluted statements. So, let us look into this versatile solution where a prime lens is also a zoom lens.

It's not convoluted, it's very straight forward. I never said that a prime lens is also a zoom lens! I said that in general a zoom is more versatile. I also said that a prime lens has many characteristics that make it versatile as well. Two separate ideas. Perhaps your reading comprehension is the root problem of our disagreement?

You provided a glimmer of hope against convoluted argument. You answered my question (in bold) but feel the need to still defend against your own response. If a zoom lens is about versatility, you're basically agreeing with: Versatility being Jack of All Trades, Master of None.

Prime would be ideal, when zoom might be more versatile.

 EinsteinsGhost's gear list:EinsteinsGhost's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-F828 Sony SLT-A55 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM Sony 135mm F2.8 (T4.5) STF +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
jeezNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow