Continuation: Sensor Size, Present & Possibilities

Started Apr 10, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Erik Magnuson
Forum ProPosts: 12,179Gear list
Re: On DOF
In reply to neil holmes, Apr 11, 2013

neil holmes wrote:

Sorry, the EF 85 1.2L 11 is but MINE that i USE on the Q is a 85 1.2 FD L that cost $800 ..and your still 80mm short or $600 more

My Sigma 70-200 ex + a 2x converter cost me $500.  Still 400mm f/5.6 and yet $300 less. Auto focus too.


But you can't match the 175mm f/2.8 of my photo example as you'd need a 30mm f/0.5. Oops.

Not for me.

We can compare arbitrary used prices or new prices.  Most people would compare new as it's easier to minimize the variables.

.....At 5.6 and iso 6400 and 1/50 on the FF, I can be at 1.4, iso 1600 and 1/100.

Or you could be at ISO 12800 and 1/100.  There is no Pentax Q in the DP comparison tool, but pick the best 1/2.3" sensor and compare the FF ISO 12800 (or 25600) results vs small sensor ISO 1600.  No contest even excluding resizing.

I corrected my error, to get 1/100 with that FF in that example you would be at iso 25600 not 12800

The point holds at ISO 25600.  Did you bother to check the DPR comparison tool?

and it would still not be hand holdable for many at that shutter speed

I don't think you understand the physics of camera shake and lenses.  If the AOV and effective magnification is the same, the effect of shake is the same.

1/50 at 480mm and you wanna be on a tripod or drugs.

Beta blockers might help, but for either combo you have the same issues that an arc of 'a' will cause a blur length of 'b'.

The Canon 85 1.2L on my Q (without stabilzation yet...must get it) is  easier to hand hold than my FF 300 2.8 on an apsc camera WITH stabilization

A 400mm f/5.6 is a lot lighter than a 300mm f/2.8 - you really seem to like to make arbitrary comparisons w/o thinking why they might not apply.

Yes, part of my argument why the whole thing is silly....I am not intersted in EXACTLY the same photo from any particular sensor but getting a photo I am happy with.

Perhaps you are just too easy to please.  Or your preferred style/subject can be done with almost any ILC with similar quality. If so, then going small & light would be an option.

Actually the 85 on the Q does isolate quite well....

Shooting someone from as far away as you'd need with the Q+85 is quite impersonal - too far for effective communication (for that shot, consider the sounds of surf and wind.)  But if I wanted the look you'd get with the Q+85 I have a couple of options (70-200+2x TC or the 100-400L).

Not seeing it.....again varies camera to camera.

Doesn't vary that much for contemporary cameras.  Exactly what two cameras (one FF, one 1/2.3") are you looking at where you can't see the difference?

-- hide signature --


 Erik Magnuson's gear list:Erik Magnuson's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 450D Sigma SD10 Sony Alpha NEX-5 Nikon D3200 +28 more
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