D600 vs d7100

Started Apr 26, 2013 | Discussions thread
ultimitsu
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,442
Like?
Re: Why so defensive?
In reply to MikeInIndy, May 3, 2013

MikeInIndy wrote:

Grevture wrote:

MikeInIndy wrote:

And that's giving you the benefit of your argument that we must compare a stop faster lenses.

Here I think is the crux of the matter: We want to compare prices of lenses giving the same real life performance, while you bring up price comparisons of lenses which deliver different performances.

And yes, you really do need one stop faster lenses on DX to be able to deliver the same performance. That is not some oddball idea, it is a very real consequence of having half the sensor area

There's really only one thing you need a stop faster lens for, depth of field control.

This really shows your lack of understanding of the whole thing. It is not just about DOF, it is also about end resulting IQ which is a lot more important.

Getting into light sensitivity would be like saying back in the day we compared lenses differently based on what film was behind them.

That is essentially the issue.

At the end of the day a lens is a lens, it's performance is fixed,

But the sensor behind it get better performance for being larger.

you two keep setting up straw men arguments as to why FX is somehow "cheaper" than DX.

"straw men" argument is exactly what you are doing. you fail to understand that sensor size dicates IQ and it must be taken into consideration when comparing resulting IQ.

In the technical ultimate image quality sense, yes, it is, because DX just plain can't compete at the top end.  But in the "relevant to a thread where some guy asks do I buy a D7100 or a D600" sense, it's just an exercise in semantics.

No it is not. It is all about money for IQ. beyond the initial higher body price, the FF system offers more bang for the buck.

As I said in my other post, if your argument was that persuasive DX lenses would be marked in 35mm equivalent focal lengths and apertures, or people would be clamoring to make them be marked as such because anything else is deceptive.

This argument is nonsensical. it would be inappropriate because Focal length is focal length. Furthermore there is no such a need because people who care will be smart enough to work out the equivalent FL and F-ratio, those who cannot work it out probably do not care anyway. god bless them just the same.

Perhaps you guys should get together and sue Canon and Nikon for false advertising.

There is no false advertising because neither ever claimed APS-C would perform the same as FF when using the same lens. However you could be sued for defamation for calling canon and nikon false advertising, and for misrepresenting APs-C performance with your fallacious claims that they equal to FF.

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