I think the notion of FF = heavier lens may not be true

Started 10 months ago | Discussions thread
Bmoon
Regular MemberPosts: 200Gear list
Like?
Re: I think the notion of FF = heavier lens may not be true
In reply to Great Bustard, 10 months ago

Great Bustard wrote:

Bmoon wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

Bmoon wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

The fact of the matter is that 200mm f/2.8 on APS-C most nearly compares to 300mm f/4 on FF in terms of AOV, DOF, and total amount of light projected on the sensor for a given shutter speed.

And with this cuts to the point why would someone the cropped 200mm f2.8 to a FF 300mm 2.8

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here -- are you saying it's why someone chooses a 300 / 2.8 on FF over a 200 / 2.8 on crop? To maximize the advantage of the larger format? Sure. No real point in using a larger format just to get photos equivalent to what a smaller format could do. That said, there are advantages of a 300 / 4 on FF over a 200 / 2.8 on crop.

Half my post was lost ? I guess I should have reviewed before hitting post

Ah!

Why would some compare the cropped 200 f2.8 to a FF 300mm 2.8 and complain that the FF lens was heaver when performance and application of the 2 lenses are vastly different, it would be better to compare it to a 300 F4

Yes. Well, I mean, we could compare the 200 / 2.8 on crop to a 300 / 2.8 on FF and discuss why the 300 / 2.8 on FF was a better choice for some, but to compare the 200 / 2.8 on crop against a 300 / 2.8 on FF and then say you don't care about the more shallow DOF, the more light being projected on the sensor, and only size and weight matter, well, that's either very uneducated or very disingenuous.

I personal would put up with the added weight of the 300 2.8 having the ability to stop the lens down one stop while still capturing the same image is a benefit to how I like to shoo,t most 300 2.8 I have shot with are amazing around F4

I think a better example for those promoting smaller formats would be a 200 / 2.8 on mFT vs a 400 / 5.6 on FF. The mFT option would have the same DOF and project the same amount of light on the sensor, but would be smaller and lighter (probably cost the same, though, if not more).

As FF moves up the ladder with a larger user base I am hoping that we see the releases and updates of the 400 5.6 and the slower longer glass and then I would only worry about using another format.

 Bmoon's gear list:Bmoon's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Pentax K10D Nikon D3X Nikon D300S Pentax K-5 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow