Potential dead horse: how bad is FF's deep DoF disadvantage?

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
bobbarber
Regular MemberPosts: 360Gear list
Like?
Re: no disadvantage
In reply to Erik Magnuson, 4 months ago

You = don't get it.

For any two sensor sizes, the blur will be the same. The sensor blurs as a unit. It's when you try to crop the sensor, and pretend that the crop has the same blur as the entire sensor, that you go wrong.

If you're having trouble seeing this, imagine a FF sensor with a billion billion pixels, essentially unlimited resolution, with which you take a picture of a forest scene, and then crop 1/1,000 of the sensor, expecting pixel-level sharpness of a single leaf. Absent perfect image stabilization, you don't get it. What would have been very minor blur, perhaps indistinguishable on a 16 Mp FF sensor, is now a huge problem. You are thinking of resolution in terms of cartoon drawings in a textbook (academic perhaps? that's how you spend your days? good for you...) but the mechanics of pixel-level resolution are messy in the real world.

In case you're unsure of how difficult it is to stabilize anything, go to your local geologist's laboratory and watch the seismometer for a while. The earth is moving under your feet. That's a heck of a disadvantage to contend with right off the bat, without even adding in wind, tripod instability, etc. The FF crop myth is a myth, period. If you want reach, buy a God-awful expensive FF long lens, or a decent camera in a smaller format.

 bobbarber's gear list:bobbarber's gear list
Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
ZeroNew
(unknown member)
DustNew
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow