Sensor Size & Versatility

Started Apr 2, 2013 | Discussions
EinsteinsGhost
Forum ProPosts: 11,834Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to Biggs23, Apr 3, 2013

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Jorginho wrote:

It can't do it all.

It can do pretty much anything a comparable DSLR/DSLT can. However, it will be a tall order to reverse that.

No, it can't, depending on what you mean by 'comparable' anyway. It can't do a LOT of things that a FF dSLR can.

"Comparable" to me entails not ignoring that fact. But if you believe that DSLR lose ground when you compare the comparables, and that a NEX should be compared to cameras with larger sensor and feature set, then, you're welcome to keep repeating that.

No long zooms available.

Non-issue to me. It is extremely rare for me to feel the need for anything past 135mm (200mm equivalent). In some of these cases above, are the few moments I go to 200mm or better.

A non-issue for YOU, but not for a lot of other people. That's just one of the the things it can't do.

I prefer to speak for self more than for others. Is that a bad thing? That being said, I was using a 200mm f/2.8 in most of the shots I posted earlier. You'd need a 300mm lens on FF for that.

Sony lenses for the NEx cannot do what DSLR lenses can in that department. Samsung and m43s have better IQ in general, a lot better and m43s has a much longer focal length. But even these are not where DSLR systems are yet.

Sony NEX can do more than a comparable DSLR can.

Again with this 'comparable' thing. What's your definition of 'comparable'? The dictionary definition of 'comparable' just means 'able to be compared', which means that ALL dSLR's and SLT's are comparable.

I assume then you never use the word "comparable", or have seen use of it? Yes, you can compare anything, and go bonkers completely eliminating perspective, to fit your whim. A medium format camera is a camera and so is a point and shoot. Your limits may be reached with them both being a camera, mine investigate greater details.

To repeat, I can if I were to carry just one camera today, for its versatility, Sony NEX-6 would be my pick. Not any comparable DSLR, not any DSLT. And forget m4/3 and lesser cameras.

But what does what YOU would choose have anything to do with the original question?

Versatility.

 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
EinsteinsGhost
Forum ProPosts: 11,834Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to 69chevy, Apr 3, 2013

69chevy wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

And generally speaking, Jack of all trades and master of none is better representative of versatility.

Not in this case.

The trade is photography, the tradesman is the photographer.

Which tool allows him/her to produce better results in the widest range of conditions?

This tells you which tool is more versatile.

Note that you said better, not the best.

 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
Biggs23
Biggs23 MOD
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,599Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to EinsteinsGhost, Apr 3, 2013

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

I didn't pick his lenses. He picked his own, to advertise what he fits in a "small waist" belt. I picked mine, for focal lengths, I would normally carry which generally is about small, fast primes. If you want to take up the challenge, what kind of weight and size are you looking at with lenses to match the FoV I mentioned with a FF body?

Who cares about weight? I thought we were originally talking about image versatility?

Versatility of anything isn't about considering a select piece of the entire makeup. It is something's ability to adapt easily to several different situations.

Exactly, making my original (from the first thread) argument even stronger.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

Not really. Because your argument was one-dimensional whereas versatility is about being multi-dimensional. And generally speaking, Jack of all trades and master of none is better representative of versatility.

My argument is one dimensional in the sense that I'm only referring to image versatility. That said, it's really the only criteria that matters for a photographer, right?

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Biggs23
Biggs23 MOD
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,599Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to Draek, Apr 3, 2013

Draek wrote:

No, that'd be a medium format camera equipped with a handful of high-quality prime lenses, as results of upsampling are never as versatile as capturing a larger, more detailed image to begin with in terms of producing a final image.

It's a tad impractical for some situations (such as street shooting, or photographing a classical concert), but then so are 35mm SLRs and f2.8 zooms (such as in street shooting, or photographing a classical concert; funny that).

Actually, no. In order to meet the range of 14-200mm at f/2.8 you need to go with FF. Additionally, the high ISO capabilities of today's FF's far surpass the ability of any medium format back. As such, medium format takes a backseat in terms of versatility of image quality in a variety of circumstances, even if it excels in a couple of very specific areas.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Biggs23
Biggs23 MOD
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,599Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to 69chevy, Apr 3, 2013

69chevy wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

And generally speaking, Jack of all trades and master of none is better representative of versatility.

Not in this case.

The trade is photography, the tradesman is the photographer.

Which tool allows him/her to produce better results in the widest range of conditions?

This tells you which tool is more versatile.

Correct.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Biggs23
Biggs23 MOD
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,599Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to EinsteinsGhost, Apr 3, 2013

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Jorginho wrote:

It can't do it all.

It can do pretty much anything a comparable DSLR/DSLT can. However, it will be a tall order to reverse that.

No, it can't, depending on what you mean by 'comparable' anyway. It can't do a LOT of things that a FF dSLR can.

"Comparable" to me entails not ignoring that fact. But if you believe that DSLR lose ground when you compare the comparables, and that a NEX should be compared to cameras with larger sensor and feature set, then, you're welcome to keep repeating that.

I am an excellent reader and have a thorough understanding of the English language but I cannot make heads or tails of that reply.

No long zooms available.

Non-issue to me. It is extremely rare for me to feel the need for anything past 135mm (200mm equivalent). In some of these cases above, are the few moments I go to 200mm or better.

A non-issue for YOU, but not for a lot of other people. That's just one of the the things it can't do.

I prefer to speak for self more than for others. Is that a bad thing? That being said, I was using a 200mm f/2.8 in most of the shots I posted earlier. You'd need a 300mm lens on FF for that.

But the thread was about versatility in general, not versatility for you. See the difference?

Sony lenses for the NEx cannot do what DSLR lenses can in that department. Samsung and m43s have better IQ in general, a lot better and m43s has a much longer focal length. But even these are not where DSLR systems are yet.

Sony NEX can do more than a comparable DSLR can.

Again with this 'comparable' thing. What's your definition of 'comparable'? The dictionary definition of 'comparable' just means 'able to be compared', which means that ALL dSLR's and SLT's are comparable.

I assume then you never use the word "comparable", or have seen use of it? Yes, you can compare anything, and go bonkers completely eliminating perspective, to fit your whim. A medium format camera is a camera and so is a point and shoot. Your limits may be reached with them both being a camera, mine investigate greater details.

Again, this is near incomprehensible. I'm comparing FF dSLR's to NEX and other MILC's. To me they are comparable. Do you disagree?

To repeat, I can if I were to carry just one camera today, for its versatility, Sony NEX-6 would be my pick. Not any comparable DSLR, not any DSLT. And forget m4/3 and lesser cameras.

But what does what YOU would choose have anything to do with the original question?

Versatility.

Right, but you're arguing against versatility so I'm confused. You're arguing for a camera system that's LESS versatile, not more.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
EinsteinsGhost
Forum ProPosts: 11,834Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to Biggs23, Apr 3, 2013

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

I didn't pick his lenses. He picked his own, to advertise what he fits in a "small waist" belt. I picked mine, for focal lengths, I would normally carry which generally is about small, fast primes. If you want to take up the challenge, what kind of weight and size are you looking at with lenses to match the FoV I mentioned with a FF body?

Who cares about weight? I thought we were originally talking about image versatility?

Versatility of anything isn't about considering a select piece of the entire makeup. It is something's ability to adapt easily to several different situations.

Exactly, making my original (from the first thread) argument even stronger.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

Not really. Because your argument was one-dimensional whereas versatility is about being multi-dimensional. And generally speaking, Jack of all trades and master of none is better representative of versatility.

My argument is one dimensional in the sense that I'm only referring to image versatility. That said, it's really the only criteria that matters for a photographer, right?

No. The primary criteria to a photographer is to be able to take photographs, under a variety of conditions, some permitting, some not so much. Maximizing IQ is a goal, but you need to be able to take photographs to achieve that goal.

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

 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
EinsteinsGhost
Forum ProPosts: 11,834Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to Biggs23, Apr 3, 2013

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Jorginho wrote:

It can't do it all.

It can do pretty much anything a comparable DSLR/DSLT can. However, it will be a tall order to reverse that.

No, it can't, depending on what you mean by 'comparable' anyway. It can't do a LOT of things that a FF dSLR can.

"Comparable" to me entails not ignoring that fact. But if you believe that DSLR lose ground when you compare the comparables, and that a NEX should be compared to cameras with larger sensor and feature set, then, you're welcome to keep repeating that.

I am an excellent reader and have a thorough understanding of the English language but I cannot make heads or tails of that reply.

Well, just keep repeating that we should be comparing NEX with APS-C sensors to DSLRs with FF sensor, as they are comparable, and you will be doing your job.

No long zooms available.

Non-issue to me. It is extremely rare for me to feel the need for anything past 135mm (200mm equivalent). In some of these cases above, are the few moments I go to 200mm or better.

A non-issue for YOU, but not for a lot of other people. That's just one of the the things it can't do.

I prefer to speak for self more than for others. Is that a bad thing? That being said, I was using a 200mm f/2.8 in most of the shots I posted earlier. You'd need a 300mm lens on FF for that.

But the thread was about versatility in general, not versatility for you. See the difference?

My point being that I'm not sitting and complaining.

Sony lenses for the NEx cannot do what DSLR lenses can in that department. Samsung and m43s have better IQ in general, a lot better and m43s has a much longer focal length. But even these are not where DSLR systems are yet.

Sony NEX can do more than a comparable DSLR can.

Again with this 'comparable' thing. What's your definition of 'comparable'? The dictionary definition of 'comparable' just means 'able to be compared', which means that ALL dSLR's and SLT's are comparable.

I assume then you never use the word "comparable", or have seen use of it? Yes, you can compare anything, and go bonkers completely eliminating perspective, to fit your whim. A medium format camera is a camera and so is a point and shoot. Your limits may be reached with them both being a camera, mine investigate greater details.

Again, this is near incomprehensible. I'm comparing FF dSLR's to NEX and other MILC's. To me they are comparable. Do you disagree?

Disagree? I LOVE it that you must.

To repeat, I can if I were to carry just one camera today, for its versatility, Sony NEX-6 would be my pick. Not any comparable DSLR, not any DSLT. And forget m4/3 and lesser cameras.

But what does what YOU would choose have anything to do with the original question?

Versatility.

Right, but you're arguing against versatility so I'm confused. You're arguing for a camera system that's LESS versatile, not more.

Yes, you're confused. I'm telling that if I had to live with just one camera, I would pick NEX-6. It can be a small go to system, or I can go shoot sports with it. It is not a "specialty" camera.

For that matter, I asked you this question in another response above: Are zoom lenses more versatile than primes? Explain why you think so.

 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
69chevy
Senior MemberPosts: 1,467
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to EinsteinsGhost, Apr 3, 2013

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

I was using a 200mm f/2.8 in most of the shots I posted earlier. You'd need a 300mm lens on FF for that..

Which would have given a better results.

Higher contrast, sharper images, with more isolation from the busy backgrounds. You know, the reason pro sports shooters carry around these huge primes.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Biggs23
Biggs23 MOD
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,599Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to EinsteinsGhost, Apr 3, 2013

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

I didn't pick his lenses. He picked his own, to advertise what he fits in a "small waist" belt. I picked mine, for focal lengths, I would normally carry which generally is about small, fast primes. If you want to take up the challenge, what kind of weight and size are you looking at with lenses to match the FoV I mentioned with a FF body?

Who cares about weight? I thought we were originally talking about image versatility?

Versatility of anything isn't about considering a select piece of the entire makeup. It is something's ability to adapt easily to several different situations.

Exactly, making my original (from the first thread) argument even stronger.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

Not really. Because your argument was one-dimensional whereas versatility is about being multi-dimensional. And generally speaking, Jack of all trades and master of none is better representative of versatility.

My argument is one dimensional in the sense that I'm only referring to image versatility. That said, it's really the only criteria that matters for a photographer, right?

No. The primary criteria to a photographer is to be able to take photographs, under a variety of conditions, some permitting, some not so much. Maximizing IQ is a goal, but you need to be able to take photographs to achieve that goal.

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.

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.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Draek
Senior MemberPosts: 2,028Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to Biggs23, Apr 3, 2013

Huh? even if a 35mm SLR's output at ISO1600 is almost as good as that at ISO100, if its ISO100 is insufficient for the task at hand then its versatility is nil.

I thought that was what you meant by versatility in creation of the final image, as if it is simply by flexibility in situations in which it can function (in terms of focal range and ISO setting), 35mm vs APS-C vs m43 becomes a matter of whether clean, medium-sized prints of black cats in coal mines are more valuable than candid grab shots on the street and images from events with "no professional cameras allowed" policies in place, rather than a de facto victory for the 35mm format.

 Draek's gear list:Draek's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR Samsung TL500 Canon PowerShot A1200 Sony Alpha DSLR-A390
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
69chevy
Senior MemberPosts: 1,467
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to EinsteinsGhost, Apr 3, 2013

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

69chevy wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

And generally speaking, Jack of all trades and master of none is better representative of versatility.

Not in this case.

The trade is photography, the tradesman is the photographer.

Which tool allows him/her to produce better results in the widest range of conditions?

This tells you which tool is more versatile.

Note that you said better, not the best.

Yes, because better photography is possible, and measurable. Best (or perfect) is near impossible, and is much more subjective.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Biggs23
Biggs23 MOD
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,599Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to EinsteinsGhost, Apr 3, 2013

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Well, just keep repeating that we should be comparing NEX with APS-C sensors to DSLRs with FF sensor, as they are comparable, and you will be doing your job.

My job is using the cameras, not discussing them. I'm typing now as a hobby, not a job.

My point being that I'm not sitting and complaining.

Who is?

Again, this is near incomprehensible. I'm comparing FF dSLR's to NEX and other MILC's. To me they are comparable. Do you disagree?

Disagree? I LOVE it that you must.

What in the world are you talking about?

To repeat, I can if I were to carry just one camera today, for its versatility, Sony NEX-6 would be my pick. Not any comparable DSLR, not any DSLT. And forget m4/3 and lesser cameras.

But what does what YOU would choose have anything to do with the original question?

Versatility.

Right, but you're arguing against versatility so I'm confused. You're arguing for a camera system that's LESS versatile, not more.

Yes, you're confused. I'm telling that if I had to live with just one camera, I would pick NEX-6. It can be a small go to system, or I can go shoot sports with it. It is not a "specialty" camera.

Ok, and I have no problem with that. I saying that if I had to live with just one camera, I would pick the D4. It can shoot pretty much anything, anytime, in virtually any conditions and has the widest range of accessories and lens options available. Thus making it the most versatile tool available to me today. (Not a brand thing, the same could be said for the 1Dx or whatnot.)

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
EinsteinsGhost
Forum ProPosts: 11,834Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to Biggs23, Apr 3, 2013

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

I didn't pick his lenses. He picked his own, to advertise what he fits in a "small waist" belt. I picked mine, for focal lengths, I would normally carry which generally is about small, fast primes. If you want to take up the challenge, what kind of weight and size are you looking at with lenses to match the FoV I mentioned with a FF body?

Who cares about weight? I thought we were originally talking about image versatility?

Versatility of anything isn't about considering a select piece of the entire makeup. It is something's ability to adapt easily to several different situations.

Exactly, making my original (from the first thread) argument even stronger.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

Not really. Because your argument was one-dimensional whereas versatility is about being multi-dimensional. And generally speaking, Jack of all trades and master of none is better representative of versatility.

My argument is one dimensional in the sense that I'm only referring to image versatility. That said, it's really the only criteria that matters for a photographer, right?

No. The primary criteria to a photographer is to be able to take photographs, under a variety of conditions, some permitting, some not so much. Maximizing IQ is a goal, but you need to be able to take photographs to achieve that goal.

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. 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.

Idealism and reality often differ.

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.

 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
Biggs23
Biggs23 MOD
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,599Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to Draek, Apr 3, 2013

Draek wrote:

Huh? even if a 35mm SLR's output at ISO1600 is almost as good as that at ISO100, if its ISO100 is insufficient for the task at hand then its versatility is nil.

But you're referring to a VERY small subset of image creation. I'm referring to image creation as a whole in a wide variety of situations and conditions. Medium format definitely beats FF in the small subset you're referring to but loses in virtually every other situation.

I thought that was what you meant by versatility in creation of the final image, as if it is simply by flexibility in situations in which it can function (in terms of focal range and ISO setting), 35mm vs APS-C vs m43 becomes a matter of whether clean, medium-sized prints of black cats in coal mines are more valuable than candid grab shots on the street and images from events with "no professional cameras allowed" policies in place, rather than a de facto victory for the 35mm format.

Right, but candid grab shots can be created by both and FF will provide better results. The argument concerning places with 'no professional cameras' policies is valid, but it, again, a small subset of all photography. It's been years since I encountered a place where I could bring my gear along with me.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
EinsteinsGhost
Forum ProPosts: 11,834Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to 69chevy, Apr 3, 2013

69chevy wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

69chevy wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

And generally speaking, Jack of all trades and master of none is better representative of versatility.

Not in this case.

The trade is photography, the tradesman is the photographer.

Which tool allows him/her to produce better results in the widest range of conditions?

This tells you which tool is more versatile.

Note that you said better, not the best.

Yes, because better photography is possible, and measurable. Best (or perfect) is near impossible, and is much more subjective.

Which is exactly my point with: Jack of all trades, master of none. For that matter, my other point on whether zoom lenses are about versatility compared to primes. Are they not?

 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
Biggs23
Biggs23 MOD
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,599Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to EinsteinsGhost, Apr 3, 2013

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.

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? 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.

Idealism and reality often differ.

Your posts do show that to be correct.

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?

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
EinsteinsGhost
Forum ProPosts: 11,834Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to Biggs23, Apr 3, 2013

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Well, just keep repeating that we should be comparing NEX with APS-C sensors to DSLRs with FF sensor, as they are comparable, and you will be doing your job.

My job is using the cameras, not discussing them. I'm typing now as a hobby, not a job.

Perhaps it is "English" that is getting in the way. Don't worry about your real job. We're discussing photography in a photography forum.

My point being that I'm not sitting and complaining.

Who is?

Those who sit and complain x and y can't be done with NEX, when someone actually demonstrates it otherwise.

Again, this is near incomprehensible. I'm comparing FF dSLR's to NEX and other MILC's. To me they are comparable. Do you disagree?

Disagree? I LOVE it that you must.

What in the world are you talking about?

Your fascination of avoiding APS-C (DSLR) to APS-C (NEX) comparison, that you can't make a point unless you must compare APS-C (NEX) to FF (DSLR). So, how come a NEX with APS-C sensor is more comparable to a FF DSLR? No need to explain it though, just keep repeating that argument.

To repeat, I can if I were to carry just one camera today, for its versatility, Sony NEX-6 would be my pick. Not any comparable DSLR, not any DSLT. And forget m4/3 and lesser cameras.

But what does what YOU would choose have anything to do with the original question?

Versatility.

Right, but you're arguing against versatility so I'm confused. You're arguing for a camera system that's LESS versatile, not more.

Yes, you're confused. I'm telling that if I had to live with just one camera, I would pick NEX-6. It can be a small go to system, or I can go shoot sports with it. It is not a "specialty" camera.

In English, "you're" in your response (to me) would be directed towards me and "I'm" would be pointing at you. So, when you say "I'm confused" is about you.

Let us see your sports/action shots with small cameras so we can discuss that too.

 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
Draek
Senior MemberPosts: 2,028Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to Biggs23, Apr 3, 2013

Biggs23 wrote:

But you're referring to a VERY small subset of image creation. I'm referring to image creation as a whole in a wide variety of situations and conditions. Medium format definitely beats FF in the small subset you're referring to but loses in virtually every other situation.

Small? you're kidding, right? landscape, portrait and product photography alone cover nearly everything in professional photography and a good part of amateur work as well.

No, the only reason most people don't shoot digital MF is cost, weight and size. Mostly cost. Sounds familiar? it should, as it's the same argument against 35mm SLRs vs smaller format mirrorless.

Well, there's also the high ISO issue you mentioned, but as the ~70 years of 35mm dominance show, ISO400 is good enough for most purposes anyways, and a good APS-C is still quite respectable all the way up to 1600 anyways; it is ISO6400 and above which truly are the tiny subset of current photography.

Right, but candid grab shots can be created by both and FF will provide better results.

You really think a Nikon D800 with a 70-200/2.8 lens will be as unnoticeable as an Olympus E-PL5 with a 45/1.8 by someone you're wishing to photograph?

The argument concerning places with 'no professional cameras' policies is valid, but it, again, a small subset of all photography. It's been years since I encountered a place where I could bring my gear along with me.

It's been years since you attended a classical concert? well, it's been almost a decade since I wanted to shoot a bird with a 400mm lens at dusk; clearly this means it's inconsequential to the world at large and thus can be safely disregarded.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Draek's gear list:Draek's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F70EXR Samsung TL500 Canon PowerShot A1200 Sony Alpha DSLR-A390
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Biggs23
Biggs23 MOD
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,599Gear list
Like?
Re: Sensor Size & Versatility
In reply to EinsteinsGhost, Apr 3, 2013

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Well, just keep repeating that we should be comparing NEX with APS-C sensors to DSLRs with FF sensor, as they are comparable, and you will be doing your job.

My job is using the cameras, not discussing them. I'm typing now as a hobby, not a job.

Perhaps it is "English" that is getting in the way. Don't worry about your real job. We're discussing photography in a photography forum.

My real job is photography, seems relevant.

My point being that I'm not sitting and complaining.

Who is?

Those who sit and complain x and y can't be done with NEX, when someone actually demonstrates it otherwise.

Ah, I see. Fair enough.

Again, this is near incomprehensible. I'm comparing FF dSLR's to NEX and other MILC's. To me they are comparable. Do you disagree?

Disagree? I LOVE it that you must.

What in the world are you talking about?

Your fascination of avoiding APS-C (DSLR) to APS-C (NEX) comparison, that you can't make a point unless you must compare APS-C (NEX) to FF (DSLR). So, how come a NEX with APS-C sensor is more comparable to a FF DSLR? No need to explain it though, just keep repeating that argument.

I'm not avoiding that argument, I'm saying it's foolhardy. We're talking about what's most versatile, not whether an APS-C NEX is more versatile than an APS-C dSLR. That's the argument YOU keep repeating ad nauseum but isn't really relevant to the discussion of overall versatility.

To repeat, I can if I were to carry just one camera today, for its versatility, Sony NEX-6 would be my pick. Not any comparable DSLR, not any DSLT. And forget m4/3 and lesser cameras.

But what does what YOU would choose have anything to do with the original question?

Versatility.

Right, but you're arguing against versatility so I'm confused. You're arguing for a camera system that's LESS versatile, not more.

Yes, you're confused. I'm telling that if I had to live with just one camera, I would pick NEX-6. It can be a small go to system, or I can go shoot sports with it. It is not a "specialty" camera.

In English, "you're" in your response (to me) would be directed towards me and "I'm" would be pointing at you. So, when you say "I'm confused" is about you.

Uh huh, your point? I'm confused in the sense that your argument doesn't make sense, not in sense that I'm confused about the topic at hand.

Let us see your sports/action shots with small cameras so we can discuss that too.

I don't shoot sports, dSLR or otherwise.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads