I bring it up all the time. I hope you aren't calling me "technically ignorant" because you'd be wrong.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
Reading mode:
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Why FF?
- Thread starter Henry Porter
- Start date
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
BS. Total light per pixel of the same total area is what matter. We discussed that matter several times with you and you still don't get it. 8-(Total light is what matters
I most certainly do get it. You just claimed that a 22MP full-frame sensor is no better than an 8.2MP 1.6 crop sensor. Did you realize that?BS. Total light per pixel of the same total area is what matter. WeTotal light is what matters
discussed that matter several times with you and you still don't
get it. 8-(
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
I most certainly do get it. You just claimed that a 22MPBS. Total light per pixel of the same total area is what matter. WeTotal light is what matters
discussed that matter several times with you and you still don't
get it. 8-(
full-frame sensor is no better than an 8.2MP 1.6 crop sensor. Did
you realize that?
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
citizenfour
Active member
NOT!
I'm not talking about "field of view" or "angle of view". I said
the PERSPECTIVE is different between a 30, 50 and 90mm lens.
Imagine photographing a long tree lined road with the 3 lenses -
keep the vanishing point in the same place, with the shorter lens
the relationship between the trees will be more pronounced - it's
called perspective(objects getting smaller in the distance). With a
longer lens its less pronounced ie. more compressed. That's why we
use slightly longer lenses for portraits; so that features like
noses and chins don't get accentuated too much. The appearance of
depth or lack thereoff is as important a lens characteristic a
vor
Leading Member
If I've spoken BS, explain how or why. If you have nothing to support your claim, it falls flat. I've provided information to support my claim; where's yours? If I'm technically ignorant, prove me wrong via your technical knowledge.
-v
-v
F2.8 is F2.8 anywhere. Except on 1.6x camera it provides 1.6x
amount of DOF. All the rest of this BS is just that - BS.
1. WOW! Now we are talking about 22MP sensor! It is news for me.I most certainly do get it. You just claimed that a 22MPBS. Total light per pixel of the same total area is what matter. WeTotal light is what matters
discussed that matter several times with you and you still don't
get it. 8-(
full-frame sensor is no better than an 8.2MP 1.6 crop sensor. Did
you realize that?
2. If we are, than yes, cropped to 1.6x it is no better.
?????1. WOW! Now we are talking about 22MP sensor! It is news for me.
2. If we are, than yes, cropped to 1.6x it is no better.
Who said anything about cropping it?
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
vor wrote:
If I'm technically ignorant,
If I'm technically ignorant,
Sorry, go take "exposure 101" class in your local community college. Sorry, I have nor time nor desire to teach you...prove me wrong via your technical knowledge.
It's easy for me:
1. Bigger viewfinder
2. Because lenses were designed for 35mm, and because there are more of them available, I have the selection that I want.
I love shooting wide and I've not been happy with the wide selection that's available for cropped bodies. Some of it, I'll admit, is just simply because I've seen others get tremendous results with the 5d. Results I haven't seen with the 20/30d. We'll see--it'll be next year before I upgrade so I'm patient for the moment. ;-)
Jeff
1. Bigger viewfinder
2. Because lenses were designed for 35mm, and because there are more of them available, I have the selection that I want.
I love shooting wide and I've not been happy with the wide selection that's available for cropped bodies. Some of it, I'll admit, is just simply because I've seen others get tremendous results with the 5d. Results I haven't seen with the 20/30d. We'll see--it'll be next year before I upgrade so I'm patient for the moment. ;-)
Jeff
You're the one that needs to learn a new topic. I'll give you that topic.Sorry, go take "exposure 101" class in your local community
college. Sorry, I have nor time nor desire to teach you...
Exposure = = image. ("= =" means "does not equal").
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
Not cropped? OK, then current 1.6x sensors are better than 22mps ones with 24x36 size, would you agree??????1. WOW! Now we are talking about 22MP sensor! It is news for me.
2. If we are, than yes, cropped to 1.6x it is no better.
Who said anything about cropping it?
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
Let me get this straight. Current 1.6x sensors (Not cropped? OK, then current 1.6x sensors are better than 22mps
ones with 24x36 size, would you agree?
No, I would most certainly not agree with that.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
vor
Leading Member
I have taken a photography course. My textbook was "Photography" by London & Upton. Chapter 5 is on exposure basics. Here's the given formula:Sorry, go take "exposure 101" class in your local community
college. Sorry, I have nor time nor desire to teach you...
Exposure = Intensity (aperture) x Time (shutter speed)
Exposure is the same no matter how little or how much of the film (or sensor) is being exposed. However, given the same exposure, more total light reaches a bigger sensor (or film) than a smaller one.
So, again, tell me where I'm wrong. Point me to the chapter in some photography textbook if you don't want to explain.
Victor
UnderWater
Veteran Member
--len
Right.Exposure = Intensity (aperture) x Time (shutter speed)
Right again.given the same exposure,
more total light reaches a bigger sensor (or film) than a smaller
one.
In that post you are right. What's your point? I guess you still don't understand the fact that for resulting S/N ratio it does not matter how much total amount of light has reashed the sensor, what matter is how nuch light reached individual photodiode and its intesity.So, again, tell me where I'm wrong. Sorry, I have nor time nor desire to teach you...
vor
Leading Member
But a bigger sensor, by having more total light, has more total signal overall. You can then use that extra signal to cut noise down, resulting in a cleaner image than that given by the smaller sensor; or, you can keep the noise as it is and get more detail from the bigger sensor than from the smaller one. Either way, in low light, it makes a big difference. Do you agree?In that post you are right. What's your point? I guess you still
don't understand the fact that for resulting S/N ratio it does not
matter how much total amount of light has reashed the sensor, what
matter is how nuch light reached individual photodiode and its
intesity.
Victor
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.