and that's VERY important issues in photography. in most cases
smaller and lighter? that 4 grams of senzor? and that few milimiters? ehm...
less expensive? true
can be done in ff too
--
...theory and execution. People aren't choosing between crop and FF on the basis of what can be done, they are choosing between the formats on the basis of what has been done.
The larger VF is definitely a plus, but crop has WA well covered with the 10-22 / 3.5-4.5.
Shallow DOF is very important to me, but I don't see many taking the kinds of pics I do. Furthermore, I have an office filled with pics from 8x12 to 20x30. How many print larger than 8x12, as a proportion of DSLR owners, that need the higher IQ?
Yeah, well, I guess if all you need to take the photo is the sensor itself, you have a point. However, I tend to think you also need a camera and a lens. I'd be pleased to see FF DSLR systems that are smaller and lighter than FF systems if shallow DOF is not important.
Pray tell, how are the 10-22 / 3.5-4.5, 17-55 / 2.8 IS, and 60 / 2.8 macro "mostly rubbish"? Which of the off-brand cropped lenses are "mostly rubbish"?
Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Doesn't help much, does it?
You left this point unanswered.
so, dof we both agree. iq means also noise. lets drink pure wine - bigger senzor always means less noise
for me, size of 50mm or 20mm is small enought. smaller body than 30d for example is inpractical
for me - yes, rubish, i am using only fixend lenses and for a good reason
problem is in company, not in FF vs crop
--
However, I am not debating my choices or yours. For most people, the advantages of crop far outweigh the advantages of FF. To that end, crop is better than FF, and crop, not FF, is the future.
Again, it's not about you or me, it's about most, and most prefer the zooms. In any case, all the FF primes work on crop, so, with the exception of wide primes, crop has all that covered as well.
But it's still a problem. We're not discussing theory, we're discussing execution. Crop camera owners can go buy a camera with in-camera IS today , FF owners cannot. That gives them IS on all their primes at and below a 300mm FOV that FF owners do not have.
And yet these are the stuff NOT based on formats but camera features. Pop ups are popular for mid to low end models. I can also argue cropped cameras got those scene mode for beginners but those are just camera features not because of sensor size. You are mixing market segmentation with format here. What about the 1D3? A cropped sensor in a pro body. The same thing goes for the Nikon D2's. Until they figured out a new design, the pop up flash makes the body less rugged. That's one of the reason why you don't see it in higher end and pro bodies. Not to mention the power is so low it's not that useful.
You know well enough on the linear distortion and cost issues. If you are shooting wide, FF is the choice; vice versa for the tele end.
Yep. Cropped sounds like crippled. Not good. The only thing it does worse, is that a cropped sensor gets less light. But you might get "better" light with many lenses, that even if designed for FF, might show some vignetting, and not on crop cameras. yes, there is software to correct vignetting, but it is not the same.
Didn't aregue to the contrary. However, as Canon and Nikon are the only two manufacturers with FF, and the only two without in-camera IS and pop-up flash on their FF DSLRs, what does that tell you?
You're missing the point, and that point is that cropped cameras have what most people want at a price they are willing to pay, and FF cameras do not.
Sure, sure. Feel free to distinguish between potential and execution.
Um, the 10-22 shows less distortion than the 16-35:
Is that possible on the internet? : )
Don't forget the size and weight reasons, as well.
And there we have it. The smaller the format, the more popular it is, and to that end, crop is the future.
And the IQ advantage is HUGE.
My FF SLR has a pop-up flash. See my profile. It's also pretty small and light and inexpensive (especially when paired with the 50mm f/1.4). And I have plenty of lenses available for it. Now, I have the TS-E 24mm f/3.5L. Where can I find its equivalent for crop cameras? Will it be smaller and lighter? Will it be less expensive?
I have neither camera IS nor lens IS. Nor do I miss them.
I like to print 12x18. I love the shallow DOF that my 50mm f/1.4 produces wide open on FF, and I use it that way a LOT. So there.
not for me, and for nikon and canon managment eather
--
Oh, what I would give if "popular" were defined as "for me"! : ) By the way, I find it interesting that you think that Canon's FF cameras are more popular than their 1.6x cameras. Even more intriguing is that you would think that Nikon's management, without a single FF camera on the market yet, thinks that FF is more popular than crop.
Huge for me, but not huge for the vast majority.
DSLR vs SLR -- big difference, no? Still, popularity is not subjective. One measures it either in number of units sold, or in profit generated by sales. I'll wager quite heavily that the popularity of cropped DSLRs, per the above definition of "popular", lay waste to the popularity of FF DSLRs.
Many crop DSLRs do.
As do I. In fact, 8x12 kinda sucks. I've found that 12x18 is a really nice size, actually. That said, this pic:I like to print 12x18. I love the shallow DOF that my 50mm f/1.4
produces wide open on FF, and I use it that way a LOT. So there.
