All this talk about "equivalence" is silly

Started Jun 10, 2011 | Discussions thread
carlk Forum Pro • Posts: 15,940
Re: All this talk about "equivalence" is silly

Howard wrote:

Anyway, I can go on. But I think this "equivalence" talk is very confusing to beginners and causes more harm (confusion) than good (clarification).

I actually agree with this statement. I’ve seen too many people, beginner or not, using the “equivalence theory” out of context either because they don’t fully understand what it is or they just want to use it to argue their usually wrong perceptions. On the other hand you don’t need to use the theory if you fully understand the effects of sensor format to FOV, DOF and reach (some people describe this as equivalent FL which does make it very confusing). Not to mention the later two are just secondary effects from the FOV difference. As you said to make the simple FOV difference that complicated and confusing may be doing more harm than good.

The weakest part of the “theory” is, in order to make the theory stand, we need to assume the fixed 1.6x noise/ISO difference between FF and aps-c. This is hardly true when you look at dslr from different generations or even dslr of the same generation from different vendors. I know the author understand this even though he sometimes try not to mention it, but most people who quote the theory do not. It becomes another source of confusion and reason for the conflict in the cases you mentioned in your op.

 carlk's gear list:carlk's gear list
Canon EOS 50D Canon EOS 7D Nikon D800E Fujifilm X-E1 Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM +6 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow