I finally 'get' equivalence

Started May 22, 2012 | Discussions thread
Melbourne Park Senior Member • Posts: 2,683
Re: so so wrong

tko wrote:

Lets get really simple. You know what determines the performance of a telescope? The front objective diameter. Scopes are advertized as 200" or 20" or 2" or whatever. You ever see a telescope vendor advertizing the CCD sensor size? Pixel pitch? Nope. Because it doesn't matters. Astronomers are smart dudes.

Larger lens gather more light. A properly design sensor uses all that light. No more, no less (unless you put a FF lens on a crop sensor, then you throw away some of the light.)

Yes, it really is that simple.

Yep, that's the light issue for sure. Just like a small magnifying glass will burn a hole in a piece of paper slower, than a big one will.

And m43 users can put FF lenses onto their cameras, and the camera will get that light focused onto the 43 sensor.

But wouldn't that mean that the light on the 43 sensor (which is smaller than the FF sensor) would be brighter per square inch, since the light is capture closer to the lens?

And if that is the case, then if the 43 sensor was as efficient as the FF sensor, wouldn't then the only difference be the depth of field focus issues?

 Melbourne Park's gear list:Melbourne Park's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Sony Alpha a7R II Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
tko
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow