Hogan's Photokina: DX/APS-C sure looks forelorn.

Started Sep 22, 2012 | Discussions thread
Dennis Forum Pro • Posts: 18,346
Re: Not so simple IMO, likely DX will be here for a long time

mosswings wrote:

Dennis wrote:

But the point is, the large sensor advantage for low light is exploited at the expense of DOF, and I'm not sure how much benefit I'd see based on that concern.

I'm a bit confused by the equivalence argument here. Indeed, between DX and FX (and between u43 and DX) there is a one-stop difference in light-gathering ability and DOF. But if you're worried about the loss in DOF in a larger sensor system, you simply stop down and decrease shutter speed, or increase ISO.

Well, if we're talking about low light situations (Renato mentioned FX for that reason) then typically, I've already set my shutter speed as low as I'm willing to go (to put as much light on the sensor as possible). So that leaves raising the ISO. Which (in theory) negates the low light benefit of the larger sensor.

And that's where I'm curious about the purported low light benefit. Are people willing to shoot in these low light situations at the same f-stops on FF that they do on APS-C (are they ok with shallower DOF ?) As I mentioned, I'm using faster-than-f/2 primes for my low light shooting. If someone else likes doing their low light shooting with, say, a 17-55/2.8 for convenience, then I could definitely see the benefit of going to a 24-70/2.8 because I would have no concerns over too-shallow DOF.

So that's the basic question, asked out of curiosity ... how do people looking to FF for low light plan to shoot in order to exploit that benefit ?

  • Dennis

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Mako2011
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow