“Full Frame Equivalence” and Why It Doesn’t Matter

Started Feb 4, 2013 | Discussions thread
macjonny1 Regular Member • Posts: 147
Re: He was more-or-less okay, until he went off the rails

ljfinger wrote:

sarlo100 wrote:

However...full frame will never, ever be as portable or inexpensive as m4/3 or compact cameras. And that's where the "equivalence crowd" steps on their own cranks. They think, because *THEY* demand the absolute technical maximum out of their photographic equipment, that anything that doesn't deliver the technical maximum is garbage.

That isn't the case for the vast majority of photographers out there, and it's why I ultimately laugh at the equivalence religion. "Good enough" is good enough for most people.

And explaining aperture/sensor size/focal length differences using standard 35mm notations, while perhaps not technically accurate, gives a good enough set of reference points to the vast majority of people who care about such things.

You (the equivalence crowd - not you, Lee Jay) may be right. In fact, you are right. But very, very few people give a damn.

I am the "equivalence crowd" and what you said above is laughably wrong about us. Just because I find the ability to relate focal lengths and f-stops across formats to be a highly useful concept doesn't make me a full-frame snob. On the other hand, the 4/3 people perceive us all to be full-frame snobs because many of them are so defensive about their chosen format that they think any factual statement like those I made is an attack on them. I have six cameras that get used regularly, and only one of them is a full-frame camera. Two are 1.6-crop cameras and three are 1/2.3" sensor cameras. If everything I say about equivalence is an attack on 4/3, then what does that say about my 1/2.3" sensor cameras?

Don't be defensive about the format size you chose and don't perceive equivalence as an attack. It's not. It's just physics.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

I think what's funny is that often I hear folks that are so pro-m43 they refuse to accept that there is a meaningful difference in the types of images that you can produce with different sensor formats.  There's a reason people pay huge sums of money to get that 300mm f/2.8 prime over the 300mm f/4 version with a Canon or Nikon.  When that's brought up to a m43 fan they say "very, very few people give a damn."  Funny.....people have been giving a damn for decades.  Again, use the tools that get you where you want to be.  You aren't going to carry that 300mm f/2.8 on a mountain hike and that's where the size advantage comes in.  It's all about admission of the differences rather than downplaying each other's preferences.

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