Nikon FF v APS-C image comparison

Started Apr 11, 2013 | Discussions thread
temama Contributing Member • Posts: 645
Re: Nikon FF v APS-C image comparison

paulkienitz wrote:

Rod McD wrote:

If I were to look at my overall gear preferences I'd have three cameras - a high grade compact, stay APSC for my DSLR, and buy FF only if I could afford and source a high grade small, WR FF MILC with a decent built-in EVF.  That would be a treat for landscape, hiking and travel.  I've got the first two.  If Pentax were to make an FF MILC, I'd probably be an early buyer.  You won't find me toting a large FF DSLR and fast mega zooms.   I suspect FF MILCs are just around the corner, so maybe it'll be possible within a year or two. I don't know if it'll be Pentax - Fuji and Sony are already looking at it.

If I could have exactly what I wanted with cost being no object, I don't think I'd want either APS or FF.  For telephoto and casual work I'd get something like an Oly OM-D, and for landscapes and such, a 645D II.

I guess the lesson in that is that APS and FF are successful because they're good middle compromises.

Half-true. I just don't see how you can categorize OM-D (m43) over APS-C what comes to telephoto. I think APS-C DSLR is near perfect compromise for tele-shootings. Even m43 AF system is not good enough to such a shooting.

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