From Canon 6D to mirrorless

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
Cato1040 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,937
Re: From Canon 6D to mirrorless

Rado R wrote:

Cato1040 wrote:

Rado R wrote:

ecka84 wrote:

Unfortunately, you and many others (including your suggested youtuber) are terrible at math. Because FF 24-105F4 is equivalent to APS-C 16-70F2.6. Not F4.

So, how big is and how much does the XF 16-55F2.8 weight? Same goes with XF 50-140F2.8, which is simply "destroyed" by the faster, smaller, better and cheaper FF 70-200F4.

Learn equivalence. Don't believe lies.

I said they are equivalent when it comes to landscape! For landscape photos, you care only about how wide is the lens and not speed or shallow depth of field. Most landscape photographers actually stop down to get best lens sharpness!

An exposure on crop at f4 is exactly the same as an exposure on FF at f4. You will get more light on FF, but that doesn't change your exposure as the extra light hits *different* pixels. The center pixels (where the crop sensor would be) are hit at exactly the same intensity on FF.

Try it - same ISO, same SS, same sensor, same aperture. Take one photo at 24mm and one at 16mm and then crop to the 24mm equivalence. Except for dof, perspective and IQ due to the resizing, the exposures will be exactly the same assuming that the lighting conditions did not change. Then, come back and tell me how terrible at math I am again.

Equivalence is tricky and depends on what you're looking for.

Yes, the same SS, same aperture, and same ISO (the biggest variable) and the exposure should be the same; but when you use a smaller sensor or crop into a smaller sensor, as you mentioned before, you lose overall light, which can decrease the signal to noise ratio.

Whether that is to the point where the user cares about it or not is another issue.

Also, if one would significantly need to stop down their aperture to increase the depth of field on a larger vs a smaller sensor could be another factor (though focus stacking can also be an option).

I completely agree.

As landscape photographers shoot on tripods, wide and far, the differences you mentioned are of little significance to them. That's why I said they are pretty much equivalent to landscape photography.

The only differences that i think matter would probably be IQ and distortions. But with the sensors and software nowadays, combined with the crop, these are also not very significant.

Yea, if you are willing to take the time on the field and in post, sensor quality doesn't matter as much with exposure stacking, focus stacking, pixel-shifting...

But if you want to get the shot hand-held in one shot with more motion involved (living subjects in the frame, windy days, rapidly changing light...) then sensor quality can matter a lot.

 Cato1040's gear list:Cato1040's gear list
Olympus Stylus Tough TG-850 iHS Fujifilm X100T Panasonic LX10 Sony a6000 Sony a7 III +18 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow