Is my thinking about equivalence right?

Started 3 months ago | Questions thread
RSTP14 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,038
Re: Is my thinking about equivalence right?

bobn2 wrote:

rogerstpierre wrote:

Never said that IQ would be similar. I am only saying that there is no correlation between the physical size of the sensor and the size of the rendered image. That is all.

Well, before you were saying that there is no such thing as 'magnification' or 'enlargement' in a digital image. Isn't it very clear that if a lens projects an image which is 17.3 by 13mm and you view it at 173 by 130mm, there is a relationship between those two sizes, like one is ten times the other. Now you decide to view it at 346 x 260mm. The relationship is now that one is 20 times the other. So, let's agree that relationship could be called 'enbigification', however the enbigification happens.

Totally agree on the relationship betwen projected size of the image on the sensor and representational size of the data captured hence a different ratio for a M43  image than a FF one of same resolution.  It's a relationship to the physical size of the image circle though not a cause and effect as it is for film where a smaller negative must be enlarged more as per your original statement. As such, the ratio of projected image to representation will be the same if the larger sensor has a lower resolution equal to that of the ratio between sensor sizes.

-- hide signature --

Roger

 RSTP14's gear list:RSTP14's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M10 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 Olympus 12-45mm F4 Pro +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Yxa
Yxa
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow