Is my thinking about equivalence right?

Started 3 months ago | Questions thread
robert1955 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,019
Re: IMO the QE of the sensor is more important than size
3

silentstorm wrote:

Personally I think the sensor size is not important at all. The technology behind the sensor is more important.

Here's a chart from photonstophotos:

My case in point:

From the 1st Oly E1 FT to the current 20MP sensor

From the 1st Canon 1Ds to the current R5

From the Nikon D3 to the current Z7ii

From the Sony Nex7 to the A6600

Everyone can see from the chart that the 20MP mFT sensor is pretty much up there with the best APSc and FF from yester years. With advancing sensor tech and materials, I believe the sensor size in our cameras is no longer relevant.

But is that a fair comparison? after all the MFT sensor will always stay one step behind.

BTW: the Y axis in this graph is normalized for the CoC appropriate for the sensor size, which I think changes the comparison

How many of you here think of equivalency when you bring the camera to your eyes?

A bit of a straw man, as equivalence only claims to be a tool for comparing formats

How many of you here think of equivalency when you bring the handphone camera to a scene?

 robert1955's gear list:robert1955's gear list
Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm 16-55mm F2.8R LM WR Fujifilm XF 70-300 F4-5.6 R LM OIS WR
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