Is my thinking about equivalence right?

Started 2 months ago | Questions thread
tammons Veteran Member • Posts: 6,567
Re: IMO the QE of the sensor is more important than size
2

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.

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

To me the only significant difference equiv wise between MFT and FF is DOF per equiv lens focal length. But if you dont care about 1/4" DOF via FF, then that doesnt matter so much either. It would be nice to have a super clean ISO 6400-12800 and more DR at high ISOs, but for me its not a deal breaker.

That said, as far as just DOF, some of my best DOF shots I get with the 12-100mm F4 used WO which in equiv FF terms is F8. Actually it does such a good job and renders OOF areas so well, I rarely grab my Sigma 30mm F1.4 for those types of shots.

And I will add that Olys (and Panys) pro lenses are a step above anything else I have used.

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