Originally posted by Alan 2 I have no problem with people debating the issue, but plllleeease stop with the weird colored print. It's very irritating to read to the point where I refuse to look at any postings that use it. So your point is lost
I use the color to seperate my words from quotes. I thought color is easier to delineate the difference.............
At dp review I usually would use dots as in (would you read it in italics and underlined???) EDIT: No italics, they ar more irritating then color
..................................................
"Edit: I should also add that changing sensor size at fixed f-stop to change the diffraction spot size relative to frame height, is really trading off DOF against diffraction effects. If you want a given DOF, the size of the diffraction spot will the the same relative to frame size; the two go together to a first approximation. Of course, it may be that the lens doesn't go fast enough on a small sensor to give the same DOF of a big sensor, but that's another issue. But given that one has chosen the DOF, that selects the f-stop (differently for different sized sensors), and the only remaining issue (apart from those of more noise on smaller sensors) is resolution, and for that, more MP is always better."..........................................
Re: The common misconception is not a misconception after enlargement: Open Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
For those inclined to debate DOF/COC/ and the benefits of sensor size/pixel density I heartily recommend searching dpreview for Emil Martinec, John Sheehy, Gordon Goodman, Illiah Borg, Julia Borg and a host of others equally impressive and way more learned then me.....
I just try to condense it and present it. It is more valid then me just stating "Most do not need full frame, most need more pixels and better parts for the current technology (ie low noise ADC's, better cleaner circuits) and more artistic skill" or "just create with what you have and stop whining"
You people are reinventing the wheel here........