Originally posted by Pål Jensen This is complete bogus argument.
It absolutely is not.
Quote: 99.99% of all photography is not shot at F:1.4 or wider apertures;
Probably 90% of photography is shot at smaller apertures than f/1.4 (f/1.4 --> f/22 that is) (not 99.99%,) but probably over 50% of photography is shot at apertures
larger than f/5 (f/1.0 --> f/5 that is.) In this range, at the wide to mid-telephoto focal lengths have a distinct advantage for FF over aps-c.
For example, the majority of folks would probably wish that when shooting their f/2.8 zooms wide-open, they could retain the nice f/2.8 DOF and pleasing background blur and subject isolation while somehow gaining the sharpness and reduced CA that zoom shows at f/4.5, say.
FF allows you to do that. You get the f/2.8 DOF at the f/4.5 (sharper) aperture for the same FOV.
If I shoot my 50 1.8 at f/2.8 on FF, it's sharper than my 35 1.8G wide-open on aps-c (of course) - yet has the same FOV/DOF. (Note: I shoot it at f/1.8 --> f/2.8 all the time - nicer subject isolation at typical shooting distances.)
(below, f/1.8 50mm on FF == about 35mm f/1.2 on aps-c. Price a 50 1.8 vs a 35 1.2.
)
And for anyone who wants the same DOF for that FOV,
you simply stop down to get it.
More DOF control. Any photographer would want it. (I would think.)
Quote: just look at any newspaper, magazine or art gallery. Those images that are actually shot at F:1.4, most of them are due to getting fast enough shutterspeed not for shallow DOF.
Not true. My local paper features shots taken at f/2.8 or higher with 20, 24, 35mm lenses or focal lengths all the time in daylight, in order to isolate the subject while retaining a sense of setting. The best shot I've seen in my paper in a while was taken outside at a funeral wake, daylight, subject about 15 feet away - I emailed the photog; 24mm f/1.4 shot wide-open on FF. Beautiful, stunning shot. Un-reproduceable on aps-c from that position.
.