Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-10-2019, 12:27 PM - 1 Like   #241
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Boston,MA
Posts: 257
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Your point has nothing to do with the topic, which is about the technical advantages of larger formats over smaller ones. By saying you don't see any technical advantage, it was a pretty safe bet that you are a one small format shooter, or that you judged everything by reducing it to the lowest quality possible, instagram being the great equalizer.
Brettday's post above is an example of reducing things to the point that technical advantages are not as pronounced. carried to the logical extreme, we could reduce the size of every image to 1x1 pixel to show that there were no advantages of one format over another.
How you can say you've shot multiple formats and say you can't see any technical advantage of a larger one over a smaller one gives rise to another set of questions, one of which would be is Helen Keller your real name?

I'm not debating with you about content trumping format, that is a given. A garbage image is a garbage image no matter how big the medium, but this thread isn't about that.
1. My point is “content is more important”, and since you agree that the content is more important and you don’t want to debate that, which is the only point I want to make, then great, we are actually on the same page!

but I do believe this is still related to this thread, but if you firmly believe that what I said is not relevant here, feel free to report my comments to admin.

2. I never said “I don’t see a difference” and I have no idea why you keep saying that, you can go back and read my comments again. But keep saying this makes you happy, then OK.

3. I don’t post a lot of images on the internet, but even on this forum alone, you can easily find my images shot with K3, K1, MX, Hasselblad Xpan, Hasselblad 500cm, digital 645 and Rolleiflex 3.5. But hey, if it make you happy, sure I have never shot with multiple formats.

5.I don’t think I have replied to your comments on this forum before and I still don’t know which part of my comments offended you (or your belief). But let me say that, you are right man, and I was wrong. As you noticed, I am just as deaf and blind as Helen Keller. After reading your comments, I now realized that there are BIG differences between different formats, form now on I will never judge images through instagram, and I definitely don’t know what I was talking about since I never tired different formats.

You can now take it easy Bill, Saskatchewan is beautiful, Jester is one handsome Rottie, you have a good one and good luck to you and your photography. Please forgive my ignorance comments, thank you.

05-10-2019, 03:29 PM - 1 Like   #242
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 11,206
QuoteOriginally posted by blan01 Quote
1. My point is ďcontent is more importantĒ, and since you agree that the content is more important and you donít want to debate that, which is the only point I want to make, then great, we are actually on the same page!

but I do believe this is still related to this thread, but if you firmly believe that what I said is not relevant here, feel free to report my comments to admin.

2. I never said ďI donít see a differenceĒ and I have no idea why you keep saying that, you can go back and read my comments again. But keep saying this makes you happy, then OK.

3. I donít post a lot of images on the internet, but even on this forum alone, you can easily find my images shot with K3, K1, MX, Hasselblad Xpan, Hasselblad 500cm, digital 645 and Rolleiflex 3.5. But hey, if it make you happy, sure I have never shot with multiple formats.

5.I donít think I have replied to your comments on this forum before and I still donít know which part of my comments offended you (or your belief). But let me say that, you are right man, and I was wrong. As you noticed, I am just as deaf and blind as Helen Keller. After reading your comments, I now realized that there are BIG differences between different formats, form now on I will never judge images through instagram, and I definitely donít know what I was talking about since I never tired different formats.

You can now take it easy Bill, Saskatchewan is beautiful, Jester is one handsome Rottie, you have a good one and good luck to you and your photography. Please forgive my ignorance comments, thank you.
Well that was a bit over the top.
1 Day Ago   #243
Lev
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Posts: 349
I've heard so many times that full frame is for pros... well, this is true when someone gets an APSC body, and this is only tool he can rely on, finds some nice subject, makes composition and soon realizes that the final image needs much more surroundings than it can be made by his cropped format, leaving pleasing depth of field intact, there is no other option rather than just click the shutter.

Now professional always knows what he needs for that particular task and gets the job done.

I have seen just countless beautiful images taken with APSC but there are many sitiations where this format is just unable to give you same results as full frame, just like full frame can't compete with medium format.
6 Hours Ago   #244
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,767
QuoteOriginally posted by Lev Quote
I've heard so many times that full frame is for pros... well, this is true when someone gets an APSC body, and this is only tool he can rely on, finds some nice subject, makes composition and soon realizes that the final image needs much more surroundings than it can be made by his cropped format, leaving pleasing depth of field intact, there is no other option rather than just click the shutter.

Now professional always knows what he needs for that particular task and gets the job done.

I have seen just countless beautiful images taken with APSC but there are many sitiations where this format is just unable to give you same results as full frame, just like full frame can't compete with medium format.
Here' a chance to test that observation.
Full frame or APS-c, you be the judge. - PentaxForums.com

QuoteQuote:
I have seen just countless beautiful images taken with APSC but there are many sitiations where this format is just unable to give you same results as full frame, just like full frame can't compete with medium format.
I'd point out the reverse is also true. There are some APS_c images you just couldn't take with an MF camera.

In the test above, it was much easier to get APS_c images. The difference between ƒ/5.6 on APS-c and ƒ/8 on FF to achieve the same depth of field meant it was much harder to get keepers on FF than on APS-c because of motion blur in a light breeze. It's not that one is better than the other, it's that they have different strengths.

Going for an everything in focus image in good light a cell phone gets you great DoF at fast apertures. Large format has to be stopped down so much you'd have to have a long exposure even in good light, and that's just not suitable for most subjects.

As long as you're thinking this one camera is better than this one, because of the size of format, you haven't got it figured out yet. You have to know the limitations of every system. Sometimes I walk out the door with my XG-1 1:1.2, because for what I want to do that day, it's the best for the job, which may well be impossible even with FF or APS-c, forget about MF.

You don't find this knowledge on the blogs or test sites, you find this kind of knowledge actually working with the systems. Which I would suggest would be a good thing to do before you launch into this kind of generalization.

4 Hours Ago   #245
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,139
QuoteOriginally posted by house Quote
Norm, I correctly picked the sensor size from low res images in the above blind test. Its just one data point and I won't promise 100% hit rate but there are qualities that sometimes are visible at smaller sizes.
If 6 blind people guessed 1 should get it right. So it is not enough to convince this blind man you see something and there is a 1/6 chance your luck bolstered your confirmation bias completely, and 4/6 chance you get at 1, you can't get 2.

That said I am not saying you didn't see something.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
24x36mm, advantage, aps-c, camera, charlie, colour, dslr, experience, ff, ff images, finger, flickr, frame, full-frame, fullframe, gear, image, images, lens, lenses, macro, mirrorless, mp, pentax, people, photography, range, sensors, system
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How & Why Sensor Size Affects Image Quality (APS-C vs FF vs compact) Adam Photography Articles 28 01-02-2015 09:38 PM
APS-C & FF cameras combination yusuf General Photography 3 06-05-2014 06:05 AM
Practical FF resolution is 30-40% better than sans-AA APS-C ElJamoquio Pentax Full Frame 257 04-26-2014 07:58 AM
Pentax at P&E2013: FF under development, APS-C compact camera and more Mistral75 Pentax News and Rumors 82 04-30-2013 06:30 AM
Tech Question: Why are FF DSLRs so Large? Sailor Photographic Technique 50 07-20-2011 08:48 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:49 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top