[alamo5000]

There's no money to be made in knowing everything about cameras.

Except if you're a camera salesman

[Digitalis]

“We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.”― Benjamin Franklin

History shows that there is nothing so easy to enslave and nothing so hard to emancipate as ignorance, hence it becomes the double enemy of civilization. By its servility it is the prey of tyranny, and by its credulity it is the foe of enlightenment. ~Lemuel K. Washburn

[RobA_Oz]

Except if you're a camera salesman

We need an irony emoticon…

[sherrvonne]

She's a camera snob, she wants to shoot in rain and ignores cameras and lenses that can handle it, and I would be worried that the second shooter wouldn't necessarily like getting themself or their gear wet and thus not doing a good job. lol, I think hiring someone who didn't mind at least a small amount of discomfort would be important. If I was going to baby my camera, I would not of bought Pentax. That camera rarely gets taken anywhere nice.

[Digitalis]

There's no money to be made in knowing everything about cameras

Except if you're a camera salesman

Funny you mention that, 10 odd years ago when I was studying at university I was looking for part time work. I applied for jobs at some of the best camera stores - thinking that my extensive knowledge of cameras, and how to repair them might prove a useful asset. One of the managers who interviewed me was purely a salesman, he didn't know much about the work of Leibovitz,Eggleston,Stieglitz or Weston. He didn't know much about cameras beyond reciting marketing blurbs and memorizing spec sheets. Needless to say I didn't get the job, probably because of my inability to hide my contempt for those who have no empathy for their customers and are only out to sell stuff that their customers don't really need.

[silver_dragon]

England and America are two countries separated by a common language. By George Bernard Shaw.

Wouldn’t this be even truer for Australia and America?

DAZ

Definately! We Aussies tend to butcher the English language.

[RobA_Oz]

Definately! We Aussies tend to butcher the English language.

The only specifically Australian butchery is the adoption of overseas English (usually from commercial TV) in place of the local variant, which used to enrich the language. Butchery is usually, though, the incorrect or loose use of language.

So, to bring this back to the topic, the unfortunate woman at the centre of this doesn't seem to know there's no such thing as a crop sensor, just as there's no such thing as a full frame sensor.

"Crop" in this sense actually refers to the use of a section of the focal plane smaller than the maximum allowed by the mount. "Full frame" implies that the mount is used to the maximum. It is, of course, common shorthand to use the terms in that way, but it's a good example of how language can prejudice our thinking. "Crop" implies something less than optimal, but in this case, putting an APS-C sensor in a body with a mount designed around its dimensions (eg the Fuji XT-1) means it isn't used in a crop mode, ie it's a full-frame sensor. Butchery, indeed.

[ivanvernon]

Sometimes it seems like we are speaking a separate language, for instance:

Americans call them flip flops, Aussies call them thongs - this can cause confusion as a thong is a very different thing to Americans.

We have various words for this footwear: shower shoes, flip flops, and thongs . . . so we also call them thongs. In many instances we use words to mean two different things so that the context is necessary properly to decipher meaning.

"Crop" in this sense actually refers to the use of a section of the focal plane smaller than the maximum allowed by the mount. "Full frame" implies that the mount is used to the maximum.

Who would use such a definition? The No.1 DSLR maker (Canon) has a mount diameter of about 53mm, so inserting sensors of measly 36x24mm means they are all heavily cropped sensors in 1DX and cheaper models. And they have no FF lenses either (the Tilt ones aside)

The current Q might be full frame though.

The only definition which would make sense is to compare a sensor format to the largest sensor format available in consumer IL-cameras (currently full 645 such as PhaseOne). The latter is "full" anything smaller is "crop".

[RobA_Oz]

Who would use such a definition? The No.1 DSLR maker (Canon) has a mount diameter of about 53mm, so inserting sensors of measly 36x24mm means they are all heavily cropped sensors in 1DX and cheaper models. And they have no FF lenses either (the Tilt ones aside)

The current Q might be full frame though.

The only definition which would make sense is to compare a sensor format to the largest sensor format available in consumer IL-cameras (currently full 645 such as PhaseOne). The latter is "full" anything smaller is "crop".

Obviously, the maximum image circle from a particular mount is going to be something less than the mount throat diameter allows, because the lens housing has to fit in there, too.

My main point was the thinking that comes from referring to "crop" sensors being necessarily sub-par, not the precise definition of "full frame".

[Digitalis]

putting an APS-C sensor in a body with a mount designed around its dimensions (eg the Fuji XT-1) means it isn't used in a crop mode, ie it's a full-frame sensor.

Shifting the goal posts are we? If we follow that logic are 1/2.3" sensor compacts really full frame? APS-C is still APS-C for the love of god... if you call a Frangipani a Rose does its flowers cease to emit their haliotic stench?

[RobA_Oz]

Shifting the goal posts are we? If we follow that logic are 1/2.3" sensor compacts really full frame? APS-C is still APS-C for the love of god... if you call a Frangipani a Rose does its flowers cease to emit their haliotic stench?

Actually just pointing out where the goal posts really are. I'm in favour of calling them APS-C and 35mm, not crop or full frame for the reasons I mentioned. I thought I was at pains to point out how a term like "crop" prejudices thinking about a sensor's capabilities.

[Kunzite]

Is "full frame" anything else than a Canon marketing designation? They wanted to make their cameras appear "superior", compared to Nikon's "crop" cameras and within their own product range, as something to aspire to. Because APS-C is not really whole, thus inadequate; regardless of one's real needs.
They succeeded.

[monochrome]

"Envy is ignorance,
imitation is suicide."
- Ralph Waldo Enerson

[Tanzer]

Elsewhere on PF, members are making the same exact arguments in favor of the upcoming full frame as the pro photographer who is the subject of this thread.