[Rondec]

Setting the cat amongst the pigeons!

What's the big deal with full frame...
when "back in the day"
we all shot full frame and
printed 8 x 10?

When "back in the day"
zoom lenses were mostly crap...
we now have some superb super-wide and out zooms
we crop in camera when shooting!

The APS-C format has matured to become a great standard!
Everything about it is accessible...full frame will be bloody expensive!

Anybody?

Michael

With digital, every time you increase sensor size, you get a bump in performance (assuming the technology remains the same), So medium format outperforms 35mm outperforms APS-C with regard to high iso performance and dynamic range and so on down the line. There is a clear argument to be made that all of the cameras out there now are "good enough." If you own a K5 or a K30, you can probably shoot to iso 3200 without too much concern about noise and that may be adequate for your purposes, but clearly moving up to a larger sensor size will give a bump over those cameras.

The cost factor is a big reason why folks have chosen to go with full frame versus medium format. I think the Pentax 645D is about the cheapest medium format option out there now and it can be had for 4000 dollars, but unless you own lenses for it, you are talking several more thousand dollars to fill out your lens line up (and that is an older sensor that probably won't out perform current full frame sensors). On the other hand, there are full frame options now in the 1500 dollar range and the lens costs are much more reasonable.

APS-C is a great standard, but the biggest thing that has changed over time is that the cost of full frame has come down and folks with legacy lenses that cover 35mm sensor size start getting excited when it drops into their price range.

[MJKoski]

I do not like 3:2 because many scenes here are "taller" more than "wide". Trees and buildings are problematic and you get more coverage upwards with 4:3 ratio without having to switch to (U)WA optics all the time. This is one reason why (T)/S lenses are vastly better option for most photography, it is easy to get 4:3 and 5:4 ratio with vertical stitching and at the same time you get unique perspective when stuffing a WA lens right next to target.

Like this:



17mm TS-E, 3 frame vertical stitch with shift.

[Kunzite]

I do not like 3:2 because many scenes here are "taller" more than "wide".

Turn the camera 90 degrees and you'd get a 2:3 ratio

[FireDog]

irony - noun

• the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.
• a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often wryly amusing as a result.
• a literary technique, originally used in Greek tragedy, by which the full significance of a character's words or actions is clear to the audience or reader although unknown to the character.

We could add another meaning like "made up to suit the circumstances", but the Mad Hatter might take exception.

Hmmm.

Definition three fits my statements. Think about it. Which are you - the "audience" or the "character".

[RobA_Oz]

Hmmm.

Definition three fits my statements. Think about it. Which are you - the "audience" or the "character".

That depends on the circumstance. The word "irony" is becoming one of the most-abused words in the English language (possibly only surpassed by the misuse of the word "surreal"), yet we live in times when it could be frequently and correctly applied to a lot of contemporary life. My intent was purely definitional, to assist with interpretation, not to provide commentary.