Originally posted by Lowell Goudge ...there was no "crop factor" or magnification ratio or anything else discussed. it was just FOV vs format. so why are we now magically so thick we can't accept comparing FOV as a function of just one more format?
.
Because, like it or not, pixel density and sensor resolution play a large role in things now, in people's choices, and that's pretty much tied directly to cost.
I want a certain FOV; I can shoot a 450mm f/5.6 lens on FF, or a 300mm f/4 lens on APS-C. They both will give me roughly the same image (using the same pixel density,) but the FF solution will cost probably 3 times as much.
So, I could just use the 300mm lens on the FF body and crop the image to save lots of money, but then I'm down to 5MP. Big enough to print at 11x16? Maybe. Some would say, not. And what if I want to print larger, or sell the image to someone who might, or crop the image further? Would a TC be better? (surprisingly, in many cases, no.)
And if I'm cropping most of my FF telephoto images, would it make sense to pick up a used APS-C body for my telephoto needs, and get all those pixels inside the image circle? By George, it might!
But what if I put that APS-C money towards a higher-resolution FF body? Will 10MP in the image circle be enough after a crop?
(and the discussion continues, with opinions mixing with biases mixing with myths...
)
.