Originally posted by normhead You're sounding a little desperate dude. Maybe you should let this go. your point is pretty much insignificant. Your 99% of photographers, you made that up.
Just because you apparently don't understand my point doesn't make it insignificant. I'd say it's patently obvious to most people following this discussion. You're right that I just made up the numbers (obviously), but if you don't think more way people care about the inability to get an extra f-stop at the wide open end than the inability to get an extra f-stop at the stopped down end, then you don't clearly don't have nearly as much experience with photography as you make it sound. My statement here is should *not* be particularly controversial at all. When it comes to DOF control - and DOF control *only*, not looking at any any other factors - APS-C beats FF for the vast majority of use cases that photographers who care enough to invest in either system would care about, for the quite simple reasons I've been patiently explaining.
Quote: in the same way you embellish the importance of FF over APS-C.
Not at all. I am simply trying to correct the errors when others have attempted to make the advantage seem smaller - or bigger - than it actually is. Perhaps you haven't noticed, but I've actually been correcting perceived errors on *both* sides of the debate. I have no illusions about the magnitude of the difference; I'm just interested in getting the facts straight.
Quote: You're framing the argument in a way that gives way to much importance to things of negligible effect.
I don't see how someone with the amount of experience you imply having could possibly claim DOF control is "negligible effect". It is *very* important to some, sort of important to most, and not important at all to a small few. I guess you're in that latter group, but if you truly studied photography in school and have experience with large format systems, you cannot possibly believe there aren't a lot of people who do care about DOF control.
But is it the only thing that matters? No, of course not. It doesn't matter enough to *me* to make it a determining factor, but I recognize that the difference exists, so when someone incorrectly states that FF always has less DOF than APS-C, I think it important to correct that misunderstanding.
Quote: There's this whole sliding scale of what is available. To pick a place ie FF somewhere in the spongy middle of the scale and say "this is the spot" is arbitrary.
Indeed, but note I have never said anything remotely like that - you're arguing a straw man here. In the ways that FF is better than APS-C, 645 is better still - clearly. However, the ways in which FF is *not* better than APS-C (size, weight, price) also become more significant. At best, I'd say historical accident is such that 135 format *does* happen to represent a sweet spot, not in terms of best IQ or anything, but in price/performance, for a certain type of photographer. But I'd also say APS-C hits tht sweet spot for more photographers. And the P&S hits a sweet spot for more still. There's room for all these types of photographers.
But just because APS-C hits a sweet spot for a given photographer doesn't mean that FF *doesn't* provide more DOF control for the vast majority of use cases. It's OK with me to prefer APS-C - I am among those who do. It's not OK with me to spread misinformation about the nature of the tradeoffs, though.
A point that hasn't really been made (except in passing, as an object of ridicule) is that if maximizing DOF is your primary concern - so important that it trumps diffraction and other elements of IQ - then you might as well skip right past APS-C and just use a P&S. Others have said things to that effect but meant them to be tongue-in-cheek, because for *most* purposes, that is not in fact the right answer. But if your primary consideration is maximizing DOF and you're willing to sacrifice all else to get there - and this is what the arguments in favor of APS-C over FF have basically amounted to - then indeed, a smaller sensor still is better. I am dead serious about that.
Quote: The advantages and disadvantages of both systems have been explored and 99% of photographers are not lining up to get FF cameras. You seem to think it's because they don't know what you know.
Not at all. Again, you completely misunderstand me. I use APS-C, and you couldn't *pay* me to trade it in for FF. I totally get why most people prefer APS-C - I'm one of those people. But I also like to make sure people are getting their facts straight about what the tradeoffs actually are.