Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-07-2012, 06:47 PM   #16
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by mika. Quote
The "look" is a compression in focus/defocus. It is an image in which you can see several distinct elements or areas of focus/defocus.
Is this something that came to you while eating some ergot-infested bread, or are you referencing something you can link to? (Beyond unappealing, unoriginal scanned shots that is.)

01-07-2012, 06:49 PM - 1 Like   #17
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by mika. Quote
JinDesu, jsherman999, RioRico, I'd like you to refrain from participating in this thread. You obviously don't get it, and your sarcasm is not appreciated. Please go away.
Actually, I think I'll stick around to see if the moderators end up banning you from your own thread! (which has gotta be a pentaxforum first.) (getting popcorn)
01-07-2012, 06:58 PM   #18
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,624
I'd be tempted to continue being a troll further, as I am a young person person on the internets, but I guess I will leave with this parting statement:

When you make the statement, "either you get it or you are terrible" on a forum with people who have varying interests, skill, and equipment/techniques, then you should expect far worse than what I have done. I have seen no scientific or truly descriptive explanation from you with regards to what you are talking about that makes Full Frame better than APS-C. There are other reasons for Full Frame being better than APS-C. Medium Format is better than Full Frame. It's a cost difference that keeps each apart (mostly anyways).
01-07-2012, 06:59 PM   #19
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 161
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Is this something that came to you while eating some ergot-infested bread, or are you referencing something you can link to? (Beyond unappealing, unoriginal scanned shots that is.)
You know if said something even close to this to someone not on the internet you'd have your head knocked off with a baseball bat.

01-07-2012, 06:59 PM   #20
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 161
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Actually, I think I'll stick around to see if the moderators end up banning you from your own thread! (which has gotta be a pentaxforum first.) (getting popcorn)
Get a life!
01-07-2012, 07:03 PM   #21
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by mika. Quote
JinDesu, jsherman999, RioRico, I'd like you to refrain from participating in this thread. You obviously don't get it, and your sarcasm is not appreciated. Please go away.
When you spew nonsense, you can expect to be called on it, by people who actually have some knowledge of photography.

QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Actually, I think I'll stick around to see if the moderators end up banning you from your own thread! (which has gotta be a pentaxforum first.) (getting popcorn)
Roger that.
01-07-2012, 07:05 PM   #22
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 161
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
It's a cost difference that keeps each apart (mostly anyways).
I don't buy that marketing propaganda. The cost to produce the bigger sensor should actually be lower than the cost to produce the smaller sensor. The smaller sensor has greater miniaturization than the larger sensor.
01-07-2012, 07:09 PM   #23
Veteran Member
wlachan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,626
This must be the weirdest thread that I have read in a long time. I am not really sure why mika is so upset about.

As to the compression theory, I figured it had to do with the focal length rather than the format itself. As the format gets smaller, shorter focal length will be used to achieve the same FOV. Since the actual focal length is shorter, the picture will look different. I guess this is what you mean by compression which in itself is not a theory I think.

01-07-2012, 07:09 PM   #24
Veteran Member
alohadave's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Quincy, MA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,024
QuoteOriginally posted by mika. Quote
JinDesu, jsherman999, RioRico, I'd like you to refrain from participating in this thread. You obviously don't get it, and your sarcasm is not appreciated. Please go away.

HAHAHAHA!!!

This thread just went to 11.
01-07-2012, 07:14 PM   #25
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 4,989
QuoteOriginally posted by mika. Quote
The "look" is a compression in focus/defocus. It is an image in which you can see several distinct elements or areas of focus/defocus.
I don't know what you mean by the word "compression" here. What is "compressed"? The compression of space is different with different focal lengths (longer = more compressed) -- is that what you're talking about? The fact that you'd tend to use longer lenses with FF?

But we've established than an APS-C photo is just a cropped FF photo, RIGHT? (If some object is 25ft away and I shoot it with on a FF camera at a certain aperture, and then I put that same lens on an APS-C camera and shoot again from the same position with the same aperture, you agree that object will look just the same, right, assuming the object fits into the frame onto both?)

So therefore, in your view, a FF photo that has been cropped to this extent (which of we used to do all the time in the darkroom) can not possibly have the "look", RIGHT? So, in the example below, what's in the red box has the possibility to be "not snapshot" but what's in the blue box can only aspire to be "snapshot", at best? (If you don't like the mountain, substitute anything else.) Because it is cropped? If I took one of your examples above and cropped it, it would instantly lose the look and become snapshot? Is that really what you are saying?

01-07-2012, 07:15 PM   #26
Veteran Member
alohadave's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Quincy, MA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,024
QuoteOriginally posted by mika. Quote
I don't buy that marketing propaganda. The cost to produce the bigger sensor should actually be lower than the cost to produce the smaller sensor. The smaller sensor has greater miniaturization than the larger sensor.

It's actually very simple math. You get fewer chips when the chip size is larger, than when the chip is smaller.

24x36 is larger than 18x24. 1.5 times to be exact. So, you get 50% more APS-C chips on a silicon wafer than you get with FF.
01-07-2012, 07:15 PM   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 4,989
QuoteOriginally posted by mika. Quote
I don't buy that marketing propaganda. The cost to produce the bigger sensor should actually be lower than the cost to produce the smaller sensor. The smaller sensor has greater miniaturization than the larger sensor.
That wouldn't be the larger sensor that I would want. I would want the same level of miniaturization, only a bigger area.
01-07-2012, 07:25 PM   #28
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 128
QuoteOriginally posted by mika. Quote
The cost to produce the bigger sensor should actually be lower than the cost to produce the smaller sensor.
Exactly - just like the cost to produce a 747 is less than the cost to produce a Cessna, and why point-and-shoots cost more to produce than DSLRs!
01-07-2012, 07:27 PM   #29
DAZ
Veteran Member
DAZ's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Everett, WA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 699
At the risk of getting into this maybe what the OP is not articulating (possible do to his not understand it) is the relationship of DOF, viewing angle (lens perspective) and perspective distortion.


DAZ
01-07-2012, 07:38 PM   #30
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 161
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by vonBaloney Quote
But we've established than an APS-C photo is just a cropped FF photo, RIGHT?
Exactly. Because it is cropped you don't get the full range of defocus ranges in any given image. With APS-C, because of the 1.5x decompression, you only get a fraction of the defocus ranges that you would normally get with FF. Is that making sense to you?

Last edited by mika.; 01-07-2012 at 07:50 PM.
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!
aps-c, aps-c vs ff, camera, cameras, crop, dslr, examples, factor, ff, film, images, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How about APS-H ? Livanz Pentax DSLR Discussion 62 09-29-2014 12:54 AM
best 50mm for K-x aps-c boosted03gti Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 12-06-2010 10:54 PM
35mm / APS-C - sophotec Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 20 05-23-2010 01:07 PM
Rebuilding the 35 MM Format FA* line to the DA* APS-C Format Adrian Owerko Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 14 01-20-2010 11:04 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:56 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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