Eh, I do take pictures. Not as many as you do, I know. But also not the style or the shots that you are doing either. I am focusing on portraits/weddings/models - I barely take any landscape or building or structure or colours or else.
Obviously, at this moment I believe that what is possibly that important is a shallow dof while maintaining sharpness on 2 subjects holding each other's gaze. I need to know what the 7 thousand dollar wedding guy does that makes his picture just that different in dof than I do, and makes his work consistently pop more even with subtle photoshopping. I am trying to rule out or consider every possibilities - including blurring in software, or simply knowing the location where the background is 100 feet away from the subjects. I love my pentax, and I dont
have money for an FF....unless the difference is going to be paid by the weddings I do.
If i had the money to simply go and buy the system, i would. As it is, I need to know the logic behind this. I understand that the photographer makes the picture, and not the system.
However, given the picture I wish to take, if a photographer has BOTH system, which camera would they grab?
If gearfaggotry, as you say it, is my sole reason, I am not going to be using pentax at all.
Now, did you mean NO as the answer to both my questions, or did you mean no as please dont ask ? If its the first, I need to have a better explanation than a simple no. If its the latter, then well, I did direct my question to Jsherman - but I can ask him in private if you so wish.
Originally posted by alohadave No. Please stop now. Step away from the computer and take pictures. Please stop with the physics of optics and take some goddamned pictures.
Unless your only interest in photography is gearfaggotry, it doesn't really matter. What can possibly be that important that you need to figure precise calculations to make something look similar to another system?
Just go out and buy a full frame camera and be done with it.