Negligible
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
You are currently reading a thread in /p/ - Photography
I've been shooting with an X-E1 and then X-T10 for 5 or 6 years. I got to wondering whether the full frame thing actually mattered or if Zack Arias wasn't swallowing a shill pill.
Borrowed a D750 and damn. This thing fucking delivers the IQ goods. But the shutter is loud as a fucking earthquake.
Is the IQ boost a sugar pill? Am I seeing what I want to see? Help me out /p/ before I sell my shit and buy some comparable bigger heavier louder shit.
>>2724904
That image irks my OCD. Where is the view angle? Why would you photograph laserlight?
You artschoolers really should go back to school for some basic physics.
>>2724904
porque no los dos? i have an x100s for discrete, portable shooting and a d810 for serious tripod work.
the iq boost is real, but it comes with the serious compromise of portability and overall "fun-ness" of shooting. You could go with a used A7, but the battery life and overall kludgy feel (especially coming from fuji) is an issue.
look at all that wasted light on the crop sensor. global warming.
>>2724904
>tfw X-E1 came out 3 years ago.
no placebo, the D750 is a truly wonderful camera
if you shoot at high ISOs it will deliver.
>>2724934
>a used A7, but the battery life and overall kludgy feel
That cumbersome operation bothered me enough that I accepted fuji's compromises instead of sony's.
A camera I don't like to use, no matter it's technical superiority, is a camera I won't use.
Struggling real hard with the idea of an a7s/ii right now as I want to get into some low light photography but just can't stand sony's whole get up, from feel in hand to menus (I can only just stand the menu on my rx100m3 but that's because i mostly use it p&s).
Not a sugarpill.
But you must question whether your current system/format is limiting you to such an extent that would necessitate a move to a larger format, with all its increases in iq and all its tradeoffs.
For me, it is not really necessary (don't get paid for this hobby), and though I'd like to be able to turn night into day at times it's not such a pressing need that can't be mitigated by taking the long way round with my fuji (tripod + slower shutter + f1.2 etc. ).
That Arias video pissed me off because zack the sack pisses me off.
But he's right in some regard concerning negligibility: what is negligible for one is vitally important for another.
I'm not that discerning and generally content with my current set up as it meets my humble needs, it's just consumerist greed which tries to sway me.
Tl;dr to each their fucking own
Negligible: Detail gain/loss, colors
Not Negligible: Low light abilities, IQ, DOF capability, "True" focal lengths that benefit wide angles, ISO noise.
>>2724904
are you from the future?
lenses have a character. a crop sensor is ALWAYS a compromise. youll always see a flatter image on crop, because you get the center of the lens. lens character like perspective and bokeh characteristics. all these mirrorless memecameras are giving you 4/7 of what the lens is offering optically as a whole. do the right thing, OP.
>>2725017
fucking lolwut
For me, it's as much the fact that the vast majority of professional-grade bodies are FF as anything. You get high framerates, build quality, full controls, and better viewfinders along with that sensor.
The viewfinder part is critical for manual lenses, too, at least in my experience. The extra size makes it so much easier to focus.
Also, as mentioned, DoF. I love my 35 1.4.
>>2725017
so lenses made specifically for apsc don't exist at all?
retard
>>2724904
>I've been shooting with an X-E1 and then X-T10 for 5 or 6 years.
no you havent
>>2725022
True. Although, in some ways I felt like I was living in the past with the D750. The digital HUD in the OVF of a fuji camera for example is so 2016 it hurts. The viewfinder in a DSLR looks like a Video Boy now.
As for build quality it is solid, though feels a bit more plastic. Though I don't doubt its robustness compared to the compact/mirrorless.
HOLY FUCK the shutter is loud. I mean damn. You'll have to time it with the explosions to be quiet.
It was pretty nice though. Putting a 24 f/1.4 on and ... getting real 24 f/1.4. Sure Fuji for example has the 16 f/1.4 but...b-b-b-bokeh.
the iso difference was insane. 6400 on the full frame had the same noise as 1600 on my crop
>>2724918
>That image irks my OCD. Where is the view angle? Why would you photograph laserlight?
>You artschoolers really should go back to school for some basic physics.
The image is plain WRONG.
It's not laser light but parallel beams.
That's how light from a star hits your front element.
They should be focused to one point on the sensor, not spread out.
I had to spend 165 seconds in paint to fix it.
>>2725109
>that "correction"
lmaoooooooo
7/10
i hope no one falls for that.
>>2725118
If it is not at infinity focus then the incoming lightbeams are not parallel.
Back to school with you, dumbass.
>>2725123
>focus impacts the incoming light
wat?
>>2725132
search for "camara obscura". a bitchslap for you for not knowing this.
>>2725134
A pinhole is very different from a lens.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS5.1 Windows Photographer Administrator Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2014:11:05 15:42:35 Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1260 Image Height 1038
>>2725135
hey faggot, theres no need to make people lose time here. if you want to be le epic troll, better go back to /b/. grow up, loser.
>>2724904
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YIvvXxsR5Y
And you can get a smaller, lighter and silent like the A7 series...
>>2725137
Show me camera with sensor on hot shoe i fucking dare you
>>2725153
That's not the hot shoe, that's the focus screen.
>in b4 why is it behind the shutter?
>>2725153
Fucking what?
>>2725183
He means the projected picture looks like it's on the hot shoe rather than on the sensor behind it.
This is the level of autism you encounter on /p/.
>>2724904
Under ISO 1000, if you're shooting comparable lenses, you will not notice the difference in APS-C and full frame. Especially in the final product.
>>2725012
>"True" focal lengths that benefit wide angles
Fucking what? There is no such thing as a "true" focal length. And a medium format shooter would have words with you.
>>2725017
>a crop sensor is ALWAYS a compromise. youll always see a flatter image on crop, because you get the center of the lens
????? What the fuck? A crop sensor is usually no compromise at all, and the rest is just gibberish...
>>2725022
What are the D7200, 7Dmk2, and K3-2? Framerates are slower on full frame.
>>2725109
So you only use a single pixel at the center of your sensor? Seems like a waste.
>>2725135
Structurally, and capability wise, yes. In the concept of light projection, no.
>>2725195
>So you only use a single pixel at the center of your sensor?
To represent a single point of light at the center of the image, yes.
Light coming from a different source will be projected on a different part of the sensor.
>>2725195
"True" (notice the quotes) pertains to the lens design for full frame, which is accurate only on that sensor size. Lenses designed for full frame sensors will cause a different perceived focal length on crop sensors, which is not "true".
Same concept with medium and large formats. Those lenses are designed and marked for use on those systems, and are "true" to that system.
>>2724904
OP 2 things happen with FF that most people are missing here while arguing about the accuracy of shitty diagrams.
1) Wide angle lenses not designed for digital will project light at a greater angle towards the edge, the light also has to travel farther to the frame edge than it does to the centre of the frame. this was not a big deal with film because of the shape of the silver halides, and exposure latitude, but pixels don't like light hitting them on an angle. This accentuates the fall off of the lens and you get really dark corners.
Modern lens design and micro lenses on the sensor really help solve this.
2) Chromatic aberration is intensified at the frame edge, once again mostly with wide angles.
This is also mostly resolved with lens design, Low dispersion glass, fluorite (an optical crystal), and modern coatings
>>2725195
>Structurally, and capability wise, yes. In the concept of light projection, no.
In this case it makes all the difference.
The point is that the entire surface of the lens is used to form each individual pixel in the image.
OP's image implies that only the center of the lens is used to form the center of the image, only the top edge of the lens is used to form the top edge of the image, etc.
>>2725210
Many lenses are designed specifically for APS-C sensors. Pentax, Sony, Nikon, Canon, all provide APS-C only lenses with "true" (by your definition) focal lengths. Fuji's entire X lens library is APS-C only.
Also, why on Earth would it matter? A 35mm lens made for full frame performs exactly like a 35mm lens made for APS-C, and the only differences are technical, and have literally zero effect on the operation of the camera/lens AND the final photo.
>>2725210
>perceived focal length
A what?
>>2725219
35mm on 1.5x crop looks like 50mm. You know exactly what he means, and playing stupid only serves to make us assume you're stupid. It's not the best debate technique there is.
>>2725195
>>2725214
Comparing it to a pinhole does illustrate what's wrong with OP's image.
>>2725231
And yet that's not how a pinhole works in the real world. Only when you shine a laser at it.
ITT artschoolers try to explain basic physics, hilarity at it's finest
Seriously you fags, try and finish elementary school before you post on the internet.
>>2725232
Does the mean of light look like a laser beam to you?
Have you ever seen a laser beam that's the size of a camera's filter thread?
It's no laser beam.
It's parallel beams of light.
It could for example be the light from a single star.
>>2725243
Which of course is what all cameras are always pointed at, and certainly comes into play in a major way when discussing the differences between the "sugar pill" effect of moving from APS-C to full frame. Right? We're going to be that pedantic, and pretend it matters to the thread? We're going to completely throw "Actual usage of 99.9997% of photographers" out the window to make a bullshit diagram seem less ignorant?
Yeah yeah. Why can't we just pick up a 16mm on APS-C and say it was shot with 16mm. Why do we have to care about converting to 24mm? Who cares what its equivalent is on an already arbitrarily sized 35mm sensor. Same with focal length.
>>2725373
"How much does this bread cost?"
"Six"
"six what... dollars? Pounds? Euros?"
"Just six. Why do we have to care about conversions?"
>>2725017
>a crop sensor is ALWAYS a compromise
what the fuck? what the f
>>2725505
what what faggot
>>2725505
>a crop sensor is ALWAYS a compromise
you're right otherwise we would all be shooting 8x10
>>2725231
This whole sensor debate feels like jetfuel steel beam melty meme.
jet fuel can't melt full frames
Relevant. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHYidejT3KY
It's definitely different. Getting the zoom on my crop D7100 to exactly the 33-34mm that would equal 50mm full frame still doesn't look as good as my 35mm film camera.
tfw should've waited and bought a full frame but my camera is still fantastic
>>2726299
>Getting the zoom on my crop D7100 to exactly the 33-34mm that would equal 50mm full frame still doesn't look as good as my 35mm film camera.
It looks literally exactly the same.
>>2726302
b-but
It might be the gearfag brainwashing I received though. Is there really no difference? Maybe the smaller viewfinder just gives an illusion that it's different?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D7100 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/3.9 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 802 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 36 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:12:08 19:02:58 Exposure Time 1/400 sec F-Number f/3.8 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 220 Lens Aperture f/3.8 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Fine Weather Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 24.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2726313
It is no different. In extremely low light, you might get a little more noise. Wide the same speed lenses, you get a little less bokeh on the APS-C, but the image is otherwise identical.
>>2726315
that's very comforting anon, thank you
I need to stop the gearfaggotry asap
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make NIKON CORPORATION Camera Model NIKON D7100 Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.6 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/4.1 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Color Filter Array Pattern 802 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 52 mm Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2015:12:08 19:05:34 Exposure Time 1/640 sec F-Number f/4.2 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 100 Lens Aperture f/4.2 Exposure Bias -1 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Fine Weather Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 35.00 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Gain Control None Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Unknown
>>2726299
>buying the lies that the B&H and Adorama shills post in the gearthreads and on /p/
Anon, pls no. It's pretty much the same, you'll miss out on a little bokeh but if you shoot "crop" lenses like Fuji are offering then you're really not missing out on anything at all really.
>>2724904
All this focal length talk doesn't really matter OP. All you have to consider is two things.
1. Do you like the images the camera produces? If you think it's placebo do a double blind test using similar images.
2. Do you like using the camera? It's nice having a small camera but a big heavy camera provides some sense of satisfaction. Ideally you would have both.
All the crop, iso, dof talk is pretty useless.
you cant get deep tones with a crop sensor. thats a fact.
>>2726435
Is it.
>>2726438
literally.
>>2725920
Id take women from that era into my Obscura room and bust a nut on their hairy puss, ricoh gr is best camera
>>2726435
so you can get deep tones with a little tiny sensor but you can't with another which is fractionally smaller?
>>2726455
/thread
Idk. I find there's some...barely perceptible glow in the images from my 5d2 compared to my X-T1. Though I find the X-T1's are generally sharper in the details. idk. maybe brainwash.
>>2726494
Lens.
>>2726495
You're saying the lens is sharper or the glow is attributed to the lens or both? It's almost like there are too many variables at work here to determine if a full frame offers any benefits to a crop.
>>2726499
Both.
There are not too many variables. Get a 5D and a 7D. Use the same lens on both, and crop the 5D image to match the fov of the 7D image and compare.
Or save yourself the time, because:
It's the same.
>>2726319
SKY IS GREEN
>>2726500
I believe you. Thank you.
>>2725195
Crop fag detected
102,400 ISO
Yes, it's with aggressive noise removal and slider-sodomizing... but if we all post pics at 1000px here does it really matter how sharp the images are
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon EOS 6D Camera Software Digital Photo Professional Firmware Version Firmware Version 1.1.6 Lens Name EF50mm f/1.4 USM Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 350 dpi Vertical Resolution 350 dpi Image Created 2015:12:21 22:00:38 Exposure Time 1/45 sec F-Number f/6.7 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 65535 Lens Aperture f/6.7 Exposure Bias 0 EV Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 1000 Image Height 667 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Exposure Mode Manual Focus Type Auto Metering Mode Center-Weighted Sharpness Unknown Saturation Normal Contrast Normal Shooting Mode Manual Image Size Unknown Focus Mode Manual Drive Mode Single Flash Mode Off Compression Setting Fine Macro Mode Normal White Balance Auto Exposure Compensation 3 Sensor ISO Speed 480 Color Matrix 129
>>2726703
dunno why it shows a diff number in both
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer Mason Image-Specific Properties:
>>2726703
clean up this fucking mess. jesus.
