The difference between APS-C/APS-H and 35mm is negligible. A 35mm digital sensor is great if you want to use lenses at a particular focal length. That's about it.
All the discussion about depth of field, noise, etc, is bullshit. No one passes double blind tests when trying to differentiate between a crop and 'FF' sensor.
Go an look into MF digital or LF film and you'll start to see how utterly pointless the APS-C/FF debate is. It's at MF and above that size starts to really matter. But then you have the issue of an expensive huge sensor/piece of film which is the reason 35mm and below exists.
35mm/APS-H/APS-C are just arbitrary sizes of crop sensors that will fit into small cameras and they all do approximately the same thing. Calling 35mm 'full frame' is monumentally stupid. 35mm is a fucking crop sensor.
>>2732533
don´t worry bro,
try different sensors and use the one that works best!
Related
https://youtu.be/PHYidejT3KY
>>2732533
35mm is called 'full-frame' by definition, not a by society's choice. 50 1.8 is a 50mm cheap buy on a full-frame. It's not a 50mm on a crop. For that you need a 35.
Now, stop fucking shit positing on /p/
>>2732533
>tfw OP is Zack Arias rambling about film/sensor sizes again
>negligible
Fucking triggered
I should've punched you in the face back when I ran into you at Photokina in 2012.
>>2732574
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Windows) Image-Specific Properties: Image Created 2015-12-29T16:37:30 Flash No Flash Function Image Width 1277 Image Height 985
>>2732760
>35mm is called 'full-frame' by definition
Namely, which definition?
>>2732772
Pentax
>>2732776
Convention by whoever the fuck made it. Google it fag
W H O C A R E S
you nerds argue about shit that doesn't matter day in and day out and it will literally never make your good photos any worse or your shit photos any better.
>>2732803
b-b-but it's way easier to buy new shit...
35mm Academy Format motion picture film was referred to as 35mm first.
>>2732776
there faggot >>2732916
doesnt matter what size you're given, I bet if they put you in the same location as alex or ansel adams with a large format, you'll probably take a photo of a fucking leaf.
Then VSCO it after scanning it with your DSLR.
now stop spreading faggotry and delete this thread. Fucking hipster cunt.
>>2732533
fool frame have better high iso performance
Can someone help me understand crop factors?
Okay, I understand that if I put a lens that is made for a full frame camera onto an APSC body, that the image will be cropped by 1.6x because I am only using the very middle portion of the image circle produced by the lens.
That makes sense.
What doesn't fucking make sense is why there is a crop factor when I use a lens that is MADE for APSC cameras. If the image circle is made specifically for the smaller APSC sensor, then why is my 35mm lens actually 1.6x the focal length?
This is what doesn't make sense to me. What is optimized if there is still a crop factor I must apply to APSC lenses?
Also, and this is rather minor but still stupid. Why don't manufacturers that create APSC lenses label them as what they are on a cropped body. It's not 35mm, it's 56mm -- why don't you label that as 56mm? People are only ever going to use the APSC lens on an APSC body, why not call it the focal length that it's going to be?
>Or am I just retarded?
>>2733058
The APS-C optimized lens just produces a smaller image circle than the fool frame lens does. Effectively, it's using smaller diameter glass so that it's not wasting material creating an image that's going to be cropped out. The image it does produced is the same as the center of the image on the standard lens. It is NOT 1.6x the focal length when used on APS-C as you might be assuming; a focal length is a focal length regardless of the sensor size
>>2732803
Pretending to know what they are talking about and hoping to impress some other neckbeard is what makes their pitifull lives hopeful.
I'll be the first to admit that I'm not good enough to outperform (read: be held back by) an APS-C camera. But on the one hand, getting a D810 or 5D3 would remove all doubt. If I can't make a Joey L, it's not because his shit is better than mine.
Now that I think of it, by that logic I should also have an arsenal of Profoto strobes. Shit.
Anyway, there's too much noise and not enough signal in this argument. On the one hand Zack Arias is shilling Fuji harder than dick. On the other Dan Winters is shooting 4x5. And the silent masses in between shooting who knows what and not talking about it. Probably because they're shooting.
Anyway, tl;dr too many motives to peddle shit when it comes to reviewing gear that I honestly can't trust anyone, and I'll forever shoot with my camera, unhappy because I think the grass will certainly be demosaiced better on the other side. And then I'll leave her--er sell my camera and by a new one and either repeat the process or start remembering my previous wife during sex.
>>2733058
>Why don't manufacturers that create APSC lenses label them as what they are on a cropped body.
>why not call it the focal length that it's going to be?
Focal length is a physical property (or function) of the specific optical system in your lens. It remains the same regardless of the diameter of the lens and the diameter of the image projected at the specific focal plane (that is where the surface of your film or sensor is). It would be extremely inaccurate to designate a lens with anything else than its actual physical focal length.
The diameter of the projected image (i.e. whether or not it covers a full-frame sensor or only APS-C, or m4/3, or 1", etc.) is a function of the diameter of the optical elements. Of course if we know we won't need the lens used on a sensor with a diagonal larger than X, then there is no point to make the lens larger and projecting an image larger than we can use.
Finally the angle of view in the picture is a function of the diameter of your sensor. If somehow you mounted and focused a large format 50mm on your full-frame, it would still capture the same angle of view as a 50mm dedicated for that dslr.
When you use an APS-C lens on a full-frame (and turn off auto-cropping), the camera still captures the same angle of view, except that some of it is masked/not covered due to the lens not projecting a big enough image.
So a 50mm lens is a 50mm lens is a 50mm lens, no matter what you use it on. You either get used to doing the math in your head, or look in the specs where the manufacturer will tell you Focal Length: 50mm (75mm equivalent on APS-C sensors).
