Crop Sensors vs Full Frame :: Crop Or Crap?

KCook wrote: He comes across a whole LOT better in print than on Youtube.  But I guess the Youtube stuff is what is needed these days to drive traffic.

Kelly

Agreed. But I also think that this is passionate response to some peer criticism for using an APS-C sensor for doing professional work. Context, context, context.

Correct, the passion blinds me to the context.

dullguy

It also wasn't meant to be an absolute serious piece. Zack was just clowning around. Man some folks are just wound too tight. I thought the presentation was funny and a knock off of some college professor.

I notice his defenders on here are all crop shooters... 

I'll agree that a modern crop camera is just as sharp (lens depending) as a FF camera, but you don't buy a FF camera because it's sharper.  That's a misnomer.

Also (again) his personal opinion that the bokeh is marginally different and that it doesn't really matter is just nonsense.

Then there's this:

I'm sorry but what sort of nonsense situation is this?

1. freelensing will give the illusion of a greater DOF when done right (he's obviously trying to prove his point here by giving an unrealistic situation)
2. subject distance, focal length and aperture being the same will obviously give similar DOF (afterall a crop camera is just cutting out the middle of the photo so to speak), but that's irrelevant to real life where framing is important too.
3. The Fuji image is a lot softer... what's the point of doing a bokeh test if the subject isn't sharp?  How do we know the apparent DOF  isn't being affected by the image being overall out of focus?

Anyway...

There's times where there won't be any difference (stopped down to f/8 for example there will be little difference).

Anyway, here's a better example of crop vs FF bokeh, if this is "nominal" to you, then go ahead and keep drinking to koolaid:

Additionally, given the same MP amount (and sensor tech) a full frame camera will have about 1 stop more light gathering ability than a crop camera and also the FF camera has a significant advantage in wide angle shooting.  Where every mm makes a large visible difference (in telephoto shooting the difference visually between say 200mm and 300mm isn't that much, but the difference between 15mm and 21mm is quite substantial:


15mm lens on the Sony A7:




21mm lens on the Sony A7:

And here's 200mm vs 300mm



Kind of similar differences, but one is 100mm difference and the other is 6mm difference.  I know where I'd prefer to have the differences more apparent.

Shadowfixer1 wrote: It also wasn't meant to be an absolute serious piece. Zack was just clowning around. Man some folks are just wound too tight. I thought the presentation was funny and a knock off of some college professor.

Exactly, he was clowning around and didn't present any coherent arguments to support his case. 

This guy is supposed to know what he's doing, not resort to "I’m so glad you brought math! Love it! Yummy math! That’s why I’m a photographer. Because I love math so much. That’s why I study the likes of Avedon and Mary Ellen Mark and Dan Winters; it’s because of all their gorgeous math. Every time I see a beautiful photograph I grab a calculator because math turns me on that much. Have you ever studied the math of  Paolo Roversi  (NSFW)? OMG. His math… his math is unreal. Love his math. I hope to do math like him one day. Mmmmm. Math."

He admits he's being a jerk there too, all the while not bringing up any real points. Dropping random names isn't an argument.

neg·li·gi·ble    

You're a good sport, and yes, I think that Zack is having a little fun with his blog this week. I think that the hits on his site have gone through the roof, nothing will stir the pot more than a working pro declaring to a world full of FX DSLR owners that his little mirrorless camera system is a direct replacement for their full frame systems. But it does get me to thinking, maybe Canon and Nikon aren't finding this to be funny at all. In fact, I hope that they ARE challenged by this! Maybe we'll see a sleeker stealthier D400 released, or the Canon equivalent, it sure would be nice.

They had better hurry though, I really didn't need a lot of encouragement to motivate me to explore some larger film formats. Zack almost pushed me over the edge on that idea. 

My friend owns the Fuji X-T1 and it's a nice camera.

Replacement for DSLR... well that depends on who sponsors you.

McBeth Photography wrote: You're a good sport, and yes, I think that Zack is having a little fun with his blog this week. 

I'm not too familiar with his style.  Are you saying it's just making stuff up to get hits?  Sounds very Ken Rockwell of him.

Stealthy Ninja wrote: My friend owns the Fuji X-T1 and it's a nice camera.

Replacement for DSLR... well that depends on who sponsors you.

McBeth Photography wrote: You're a good sport, and yes, I think that Zack is having a little fun with his blog this week. 

I'm not too familiar with his style.  Are you saying it's just making stuff up to get hits?  Sounds very Ken Rockwell of him.

Dude. You missed the whole point.

I've seen this elsewhere so it must be making the rounds! I don't know that I've ever seen his stuff but his name seems familiar. The video I thought was meant in fun. Although it did take him a bit to make his point! And there isn't that much difference in size between 35mm and APS size.

When film came out in APS size it was rather useless! because it only fit I think some P&S's that were made at the time. I don't think it was around all that long, I never had a camera that used it. Which did make me wonder why they brought back that size??! Obviously the cost being less if using a smaller sensor.

I remember the first digital photos and the number of megapixels were so low the pictures were awful! Even in publications particularly with enlargements the photos were all dots. As the technology has continued to improve it's certainly much better. So maybe the sensor size won't be as significant to photo quality. I think it's more a matter of what you want to be able to do if the smaller APS sensor size will be a drawback but it certainly seems possible to do professional quality work.

I don't have a FF camera to compare but with film unless I go as small as 110 that's where negatives that small lose quality. But then, those cameras have dinky plastic lenses so that affects quality more than anything I think. I just find it makes a difference if you want to do enlargements and that's where the larger negatives make a difference; otherwise I think a decent sharp lens makes more of a difference in image quality. (And I've gotten more into trying 120 film and can see where there could be an advantage in using larger formats.)

Shadowfixer1 wrote:

Stealthy Ninja wrote: My friend owns the Fuji X-T1 and it's a nice camera.

Replacement for DSLR... well that depends on who sponsors you.

McBeth Photography wrote: You're a good sport, and yes, I think that Zack is having a little fun with his blog this week. 

I'm not too familiar with his style.  Are you saying it's just making stuff up to get hits?  Sounds very Ken Rockwell of him.

Dude. You missed the whole point.

He had a point? Still trying to work it out.  He was just joking around?  Trying to please his sponsor? 

If he's making a joke, then I just don't get the humour I suppose.  Then again, I think American humour is basically variations of fart jokes and seeing who can act the most stupid.

Stealthy Ninja wrote:

Shadowfixer1 wrote:

Stealthy Ninja wrote: My friend owns the Fuji X-T1 and it's a nice camera.

Replacement for DSLR... well that depends on who sponsors you.

McBeth Photography wrote: You're a good sport, and yes, I think that Zack is having a little fun with his blog this week. 

I'm not too familiar with his style.  Are you saying it's just making stuff up to get hits?  Sounds very Ken Rockwell of him.

Dude. You missed the whole point.

He had a point? Still trying to work it out.  He was just joking around?  Trying to please his sponsor? 

If he's making a joke, then I just don't get the humour I suppose.  Then again, I think American humour is basically variations of fart jokes and seeing who can act the most stupid.

You're funny!  

McBeth Photography wrote:

Stealthy Ninja wrote:

Shadowfixer1 wrote:

Stealthy Ninja wrote: My friend owns the Fuji X-T1 and it's a nice camera.

Replacement for DSLR... well that depends on who sponsors you.

McBeth Photography wrote: You're a good sport, and yes, I think that Zack is having a little fun with his blog this week. 

I'm not too familiar with his style.  Are you saying it's just making stuff up to get hits?  Sounds very Ken Rockwell of him.

Dude. You missed the whole point.

He had a point? Still trying to work it out.  He was just joking around?  Trying to please his sponsor? 

If he's making a joke, then I just don't get the humour I suppose.  Then again, I think American humour is basically variations of fart jokes and seeing who can act the most stupid.

You're funny!  

Does that mean I've mastered American humour? 

That was surprisingly easy. 

I think that there were several points being made here. 

1. Digital technology is getting better all the time.

2. Zack started using Fuji for fun and personal work, this led to a paying gig for him.

3. In Zack's view, his APS-C sensor camera of choice is a professional camera for serious work. A game changer.

4. Zack owns a Phase One medium format camera that can give him very large files so between the Phase One kit and the Fuji kit he feels covered.

5. Zack is not afraid to admit that large format film kinda turns him on and likes to see other shooters working with large format film. 

I probably missed a few other things but I'm out of time.   

Stealthy Ninja wrote:

McBeth Photography wrote:

Stealthy Ninja wrote:

Shadowfixer1 wrote:

Stealthy Ninja wrote: My friend owns the Fuji X-T1 and it's a nice camera.

Replacement for DSLR... well that depends on who sponsors you.

McBeth Photography wrote: You're a good sport, and yes, I think that Zack is having a little fun with his blog this week. 

I'm not too familiar with his style.  Are you saying it's just making stuff up to get hits?  Sounds very Ken Rockwell of him.

Dude. You missed the whole point.

He had a point? Still trying to work it out.  He was just joking around?  Trying to please his sponsor? 

If he's making a joke, then I just don't get the humour I suppose.  Then again, I think American humour is basically variations of fart jokes and seeing who can act the most stupid.

You're funny!  

Does that mean I've mastered American humour? 

That was surprisingly easy. 

You're one of US now! Welcome aboard!

McBeth Photography wrote: I think that there were several points being made here. 

1. Digital technology is getting better all the time.

2. Zack started using Fuji for fun and personal work, this led to a paying gig for him.

3. In Zack's view, his APS-C sensor camera of choice is a professional camera for serious work. A game changer.

4. Zack owns a Phase One medium format camera that can give him very large files so between the Phase One kit and the Fuji kit he feels covered.

5. Zack is not afraid to admit that large format film kinda turns him on and likes to see other shooters working with large format film. 

I probably missed a few other things but I'm out of time.   

I suppose it's cool that Zack is sharing all that with his fans.  But I still fail to see what it has to do with the rest of the universe.

outoftheloop