« on: June 16, 2012, 01:33:59 PM »
What gives a lens its "reach" is the pixel density, not the sensor format. A 300mm lens on a 20D will give you almost the same "reach" as on a 5D Mark II/III/1Ds3.
Yep - perhaps you need to tell the sports pros that they have been using the wrong sensors for the last 10 years, never mind the wrong manufacturers cameras.
I think that the professional sports photographers, etc, all use whatever works the best and that the choice of sensor is either irrelevant or of secondary concern. If Canon never had APS-H, I doubt very much that there would be more or less professionals using Canon because of that. Similarly, the 1D series could have had 1.4 or 1.2 or 1.5 crop and they'd still have used it.
So we are in agreement - Canon made the best camera they could and the pro used it. I would guess then that the sensor that Canon chose was the one they knew would deliver what was needed. So by inference the APS-H sensor was the best sensor to sports/action.
... that Canon could manufacture in both quantity and cost effectiveness in order to deliver the 1D series camera at its price point.
If 10 years ago Canon had the machinery it does today then APS-H would never have existed.
IMO therefore would make sense therefore that the APS-H would make perfect sense for a super sports camera to come in above the 7D - tried tested and proven over the last 10 years and with the R&D done to increase the mps well above 36mps.
*yawn* if you keep repeating this to yourself over and over, I imagine that you'll convince yourself that it is true. Too bad that Canon seems to believe that sports photographers would prefer full frame sensors. I wonder why Canon thinks that? Could it be because that's what the sports photographers that Canon talks to and listens to want?
There's a thread elsewhere about some Euro football shooter that is using the 1DX. Does he complain anywhere about no longer having a 1.3x crop? No. All he cares about is the autofocus performance and frame rate. Wonder of wonders.