And neither do I
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I wish that all parties would try to be more civil and resist the urge to sink to the bottom. This forum is what we make of it.......I started seeing this fundamentally mocking behavior.
Yep, it's just popping up all over the place!
and some advice from mom.... "Just because Timmy is an a**hole, that doesn't give you the right to be one". Keep it clean and respectful please....
With Lightroom, you set the DPI of the jpeg image, so its another variable. I sold the D800, at high ISO, those 50MB nef files uncompressed to over 150MB and took a long time to post process. I used a huge amount of NR, and then any resolution advantage was lost. Since I tend to use mostly high iISO like 12800, the camera was not the right choice. My Nikon 24-70 2.8G had a ton of CA. I thought it was defective until I read the fine print in the reviews. I was using it at 24mm to take group photos, but the edges had so much CA that Lightroom could not correct it. There is more to a camera system than a sensor.
If I wanted one I'd get it now.
If a MkII comes out then it will be much more than you can get the MkI for so you have a different set of factors contributing to your purchasing decision.
Would you buy a MkII now for $2,200? Because even if they were available they wouldn't be selling for less than list, and wouldn't be for some time after release. Look after your MkI, keep the box and bag, receipt, warranty and paperwork and even if you want to upgrade in the future you won't lose that much.
Besides, lenses are for taking photos and imagine the images you will miss in the mean time.
If I wasn't in a rush I'd see what the rebates brought, but if you are not in a rush do you need it...............
Normally I'd agree but I wouldn't be shocked if the new 35mm 1.4 isn't sold at that big a premium due to the Sigma.
When shooting similar types of boring, gray products, to my eyes medium format trumps a FF 35mm sensor in the tonality department by a huge margin as well.
Your results may vary
To the original question/
We should think also to the light ray in lens and sensor. bigger sensor, bigger lens, the light rays have more different angle (wide left, wide right).
I think that play a role in the perspective-impression.. or "3d" effect... or "Real" photo/subject.
APSC will be more like this:
Even though the FOV and DOF may be the same, the images will never be "equal". Why is that? For the same reason that a 4X5 image will look "better" than 35 mm--field compression. Let me explain.
Let's take two cameras a 35 mm and 4 x 5. A 50 mm lens on a 35 mm camera and a 210 mm lens on a 4 x 5 camera give the same field of view. However, the images do not look the same because of the apparent difference in distance between the foreground and background. Even through the field of view is the same, the background will appear much closer to the foreground with the longer lens--this is called field compression. These images "look better" and have a more 3D feel. This is why the old master's like Ansel Adams, Ed Weston used large format cameras. Ansel Adams once quipped when asked what kind of camera he used his response was "The heaviest one I can carry".
The same this is going on with an APC sized sensor compared to FF. The equivalent field of view for a 50 mm lens on a full frame sensor is about 35 mm on an APC sensor. The apparent distance between background and foreground for given a field of view is greater in an APC sensor than in a full frame sensor. Hence, the images do not look as good and lack the 3D feel.
Your instructor should know this stuff. Maybe he/she should read Ansel Adam's excellent book "The Camera". In fact, all of us should read the entire Adam's series: "The Camera", "The Negative", and "The Print". There is still much to learn from the old masters even in the digital age.