Preachdude Loc: Geneva, OH

Gary Fong has put out an instruction video regarding how to deal with depth of field, which is very well done.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGcB38ZiMQI
A "sub-text" of the video is that sensors have gotten so good that professionals use full-frame, aps/c, and even one-inch sensor cameras in addition to medium format. This seems like a good point to discuss here on UHH. What do you say???

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

The question isn't well stated. Without the context of what types of photography various professionals actually use each of these different formats for, answers are not useful.

Nobody who shoots medium format professionally is likely to interchange with anything smaller than a full frame DSLR, as an obvious example. And anyone using a one-inch camera satisfactorily is very unlikely to consider even an APS-C, much less one that is larger.

It isn't as if all of these formats are now interchangeable. They aren't!

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

Going without the "s" tends to liven the link up -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGcB38ZiMQI

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

I think Gary Fong's point is that the final result - the photograph - is becoming more and more interchangeable every day. Irrespective of the sensor or the 'censor'.

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

Photographers have always used or had the availability of multiple formats. Here is a list of different formats that have been in use at one time or another.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_format

For quite some time "full frame" or 35mm was considered an amateur format. APS sensor size is derived from the failed APS film system.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Except that it is not.

Look into fashion photography. Millions of photographs a year... and probably not one from a 1" sensor, and very few from an APS-C sensor.

They simply are not interchangeable.

jack schade Loc: La Pine Oregon

There is a direct correlation between sensor size and resolution. If the pixel count is the same, the larger sensor will have better resolution with less low light noise.
Jack.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

If the sensor size is the same the pixels on the larger sensor will be physically a larger size, and they will be physically farther apart from center to center.

That means, if they use essentially the same generation of technology, that the smaller sized pixels on the smaller size sensor will have more noise, and therefore less dynamic range.

But there will necessarily be more pixels per millimeter, and therefore the smaller sensor will have higher resolution.

An example would be a Nikon D7100 with an APS-C sensor, that has 128 lp/mm resolution, compared to a Nikon D610 with a full frame sensor and the same number of pixels, yet it only has 84 lp/mm resolution. On an 8x10 print, the D7100 wins. (That assumings exposure is high enough to avoid excessive noise.)

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

You still have not figured this out? That's amazing!

On an 8x10 print, you will still have 4000x5000 pixels with either camera. The D610 wins because it has more dynamic range and less noise.

Have you tried this with a Nikon 1 J5, CMOS, 13.2 x 8.8 mm, 20.8MP (5568 x 3712)? Do the math - much higher pixel density at the sensor.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

The 4000x5000 pixels is true, but the resolution of the original scene recorded by those pixels can be different. By a significant amount too!

Both a D610 and a D7100 at ISO 200 have more than 10 fstops of useful dynamic range, which is greater than a JPEG image can encode, greater than your monitor can display, and greater than a print shows.

In fact most images that as I've said previously are exposed with enough light will be the same. But when there is a difference, the advantage for resolution goes with the D7100. That will happen any time the process is "focal length challenged". If the longest focal length lens available is being used, and it is not as long as one would like, thus producing an image that will be cropped to get the right framing... the D7100 will have higher resolution than a D610.

For some that is a rare situation and the two cameras produce the same resolution. But wildlife photography and sometimes macro are cases where the D7100's higher resolution can be very useful.

If you want to see the fine detail objects, the D7100 can record more detail than a D610.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

What is the "significant amount" and how do you measure it? Can you demonstrate it with actual images?

The resolution of the original scene will be 24 MP in either case so there is no way for you to measure or demonstrate it.


There is a very slightly higher dynamic range for the D610 throughout the ISO range but that only means that you might get away with a slightly higher ISO and less noise. That has nothing to do with the dynamic range that ends up in the JPEG.


So the advantage only results if you crop the image from the D610 but not the D7100/D7200. But this will not happen if you are not "focal length challenged". All you are saying is that you need a longer focal length with full frame than with a crop sensor - that's common knowledge.

You could also mount a 1.5x tele-converter on the D610 and not crop at all. Since the D610 already has more than a one stop advantage when it comes to noise, you would be back at par.


The D610 and D7100/D7200 have the same final resolution and resolve the same fine details.

The resolution at the sensor means nothing. Did you do the math on the Nikon 1 J5?
The J5 has 1.65x as much resolution at the sensor as the D7100/D7200 and 2.53x as much as the D610. Do you think the J5 is even better than the others? Not by a long shot!

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

This type of response is the reason I'm not going to continue this discussion. That it can easily be measured, and what those measurement are, was previously demonstrated in this very thread.

The visual effects, and gross amounts of other details, have previously been provided in other threads. None of it has had effect on your understanding previously, and I hold no hope of any change.

Hence until you understand that the D7100 has approximately 128 lp/mm resolution compared to the D610 having 84 lp/mm, we will not get anywhere. The same is true of dynamic range. Show that you can learn about those topics, and we can then have a discussion.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

The only thing you have demonstrated is that you don't know what you are talking about.

The real reason you are slinking off with your tail between your legs because you realize I know more than you do.