Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

I did not know that. I'm a Nikon user and understand FX and DX, but how do other brands differentiate the two sensor sizes? And what is the best way to discuss photography with users of other brands without confusion? Maybe using "FF" and "crop" is the best way to go even if it isn't technically correct.

BebuLamar

In fact all digital cameras use less than the whole sensor. There are always unused pixels on the sensor.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

You are absolutely correct since the misconception/misrepresentation was not corrected.

It does not mean using FF is correct, especially when read the exchanges made here and elsewhere when folks come and and say my FF is 'whatever'. We all have FF.

So this is my beef. Nothing more, nothing less.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Reaching for straws here, are we not?

TheDman Loc: USA

Coming from a guy who started a thread trying to argue the definition of full frame?

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Should I answer this?

LFingar Loc: Claverack, NY

It isn't that we don't "get it". It's that we don't care if the term "Full Frame" is precise or not because we understand what is being referenced. There are any number of terms in daily use that are just as imprecise, or more so. Most, but obviously not all of us, have discovered it is much more enjoyable and rewarding to actually use our cameras then to worry about how to define them.

BebuLamar

But the number of unused pixels is usually small so I actually agree with Ron about this. There is one camera that I know is the Panasonic Lumix DCM-LX100 that doesn't use the whole sensor. It has a 16MP M4/3 sensor but only uses 12.7MP.

Joe Blow

Sorry dude, but that is just getting asinine. Canada is a province of Iceland.

In days of old, paper, glass, lenses, and even the camera boxes started to be sold instead of being constructed by the photographer. There were few standards though. It was easier to produce many glass plates the same size than multiple sizes. And then George Eastman designed and started selling his camera loaded with cellulose film. After that, other camera makers started selling their cameras with the same size film as Eastman. Then movie cameras came along.

Because movie cameras used Eastman's patented cellulose film, it became standardized at 36mm wide and was named 35mm film. Soon, still cameras were developed that used 35mm film, basically as a way to test for the film. As the quality of the film became better, 35mm became a standard format. Kodak's larger cameras using 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 became the 120, larger 645 became Medium format, and 8x10 and larger became large format. Other formats were tried but none survived as viable.

By the 1960s, 35mm became the camera of choice for photojournalists. Range Finders were slowly replaced by Single Lens Reflex and interchangeable lenses. Most 35mm cameras allowed some user adjustment. Soon 120 cameras became obsolete and medium and large formats became the venue of art and professional photographers.

With the advent of digital, the manufacturers used their 35mm lenses and just altered the bodies to make consumer cameras. The 35mm size remained the standard, or full frame size. Cameras that use smaller sensors but the same 35mm lens produce the same picture. For a "cropped" sensor the photo is approximately 1/3 cropped around the perimeter. Smaller sensors crop even more.

So if you are concerned about the standard size sensor being named "Full Frame", that sucks. There is a lot more in the world that keeps me awake at night than the recent adaptation of a standard.

BTW, that is the super condensed summary.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

I have been using FX to denote the sensors that are 24X36 (within maybe 20%, to allow for cameras that use 9:16 aspect ratio instead of 3:4).
FX doesn't mean "full something", it's just the designation of the sensor, like DX doesn't mean anything (that I'm aware of). It just denotes a smaller sensor.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

I'll see if my wife will spring for some new lenses.

BebuLamar

Using the word "Full Frame" to describe the 24x36mm format sucks! It was once known as 35mm "Double Frame".

BebuLamar

Actually I like the way Nikon use FX and DX to indicate their sensor sizes. Besides their FX sensors are not 24x36 but they actually have 2 sizes. 23.9x36mm and 24x35.9mm.

Leitz Loc: Solms

Sort of reminds me of that old saw about changing what you can, accepting what you can't, and having enough sense to know the difference.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

D4 23.9X36
D5 23.9X35.9
D800 24X35.9

(just the cameras I have)