Hershel Loc: New York City

StevenG Loc: Long Island, NY

Interesting

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

Thanks! It is a well written and current summary.

Hershel Loc: New York City

Glad you found it useful.

Hershel Loc: New York City

Most welcome. Feel free to subscribe to Explora as it's chock full of useful information.

ken_stern Loc: Yorba Linda, Ca

Interesting factual information
However ----
I'm still left with my admittedly layman's science 101 "assumptions" regarding why just by themselves larger formats should always be a superior approach ----
Larger formats simply because they are larger collect more light - More light equals the gathering of more Photons - More photons = more information -- If you then add in the "all things being equal" statement
Shouldn't -- Bigger formats just because they are bigger be better???

Hershel Loc: New York City

Too deep for me to offer an informed opinion on as I shoot micro 4/3 (Panasonic G9) don't print and have no PP software yet.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

I do subscribe. Trouble is that it keeps fueling the burning fire of wanting a steady stream of B&H packages containing photography tools. I think my B&H Wish List takes up about half of your server!

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Bigger IS better.... but not always. As far as it goes, that article is correct. However it doesn't address that to take full advantage of full frame, you'll also need full frame-capable lenses... which are necessarily bigger, heavier and tend to be more expensive.

Folks who shoot mostly wide angle, normal and short tele (portrait, landscape, macro).... not a big deal. But folks who use telephotos a lot might do better to stick with a crop camera, in order to have the "free teleconverter" effect they offer. When I'm shooting a sporting event from the sidelines, I'd rather be mobile and shoot hand holding a $1300, 3 lb., 300mm f/4 lens on an APS-C camera than have to use a $9000, 8 lb., 500mm f/4 on a full frame camera.... not to mention having to set up a $1500 tripod to set the camera and lens on and mostly stay in one place.

Besides, APS-C (and M4/3) cameras have come a long way in recent years and unless you print really big or need to use super high ISOs, you aren't going to see all the "goodness" of full frame anyway.

Each format has it's uses and capabilities (which is why I use both).

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I believe in larger pixels and not necessarily in larger sensors. I am not a scientific guru nor I conduct experiments to determine which sensor is better. I simply take pictures and I analyze them.
A camera like the Nikon D3 only has 12 megapixels and instead it is very capable because of the larger pixels to catch more light and better details than cameras with 24 megapixels.
I cannot complain of the quality of my Olympus mirrorless bodies. It is a sensor smaller than the APS size and instead it is very capable of outstanding images that enlarge without issues. I am very happy with my Olympus bodies and lenses.
Olympus has just announced another sensor for 2019 and I have to assume it is also a micro fourth thirds sensor because it is impossible to change the size of the sensor without changing the size of the camera and lens mount. We will see.
I agree with the gentleman that has stated that if someone is not capable of producing good images with a mirrorless camera he or she will not be able to make good images with a larger sensor.
Merry Christmas to all.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Thx for the article

Hershel Loc: New York City

My pleasure.