gwilliams6

I loved math in school, just a big lol that some folks don't like to deal with it. Good discussions here.

Cheers

Bill_de Loc: US

Of all the subjects I took in grammar and high school math was my favorite, and my best. I must have realized it was going to be the most useful in 'real life'.

But, I never liked the TV show Numbers.

---

FreddB Loc: PA - Delaware County

Is that the one where the alleged mathemetician predicted where and when the crime was about to take place? Stupid premise + (or was it x) bad acting = unwatchable television!

Dan Mc Loc: NM

Multiply, divide, add, square...........MY HAIR HURTS!!!!

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

Who, given you can afford it, wouldn't want the largest sensor, or largest negative they can manage. You can do wonders with small sensors, or smaller negatives, but size does matter in this arena - IMHO. Several decades ago in my working days, the MDAC facility I worked in had one of those (overhead on tracks), very large frame film cameras (I bet Mr. Burk Knows the name of it) with lots of custom mods, took up a large amount of a 20' X 30' room. The negatives were very large, I don't remember specifics, but I would say easily 24". with large lens on a huge bellows. There images taken by this camera were astoundingly sharp, and native size was easily much greater than life size. I wish I could remember more about it, but it was along time ago (at least 25 yrs.), and memory of it is fading.

I doubt the sensors on LEO spy satellites are anywhere near as small as the largest we can acquire.

Bill_de Loc: US

Answer:

Anyone who is realistic about what they intend to do with the image once they press the shutter. It's the same argument about shooting raw or jpeg. You can certainly do more with raw, but not everybody needs to nor would benefit from it.

Matt Granger recently asked folks what photography is to them. I was surprised at the number of people who responded as I would, the best part of photography is when I press the shutter not the final image. It's a way to relax or just get your mind off other things. Even if I do nothing with the image later on I not only recorded the image on the sensor, but also in my mind. The one in my mind can be anything I want it to be and I don't need a computer. Sometimes after a night on the town the images in my mind are all a bit foggy --- no filter needed.

Why do people fish in "catch and release" areas? They can only dream about how it would taste.

The point is, for many of us photography is a pastime, not a vocation.

--

---

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

My thoughts are, that this topic has been talked to death for over 20 years now, I can't believe some are still arguing about that.

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

I concur. I used to catch and eat, then went to catch and release as water quality issues came to light, then (and now) I go to the fish store or eatery for consumption. I only "hunt" with my camera now, high power weapons and optics make it way to easy, and I hate cleaning game. Would much rather see them roaming free, catch them with my camera. There are plenty of other folks to do the actual hunting/fishing.

The image in the my mind's eye (optical memory) always reigns supreme, just like live music (or recorded) always sounds perfect in my sonic memory. Not a pro, haven't shot for profit in 3 decades, experimental hobbyist, would be a good description, oh, and a tech geek for sure.

I get just a much pleasure from working on the gear as I do using the gear, love all the photos, love my ever growing camera collection, love to take the non-working and make it better. I still think the largest negative, or sensor you can afford, is great, not necessary, but great. (I shoot APS-C, and smaller, for now).

Having achieved "old guy" status, I do love the hobby, the way I do it is just my way, and like many others, I'm full of opinions (and some would say full of other stuff ) YMMV

gwilliams6

There are new photographers every day, so what may be an old topic to you, might be important to anyone contemplating a new purchase. If it doesn't interest you, then just ignore it, rather than bash the conversation. Cheers

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

For one, ME! Bigger, heavier, more expensive for almost no gain at what I do. I never print larger than 8 X 10. I can get the same results for all but 1 type subject. That is when it is too dark, and I have the 80D, better than most APS-C which can autofocus to f/8.0, -3 EV. If you saw the video, you'd know that.

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

Same, I print very little, and on a big monitor or TV at the right viewing distance, sensor size is perhaps not even noticeable, most of the time. If I could get a bigger sensor for free, woohoo!!!!! But since I have to pay (even used) I'm ok with APS-C.

fstoprookie Loc: Central Valley of California

This is from one of our own UHH members and a section from his new e book. Most of you already know this - But for you that think a 200mm FX lens on a APC camera magically becomes a 300mm lens - JUST STOP THAT - It isn't true and you are not providing any useful information to our group.