Full Frame vs Crop Sensor (Page 22): There are two types of people in this world: those who will tell you that you won't succeed unless you get a full-frame camera and your grandmother.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

There are two types of people in this world: those who will tell you that you won't succeed unless you get a full-frame camera and your grandmother.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

CHG_CANON wrote:

There are two types of people in this world: those who will tell you that you won't succeed unless you get a full-frame camera and your grandmother.

Are you going to be the one to tell Jay Dickman and Larry Price that they will not succeed unless they change from 4/3rds to full frame?

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

CHG_CANON wrote:

There are two types of people in this world: those who will tell you that you won't succeed unless you get a full-frame camera and your grandmother.

Another country heard from:
https://www.outdoorphotographer.com/photography-gear/cameras/does-camera-sensor-size-matter/

JD750 Loc: SoCal

wdross wrote:

Are you going to be the one to tell Jay Dickman and Larry Price that they will not succeed unless they change from 4/3rds to full frame?

He did say that.

Is it possible it was sarcasm? Saying the opposite of what's true to make someone look or feel foolish.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

JD750 wrote:

He did say that.

Is it possible it was sarcasm? Saying the opposite of what's true to make someone look or feel foolish.

I recognize the need for other formats although I have found there are some members that don't. I would love to be able to afford a view camera and processing 8X10 film. Just the contact prints I have seen in famous art expositions are phenomenal. And I would like to buy a digital back for my Hasselblad. But my main tool right now is my Olympus 4/3rds because I travel and travel light. I suspect this is the main reason that the likes of Jay Dickman and Larry Price have moved to the smaller size, weight, and cost format while retaining the needed quality for their photography. I just spent a chunk of money for a wildlife lens that was just barely affordable for me. If I had to buy the same angle of view and f-stop in Canon or Nikon, I would have had to pay more than 5 times as much, dimensionally it would have been 2 times bigger for both dimensions, and would have weighted more than 2 times greater. If the quality of that lens I bought is good enough for the likes Jay Dickman and Larry Price, it should be good enough for anyone. And it will travel a lot easier than the Canon and Nikon.

I realize than the original comment that I ask the question of was probably more "tongue in check" than "hard fact", so I tried to ask the question in the same vein. Most of us are not going to tell any professional photographer what they should shoot. Those photographers already know why they shoot with that equipment. I just didn't want anyone getting too serious about the statement and was having some fun in the question. I intended no offense to anyone.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

wdross wrote:

I recognize the need for other formats although I ... (show quote)

I have had a M43 kit for years and I recently bought a new M43 body and I LOVE it. M43 is probably the format I use the most. It is my go-to kit for travel, and adventure, for hiking, and with my recent new body purchase, it has become my everyday carry around camera as well.

I would never presume to tell anyone, what they should shoot with. If asked I will tell them what I like and why.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

sb wrote:

A FF sensor captures more light. Gives you more flexibility, especially in low-light situations.

This link is to a post that I submitted after first getting my Canon 6D - the images are shot hand-held with a Canon 100-400 tele with ISO settings of 5,000 to 12,800. I could never have gotten away with this with my previous camera. http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-470932-1.html

I routinely shoot with my Pentax KP, with manual mode and ISO set 100-12800 .... I don’t have any problems either.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

nadelewitz wrote:

You've seen all the answers. Now may I correct your (common) misconception?

Crop sensor camera DOES NOT give you "added length and scope". It DOES NOT lengthen a lens. What it DOES is give you a center portion of the image the lens is transmitting, so you get LESS of the scene. The camera then magnifies the image to fill the viewfinder. A crop body CROPS the image a full-frame body would capture with the same lens.

We have this discussion all the time.

It depends on the “FF” camera. With the exception of the Nikon D850, the pixels of most “FF” bodies are farther apart than those of most “APS-C” cameras, so with a 50mm lens, my “APS-C” camera does put as many pixels on the subject as a “FF” camera would with a longer lens, so the lens acts as though it is longer.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

JD750 wrote:

I have had a M43 kit for years and I recently bought a new M43 body and I LOVE it. M43 is probably the format I use the most. It is my go-to kit for travel, and adventure, for hiking, and with my recent new body purchase, it has become my everyday carry around camera as well.

I would never presume to tell anyone, what they should shoot with. If asked I will tell them what I like and why.

Having seen many of your answers to the rest us, learned from or enjoyed hearing many your answers, I would expect nothing less from you. I may have miss which new body you acquired; the E-M5 mkIII?

cmaxi

Check out Zack Arias on YouTube for great comments on sensor size. The Fujifilm system trashes most of the arguments for full frame. To me, it’s a senseless argument. Only my 2 cents.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

wdross wrote:

Having seen many of your answers to the rest us, learned from or enjoyed hearing many your answers, I would expect nothing less from you. I may have miss which new body you acquired; the E-M5 mkIII?

Thank you! I am always hopeful that my posts are useful.

I didn't say, what it was, but it is an OM-D EM5 MII. When I said new perhaps I should explain more. It is still my "new" MR3 body but I bought it a couple years ago after using my DMC-G1 since about 2008. I really like the M43 format and I love the OM-D. Not sure why I waited so long. Now I am tempted to buy the OM-D EM5 Miii.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

JD750 wrote:

Thank you! I am always hopeful that my posts are useful.

I didn't say, what it was, but it is an OM-D EM5 MII. When I said new perhaps I should explain more. It is still my "new" MR3 body but I bought it a couple years ago after using my DMC-G1 since about 2008. I really like the M43 format and I love the OM-D. Not sure why I waited so long. Now I am tempted to buy the OM-D EM5 Miii.

The E-M5 mkIII is a tempting camera but you may want to wait and see what they do with the E-M1 mkIII (25mp maybe?) later this year. It may be enough "bang for the buck " for you to go "total uglyhedgehog"!