Full Frame and DX (cropped sensor) is not a new thing.
Jun 12, 2021 12:03:11 #
It seems like photographers today think having a camera with a sensor that is smaller than normal is something new. Actually, it dates back to very early in photography, in the old film view camera days. Many photographers with view cameras had different film backs and used the same lenses to get different size photographs. 8X10 camera photographers often had 5X7 and 4X5 film backs, this would give them the ability to shoot a normal or wide angle shot, then shoot a full length and or portrait with the same camera, onto different film backs and only have to travel with 1 camera. Cropped camera is not a new thing, in 35mm film days it was know as 'half-frame' cameras.
Jun 12, 2021 12:06:48 #
Very thoughtful, and knowledgeable. I wonder how many people on UHH Have ever seen an 8 x 10 camera And have any idea what you’re talking about?
Jun 12, 2021 12:31:32 #
Nicholas J DeSciose wrote:
Very thoughtful, and knowledgeable. I wonder how many people on UHH Have ever seen an 8 x 10 camera And have any idea what you’re talking about?
I had an 8 x 10 Deardorff camera. When I was being frugal, I used my 4 x 5 inch back.
Jun 12, 2021 12:39:30 #
I have a few 5x7 family negatives that have been pass down over the years.
Jun 12, 2021 12:45:57 #
Photec wrote:
It seems like photographers today think having a c... (show quote)
Many camera mfrs made and sold half frame cameras even Nikon and Canon. I still have a Mercury 2. Looking for a Nikon FM half frame
Jun 12, 2021 12:51:01 #
Jun 12, 2021 13:07:37 #
But there were no confusion as those photographers never used the term cropped nor they called the 8x10 full frame. So what is new is the term "Cropped" which is the source of all problems.
Jun 12, 2021 13:26:02 #
John Maher
Loc: Northern Virginia
I think I remember an "Olympus Penn FT" (name?) half-frame 35mm camera that was very popular in the 60s or 70s. It got 72 photos on a 36 exposure roll of film.
Jun 12, 2021 13:27:51 #
BebuLamar wrote:
But there were no confusion as those photographers never used the term cropped nor they called the 8x10 full frame. So what is new is the term "Cropped" which is the source of all problems.
Amen. Even that word “cropped” wouldn’t be nearly as troublesome if it weren’t for its evil fraternal twin “crop factor”.
In third grade students are forced to do more than add and subtract and develop phobia of numbers. A few years later the word “factor” is foisted upon them leading to toadall mental lockup. So we now have quite normal adults asking getting rather dumbassed ideas about how the numbers in the crop factor apply to various other imaging parameters. It’s a lot like the “super moon” or “1:1 macro” nonsense.
“ The only dumb question is the one you refrain from asking “ ?!?!?!?!?!?
That is sooooo clearly not true :-(
Jun 12, 2021 13:28:09 #
Jun 12, 2021 13:41:32 #
Pete D wrote:
2nd camera I purchased was a Olympus pen FV 48 pictures from a roll of 24 35mm film ..
Why so timid ? I always rolled my own and got about 80 :-)
Thaz just how I am. I rolled my own for medium format too. IIRC I got 60 to 70 frames per back.
Jun 12, 2021 14:16:08 #
I remember when full frame meant a photo that was not cropped when printing.
Jun 12, 2021 17:18:08 #
User ID wrote:
Amen. Even that word “cropped” wouldn’t be nearly ... (show quote)
Yeah you're right! There is nothing new in using lenses designed for different formats but it's the term "Cropped" and yes "Crop Factor" which implies something mathematics is the cause of serious confusion.
Jun 13, 2021 07:21:35 #
Jun 13, 2021 07:39:48 #
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
Photec wrote:
It seems like photographers today think having a c... (show quote)
I owed a Konica 35 mm camera that could take 1/2 frame 35mm images, so on a roll of 36 exposures I could get 72. Cool.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.