Well, I wouldn\'t so \"no difference\" at all. If that were the case, I wouldn\'t bother with shooting MF glass on FF camera or deciding to use a Zeiss vs. an Oly, as glass has different drawing styles. Similarly, sensor\'s do have different DR / color response based on different mfr design and pixel density, etc. ... but sometimes those can be subtle compared to the impact from the other pieces of the puzzle.
But, I think until a person gets command & control over their lighting (stuff before the camera) and finishing (stuff after the camera) ... the camera format isn\'t the most critical factor that is hindering them from achieving their goals. Thus, I don\'t find the platform change to MF (from FF) to be the \"holy grail\" solution that some people think it is.
I\'m not disavowing the significance of the larger pixels and larger real estate that comes with an MF sensor and the relaxed design of MF glass (I shoot it), but there is an element of \"speck vs. log\" that one should be wary of before putting $$$$ into MF as a potential solution to perceived problems with achieving their goals. The MF platform itself may not solve them or produce the intended results without the \"Before Camera\" and \"After Camera\" pieces of the puzzle being firmly in place first.
Well, I wouldn\'t so \"no difference\" at all. If that were the case, I wouldn\'t bother with shooting MF glass on FF camera or deciding to use a Zeiss vs. an Oly, as glass has different drawing styles. Similarly, sensor\'s do have different DR / color response based on different mfr design and pixel density, etc. ... but sometimes those can be subtle compared to the impact from the other pieces of the puzzle.
But, I think until a person gets command & control over their lighting (stuff before the camera) and finishing (stuff after the camera) ... the camera format isn\'t the most critical factor that is hindering them from achieving their goals. Thus, I don\'t find the platform change to MF (from FF) to be the \"holy grail\" solution that some people think it is.
I\'m not disavowing the significance of the larger pixels and larger real estate that comes with an MF sensor and the relaxed design of MF glass (I shoot it), but there is an element of \"speck vs. log\" that one should be wary of before putting $$$$ into MF as a potential solution to perceived problems with achieving their goals. The MF platform itself may not solve them or produce the intended results without the Before Camera and After Camera pieces of the puzzle being firmly in place first.
Aug 20, 2013 at 10:00 PM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #11755592 « Digital Medium Format / 35mm equiv difference »
