Re: Official: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format Announced!
Guy, sorry, you are wrong. All the literature says you\'re wrong, and more importantly, physics says you\'re wrong. Did you read the link I posted, showing what diffraction actually is? There is no physical way for larger pixels on a larger format with the same resolution as a smaller format to show greater effects of diffraction at a larger f-stop. It\'s simply not physically possible. You say you\'ve seen it, well you\'re either misremembering or not comparing apples to apples, because what you are describing doesn\'t follow the laws of physics.
I have a feeling what you are seeing is simply an effect that a large format with a sharp lens and oodles of resolution shows so much more detail at the optimal apertures that any loss of detail stands out to you more, though if you were to compare it side by side you\'d notice that 35mm suffers more at the same aperture.
You\'ll notice that the airy disk stays exactly the same size regardless of the sensor behind it....as it obviously has to. There\'s no physical way for the lens to behave differently with regards to scattering light based on the size of the medium behind it. Look at something like the 1D X and then switch to a similar resolution APS-C camera like the 7D, and look how many more of the pixels are covered at the same f-stop. Then open the aperture one stop and see that the amount covered is similar to the smaller aperture on the larger sensor....
Also, simply look at the apertures used in large format photography. f/64 is very commonly used in large format photography...and those shots are brilliant, with oodles of detail, and if you shoot with f/64 on a full frame body, you\'ll be left with a pile of mush. Medium format isn\'t some magic zone where the physics of the universe invert themselves.
Re: Official: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format Announced!
Guy, sorry, you are wrong. All the literature says you\'re wrong, and more importantly, physics says you\'re wrong. Did you read the link I posted, showing what diffraction actually is? There is no physical way for larger pixels on a larger format with the same resolution as a smaller format to show greater effects of diffraction at a larger f-stop. It\'s simply not physically possible. You say you\'ve seen it, well you\'re either misremembering or not comparing apples to apples, because what you are describing doesn\'t follow the laws of physics.
I have a feeling what you are seeing is simply an effect that a large format with a sharp lens and oodles of resolution shows so much more detail at the optimal apertures that any loss of detail stands out to you more, though if you were to compare it side by side you\'d notice that 35mm suffers more at the same aperture.
You\'ll notice that the airy disk stays exactly the same size regardless of the sensor behind it....as it obviously has to. There\'s no physical way for the lens to behave differently with regards to scattering light based on the size of the medium behind it. Look at something like the 1D X and then switch to a similar resolution APS-C camera like the 7D, and look how much more of the pixels are covered at the same f-stop. Then open the aperture one stop and see that the amount covered is similar to the smaller aperture on the larger sensor....
Also, simply look at the apertures used in large format photography. f/64 is very commonly used in large format photography...and those shots are brilliant, with oodles of detail, and if you shoot with f/64 on a full frame body, you\'ll be left with a pile of mush. Medium format isn\'t some magic zone where the physics of the universe invert themselves.
Re: Official: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format Announced!
Guy, sorry, you are wrong. All the literature says you\'re wrong, and more importantly, physics says you\'re wrong. Did you read the link I posted, showing what diffraction actually is? There is no physical way for larger pixels on a larger format with the same resolution as a smaller format to show greater effects of diffraction at a larger f-stop. It\'s simply not physically possible. You say you\'ve seen it, well you\'re either misremembering or not comparing apples to apples, because what you are describing doesn\'t follow the laws of physics.
I have a feeling what you are seeing is simply an effect that a large format with a sharp lens and oodles of resolution shows so much more detail at the optimal apertures that any loss of detail stands out to you more, though if you were to compare it side by side you\'d notice that 35mm suffers more at the same aperture.
You\'ll notice that the airy disk stays exactly the same size regardless of the sensor behind it....as it obviously has to. There\'s no physical way for the lens to behave differently with regards to scattering light based on the size of the medium behind it. Look at something like the 1Ds II and then switch to a similar resolution APS-C camera like the 7D, and look how much more of the pixels are covered at the same f-stop. Then open the aperture one stop and see that the amount covered is similar to the smaller aperture on the larger sensor....
Also, simply look at the apertures used in large format photography. f/64 is very commonly used in large format photography...and those shots are brilliant, with oodles of detail, and if you shoot with f/64 on a full frame body, you\'ll be left with a pile of mush. Medium format isn\'t some magic zone where the physics of the universe invert themselves.
Sep 20, 2016 at 08:47 PM
Previous versions of Jman13's message #13733090 « Pre-order: Fujifilm GFX 50S Medium Format body ($6,499) »
