nandadevieast wrote:
Extraordinary claim would be “APSc gear is better than FF gear”. I said it is as good as FF. Full frame gear doesn’t have to be better just because it has bigger sensor. There are trade offs and pluses/minuses in APSs as well as FF for a chosen task.
If you ask an APSc camera, “do you have better DR or Low light capability than a FF body?” The answer will be no. But that would be a technical question. In reality, a crop body can produce as good pictures as a FF body, and can also do most things a FF body can do, there are things that it cannot do, and things that it can do better than a FF body.
People need quantifiable things to asses what is better than what, but photography is not a technical pursuit. Its an art form.
vdo1 wrote:
Extraordinary claims require proof, do you have any?
nandadevieast wrote:
Sony APSc cameras are as good as their FF counterparts.
Claiming that the APS-C is as good as FF is already "extraordinary" and simply not true no matter how you spin it at least IQ wise. Sure if you want "more reach", smaller body, etc then that is a different story but IQ wise, FF has a clear advantage and that cannot be argued..facts are facts...and yes, the bigger sensor will normally be better since both are made by Sony so we are not comparing an old FF sensor to a latest gen APS-C.
Bold statements like 'crop sensor can produce as good pictures as a FF" is just wrong because that will imply it will be as good at higher isos, which is certainly wont be in terms of noise or dr.
Is not about :"needing to quantify" things but dealing with facts.
Does everyone need FF ? Of course not..but the same question applies to APS-C, 1", m43 etc etc..for some people a phone is more than enough.
Heck, I am currently on vacation and since I am not doing any photography work many of my photos are been taken with the Huawei Mate 20x which has a 27mm, 16mm and 85mm lens combination. I took my A6500 with me for any "more serious" photos but for IG, FB, my phone is doing a great job.
See..I own different camera gear from my main gear which is the A7R3, the A6500, rx100 V(well just sold it before the trip), and my mate 20x phone. And about to get a Nikon P1000 for "fun" long distance shots. So I understand clearly that there are different cameras options for different people or specific needs.
BUT I will never claim that my A6500 can match my A7R3 because hell no, it cannot! Can I use it for pro work..sure, I have a 16mm 1.4 Sigma and I can throw in a 56mm 1.4 as well and do work BUT that does not mean its going to match what I can do with my A7R3 and prime lenses and THAT is the product I want to deliver to my clients.
Yet I keep the A6500 because I understand its limitations and when I can or cant use it for a particular need. Same goes for my phone, and soon to be nikon. And same as it was when I had a m43 camera (didnt do it for my needs).
So if you prefer APS-C for your needs, that is great but making claims like it can match FF is just plain wrong and does not help users that may be looking for advice on what to buy.
Present UNBIASED FACTS and let the readers make a well informed decision based on that instead. That is a lot more helpful.
If DR was as important as it sounds here, most of the world press photo shots won’t come from a Canon body.
Really? You realize that as great as Sony is, Canon has been a market leader for a LONG time and there are a LOT more of those out there, right?
In the end this is only gear and if you like yours then enjoy it but no need to manipulate information to make something look better than what it is.
Regards
Jun 23, 2019 at 12:17 PM
Previous versions of GabrielPhoto's message #14890341 « APS-C vs Full Frame »
