thedigitalbean wrote:
APS-H IMHO is the worst of both worlds (I know there will be some violent disagreement). You don\'t get a FF sensor and you don\'t added pixel density (i.e. reach). You have no viewfinder benefit over a FF body (and indications are that you have no viewfinder advantage over the 7D either). It was a compromise made in the early days of DSLRs and I will rejoice if the 1D4 goes FF. A high speed FF pro AF 1-series that costs < $5k will make an excellent complement to the high speed crop pro AF APS-C that is the 7D.
I disagree 100%.
APS-H is the best of both worlds.
You get much better (shallower) DOF than a 1.6x crop, closer to a FF camera.
Also, you get the extra reach you don\'t get in a FF camera.
More than that,the IQ of the best APS-H sensor, the 1D MarkIII is better than any current FF or crop camera (lower noise and better detail). Because of the sensor design, and low NR of Digic 3 (which allowed the creation of the FlexNR for the 1D MkIII), I can get cleaner images at all ISO\'s than the new FF 5Dii. I\'ve done tests with the 7D Raw\'s I\'ve found online, and even reduced to 10Mp, the noise profile is at least 1 or more stops behind what I can get with the MkIII.
Also the 7D\'s AF is yet untested... the best real world review I\'ve seen says that the 7D\'s AF is still a step behind the MkII, (and the MkII is a step behind the MkIII in my 3 years experience with both). Not to mention the other areas the 7D lags (noise, low Raw buffer, build).
I will never use a 1.6x crop again, and have often thought FF would be a drawback. However, that seems to be the way things will go, so I will welcome FF before any APS-C sensor.
Sep 30, 2009 at 06:40 PM
Previous versions of musclepics's message #7588262 « 1D owners do you miss the 1.6x crop body? »
