Opinion: Canon’s mounting woes

[Walrus]

I think you’re going to get involved in the difference between light intensity and quantity soon !!

That's the problem; the difference is not field relevant. And this seems something not acceptable by many.

People need to take pictures, instead of discussing about the maths involved in taking pictures

 

[neuroanatomist]

Noise is different between FF and Aps? He doesn't care, because it's not the point.

The Earth is (nearly) spherical? He doesn’t care, because it’s not the point.

His point was that the shot he wants to achieve with APS-C, he could not achieve with full frame. His contention is that the deeper DoF with the same ‘brightness’ is only possible with APS-C.

You seem to believe the same thing, meaning you’re just as willfully ignorant. The facts have been correctly stated and exemplified by several people in different ways. If you choose to ignore those, you have only yourself to blame for your ignorance.

 

[Del Paso]

I prefer to try and teach people when they lack knowledge. But when it becomes evident they have no desire to learn, there’s no point. @ReflexVE and @Walrus have shown they choose to be willfully ignorant. Their loss, and their choice to make themselves look foolish here.

I’ve met a couple of Flat Earthers. Same attitude – the earth is flat, don’t tell me what I already know. Okay, live in your fantasy world where the earth is flat and APS-C gives more DoF than you can get with FF.

I'm presently reading a wonderful book by a Mr. Hans Joachim Zillmer titled "Darwins Irrtum" (Darwin's error).
He "scientifically" proves that man and the dinosaurs existed simultaneously. Plus many other "irrefutable" theories.
If interested, you should find it in good bookstores (I hope in the category "humour").

 

[AlanF]

The Earth is (nearly) spherical? He doesn’t care, because it’s not the point.

His point was that the shot he wants to achieve with APS-C, he could not achieve with full frame. His contention is that the deeper DoF with the same ‘brightness’ is only possible with APS-C.

You seem to believe the same thing, meaning you’re just as willfully ignorant. The facts have been correctly stated and exemplified by several people in different ways. If you choose to ignore those, you have only yourself to blame for your ignorance.

You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink. Fortunately, you can be a good photographer without understanding the underlying physics and optics. But, if you do understand you would realise you can achieve the same depth of field and the same signal to noise in an image you get with an APS-C by using a narrower aperture lens.

 

[Deleted member 383640]

The Earth is (nearly) spherical? He doesn’t care, because it’s not the point.

His point was that the shot he wants to achieve with APS-C, he could not achieve with full frame. His contention is that the deeper DoF with the same ‘brightness’ is only possible with APS-C.

You seem to believe the same thing, meaning you’re just as willfully ignorant. The facts have been correctly stated and exemplified by several people in different ways. If you choose to ignore those, you have only yourself to blame for your ignorance.

To add one more variable to this long discussion... Besides all that said there is another important difference between using FF and crop sensors - if we want to get the "same framing". By using the same focal length (same lens) on these two different bodies, by the fact that we have to move away from the subject using the crop camera (or for the "same framing" with the FF body we have to get a little closer to the subject), we thereby change the perspective of the shot. So, the framing is no longer "the same" but only similar because the perspective has changed. So here's more material for discussion.

 

[Del Paso]

That's the problem; the difference is not field relevant. And this seems something not acceptable by many.

People need to take pictures, instead of discussing about the maths involved in taking pictures

Sorry, but you're sinking deeper and deeper in the mud of ignorance...
Errare humanum est. Perseverare...

 

[Del Paso]

There was a time when I was convinced that APS/C was better suited for macros than FF.
I soon was faced with contradiction by forum members, thought it over and let myself convince I was wrong.
As easy as that. Some facts are facts, period. Like it or not.
I'm not a fan of maths, due to having studied litterature and languages, yet they helped me in getting better pictures.
It's just about accepting that some (many?) people have in some fields a higher knowledge, that's not a shame!

 

[neuroanatomist]

To add one more variable to this long discussion... Besides all that said there is another important difference between using FF and crop sensors - if we want to get the "same framing". By using the same focal length (same lens) on these two different bodies, by the fact that we have to move away from the subject using the crop camera (or for the "same framing" with the FF body we have to get a little closer to the subject), we thereby change the perspective of the shot. So, the framing is no longer "the same" but only similar because the perspective has changed. So here's more material for discussion.

True, and that’s why in my example I chose to use different focal lengths to match framing, meaning the subject distance is the same and thus so is the perspective.

We should be careful discussing this, for some people here it could mean

I might even have to dig out my chocolate stout example (mmmm, beer).

As you noticed, in his example @Walrus stated, “Subject's eyes will be more likely both in focus in the R10 picture, because to have the same subject size, he stepped back…” Same subject size, different perspective. But he doesn’t care about the maths, and his perspective is warped anyway.

 

[Walrus]

you can achieve the same depth of field and the same signal to noise in an image you get with an APS-C by using a narrower aperture lens.

He doesn't care about SNR; he cares about exposing with the same exposure triangle.

To use a narrower aperture, he would need to slow the shutter, or increase the iso; and he doesn't want to do it.

It's so simple.

 

[Walrus]

To add one more variable to this long discussion... Besides all that said there is another important difference between using FF and crop sensors - if we want to get the "same framing". By using the same focal length (same lens) on these two different bodies, by the fact that we have to move away from the subject using the crop camera (or for the "same framing" with the FF body we have to get a little closer to the subject), we thereby change the perspective of the shot. So, the framing is no longer "the same" but only similar because the perspective has changed. So here's more material for discussion.

He doesn't care about perspective; he cares about having same exposure with same exposure triangle, but with more DoF.

We're not saying different things; he's giving you an angle, but you say "well, but look at this other angle".

He wants to use his angle; and for what he cares about, same exposure with same exp triangle, his angle works in photography. For me is enough.

 

[Deleted member 383640]

True, and that’s why in my example I chose to use different focal lengths to match framing, meaning the subject distance is the same and thus so is the perspective.

We should be careful discussing this, for some people here it could mean
View attachment 212014
I might even have to dig out my chocolate stout example (mmmm, beer).

As you noticed, in his example @Walrus stated, “Subject's eyes will be more likely both in focus in the R10 picture, because to have the same subject size, he stepped back…” Same subject size, different perspective. But he doesn’t care about the maths, and his perspective is warped anyway.

Perspective, at least from my point of view (pun intended ), is more important creatively than the difference in noise levels between two different sensor sizes. I don't think the smaller sensor offers almost any advantage in terms of DOF control, really. What I think is a valid reason why someone might want a crop sensor camera (APS-C, M4/3...) is that they bring significant savings in body size and lens size, not to mention the savings in the bank account. So for someone who doesn't work in low light and doesn't need the shallowest possible DOF, it's best to go for a camera with a crop sensor.

Edit: ...and that it must be a Canon camera, of course!

 

[neuroanatomist]

What I think is a valid reason why someone might want a crop sensor camera (APS-C, M4/3...) is that they bring significant savings in body size and lens size, not to mention the savings in the bank account.

Which is exactly what I keep saying – the potential advantages of a crop format are a smaller/lighter system, lower cost, and more pixels on target if focal length limited. Th-Th-Th-That's all, folks!

 

[Deleted member 383640]

He doesn't care about perspective; he cares about having same exposure with same exposure triangle, but with more DoF.

We're not saying different things; he's giving you an angle, but you say "well, but look at this other angle".

He wants to use his angle; and for what he cares about, same exposure with same exp triangle, his angle works in photography. For me is enough.

Let anyone feel free to use any angle and any perspective and any exposure settings. I just wanted to add that there is another variable that we may have neglected or under-examined in this discussion, and that, in my opinion, has a significant impact on the final photo. Someone decides to ignore the shutter speed, someone decides to ignore the aperture, someone the ISO value or the noise level, someone the perspective - all according to the need that arises. However, regardless of what we ignore, consciously or unconsciously, the principles should always be the same. For example, I mostly shoot in Av mode and with the ISO Auto setting (and the slowest shutter speed defined), so I deliberately ignore those two values. But what is more important to me is aperture, focal length and perspective. I don't dispute at all that anyone sets his own priorities - everyone should set them for themselves.

 

[neuroanatomist]

We're not saying different things; he's giving you an angle, but you say "well, but look at this other angle".

He wants to use his angle; and for what he cares about, same exposure with same exp triangle, his angle works in photography. For me is enough.

No. He's saying that "this other angle" (achieving the same results) is not possible with FF, only with APS-C. That's wrong. Period. You can either agree with that misinformation and continue to support it, or you can admit that you're both wrong and you can learn something. I don't even have to guess which one you'll choose.

 

[Deleted member 383640]

Which is exactly what I keep saying – the potential advantages of a crop format are a smaller/lighter system, lower cost, and more pixels on target if focal length limited. Th-Th-Th-That's all, folks!

Yes, yes, I know that you keep repeating that, and it was not my intention to "steal" your opinion, but I want to reinforce that fact with my comment.

 

[neuroanatomist]

He doesn't care about SNR;

He doesn't care about perspective;

He doesn't care about facts.

To be clear, I don't care about his personal opinion. What I object to is his posting incorrect information (and you defending that behavior).

 

[neuroanatomist]

Yes, yes, I know that you keep repeating that, and it was not my intention to "steal" your opinion, but I want to reinforce that fact with my comment.

Yes, that was clear.

Sadly, no matter how many times it's repeated by multiple people, some people simply refuse to accept facts.

 

[EricN]

Thank you!
Now I understand why all my pictures are so crappy!
I'll jump to the next Viltrox and Fuji dealer after having sold my shitty Leica, Olympus and Canon stuff.
My time has come to create wonderful pictures like yours!

Can you imagine if someone like Ansel Adams had used Viltrox and Fuji? You'd take those poor quality photos that almost nobody appreciated except for a tiny small niche crowd and suddenly he'd have enough followers on Instagram to quit his job cleaning toilets at McDonalds.

 

[Deleted member 383640]

He doesn't care about SNR;

I'm also one of those who don't care too much about SNR.

 

[Walrus]

I don't dispute at all that anyone sets his own priorities - everyone should set them for themselves.

That's what I'm saying, too

He has its own way of doing things. I would do the same? Probably not.

But what I ask my self is "if, for whatever reason he may have, he military sticks to a given exposure triangle, but wants more DoF, what is the solution?"; and the answer I give myself is "if you don't want to change any other parameter, then the only solution is using a wider lens and/or a smaller format, which are the only way, given that triangle you don't want to change, to obtain more DoF compared to a FF setting".

You would of course alter perspective, DR, SNR, etc, it's a fact; but still, if he doesn't care? Then good for him.

I'm not going to question why he does his stuff, unless his stuff leads him to shoot badly exposed photo; but his stuff works, he gets same exposure not altering the triangle, and gets more DoF. So why bother trying to explain him maths? He doesn't care about maths, because what he does already works.