It really depends on your shooting conditions. As I've also said, if you're shooting in ample light there's plenty of signal so the ratio is high regardless of sensor size. However, if I was taking a portrait in low light SNR would matter, and I know which of the two cameras below I'd pick.I'm also one of those who don't care too much about SNR.
I'm not sure, but I think people with delusions get angry if someone attempts to talk about reality.
You wont alter perspective by going wider and cropping.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.
I know nothing
otherwise you seems to know a lot, so you're the best guy to write that book!It's so simple. He made it specifically clear that: For my shooting I prefer the deeper DoF I get on APS-C. What I have tried patiently to explain to him and you, and @neuroanatomist has tried with less patience, is that you can achieve the same brightness, and depth of field using an FF as with APS-C just by using a narrower aperture etc and raising the iso without any increase in noise lowering the IQ all at the same shutter speed. So, those who do worry about S/N have nothing to worry about and those who don't worry can happily use their FF for the same dof etc as an APS-C. I have no axe to grind about FF vs APS-C as I regularly shoot with an R5 and R7.I'm also one of those who don't care too much about SNR.
If you want more noise you can add it in post. If you already have noise, you can use denoising software, but it slowly begins to look more like a painting. It's ok, but I prefer to have the chance to make the photo first and then decide what I want but I guess some people want to limit themselves while blaming others for not giving them creative freedom.
Example... I shoot with a FF camera - if I don't want to go for a longer exposure than 1/125 (unsharpness will occur due to the movement of the subject), if I have already opened the aperture all the way, if I have used the highest (for me) acceptable ISO value and I used the range of the zoom lens to the maximum, I can't get any closer to the subject, and yet I need it a little bigger in the frame, the last solution that comes to my mind is to ask someone to throw me an APS-C camera, and the first solution that comes to my mind is - I will solve this problem later in the processing of the photo by cropping it. So it seems to me from all of this that if someone has no problem having a slightly larger camera and lenses and it's not a problem for him to pay a little more, the FF camera is the best solution (the best compromise) in terms of image quality. In my opinion, even DOF control is far more flexible on a FF camera than on a crop sensor. Although if we take the matter to the extreme, and compare the FF camera with the camera in a mobile phone (if, for example, we want the entire frame to be sharp, with almost infinite DOF), and for the exposure triangle to be the same as on the FF camera, the simplest solution is to take that shot with a cell phone, but still the picture from the cell phone will be significantly worse than the one taken with the FF camera. So, if the solution for taking photos with a large DOF was a sensor as small as possible, then everyone who needs a large DOF would shoot with a sensor as small as possible, but this is not the case. So, my conclusion is that for DOF control, you should not generally go for a camera with a smaller sensor. A smaller sensor is good for the reasons mentioned earlier (smaller camera, smaller lenses, more money in the bank account...).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.
I didn't call him/her delusional, it was his statements are delusional. There is a difference. Why should I ignore someone? I suggested on the first page s/he didn't argue bother arguing, but s/he clearly replied, "no." I thought, someone who is eager to argue can handle it.And I may agree with all, but then you fall on the finish line...why call him delusional? Why offend him? There's no need. You think he's wrong, you explain, he doesn't understand, ignore him then!
This started because of his claim about canon abandoning. We're attempting to explain, why it's not true.But if he doesn't want to, for whatever reason, why bashing him?
How on earth is what I have written bashing him or you? I have just explained some basic physics of photography that might be of use to everyone here. That's the purpose of a forum. There are people who may make the wrong choice of camera and these facts need to be explained.But if he doesn't want to, for whatever reason, why bashing him?
P.S.: I'm just asking everyone not to get into a discussion about AI technology in cell phones, etc.
yes, technical information is wrong. Don't fall of the flat earth and hit your head the moon no human walked on.I won't sleep tonight
Btw, many can laid out all the technical info they want; those info are still wrong, sad no one can see it
Was not referring to you specifically of course, I was asking generally why bash ourselves in a forum, where no one of us is earning or losing anything by being right or wrong
If you feel that way, I don't think anyone is forcing you to discuss it.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
you can crop full frame, but you can't uncrop Aps-cTo 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.
