Announcement

Collapse

December's CHALLENGE

The topic to inspire your creative juices this month is BOXES Please don't forget to vote on November's LEAVES challenge and please re-vote if you already did but before the recent forum upgrade.

See more
See less

If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

    Originally posted by IPWheatley View Post
    As someone who has bucked the trend so to speak, I recently switched from a crop sensor system to a full frame one. I chose this option for a couple of reasons, the main one being, as the majority of my photography is now landscape focused it seemed the obvious way to go to achieve the best image quality possible. I did not make this decision lightly. I was fortunate enough in that my local camera dealer lent me a Canon 5D Mk3 and three Canon L lenses to try for a week and the results convinced me it was the right move for me. There are disadvantages, as have already been mentioned by others here, the main one being the weight factor, but after a recent trip to The Lakes, lugging around two bodies and six lenses with my old system, the difference is negligible. The advantages are, greatly improved battery life, I used to carry six previously, now only two, and image quality, which to me is a noticeable improvement. Regrets? None on my part. One last point. How many of you here edit in 16 bit, not 8. If not why not? Yes it triples you file size but you can always resize for posting etc. It seems foolish to me not to if you want the ultimate in image quality from whatever camera system you choose to use. Interested to hear other members views on this. As always, regards to all, Ian W.
    Regards,
    Mark

    ------------------------------
    http://www.microcontrast.com
    Too much Oly gear.
    Panasonic GM5, 12-32, 12-35, 15. Laowa 7.5.
    Assorted legacy lenses, plus a Fuji X70 & a Sony A7S.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

      I went to an exhibition of Olivia Parker on Fri. She specialises in still life. Her work is of the highest technical quality and it spans over five decades. She spent a time in the 80s using large format Polaroid technology including a 24"x20" beast that weighed several hundred pounds!

      There was a recent video of her in her studio and I noticed that she was using Sony a7 gear.

      https://www.oliviaparker.com/

      https://www.artsy.net/article/halley...till-life-in-1

      This image printed large was quite breathtaking:

      Paul
      E-M1ii, Pen-F and too many lenses
      flickr
      Portfolio Site
      Instagram

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

        There's something unconvincing about that peach on top of the glass box!

        Jim

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

          Originally posted by drmarkf View Post
          ....Nikon has recently produced a couple of really interesting light and compact tele primes, the PF 300 f4 and 500 f5.6......
          The PF 300 f/4 came out just after I switched to Olympus and, when the Oly 300 f/4 turned out to be much larger and heavier, I wondered if I'd done the right thing!

          I wish Olympus would embrace this technology, as it would complement the MFT concept very well.
          Mike
          visit my Natural History Photos website:
          http://www.botanicdesign.co.uk/Natur...story/home.htm

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

            Something which has not been mentioned is comparative storage space.

            Comparing RAW with RAW, my A7R AWR files are just over 36MB and the EM-1 ORF files are centred around 15MB. I am selective as to what I shoot on FF, mostly UWA.

            Harold
            The body is willing but the mind is weak.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

              It's mostly down to the physics of collecting photons. Just like collecting rain. You have 2 measuring tubes with the same with a scale on them, one has a 1 meter diameter funnel feeding it and the other funnel is only 6" in diameter. When you have a 2 minute shower the funnels collect the same amount of rain for their respective areas. One tube fills up nicely, the other has very little in it. You can calculate how many mm of rain fell with greater certainty for the larger funnel.
              Stuff from Cuba
              More stuff from Cuba
              It all started here

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

                Originally posted by Beagletorque View Post
                It's mostly down to the physics of collecting photons. Just like collecting rain. You have 2 measuring tubes with the same with a scale on them, one has a 1 meter diameter funnel feeding it and the other funnel is only 6" in diameter. When you have a 2 minute shower the funnels collect the same amount of rain for their respective areas. One tube fills up nicely, the other has very little in it. You can calculate how many mm of rain fell with greater certainty for the larger funnel.
                Good news for monochrome but lots of little, colour-dedicated, pixels...

                Harold
                The body is willing but the mind is weak.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

                  Originally posted by Beagletorque View Post
                  It's mostly down to the physics of collecting photons. Just like collecting rain. You have 2 measuring tubes with the same with a scale on them, one has a 1 meter diameter funnel feeding it and the other funnel is only 6" in diameter. When you have a 2 minute shower the funnels collect the same amount of rain for their respective areas. One tube fills up nicely, the other has very little in it. You can calculate how many mm of rain fell with greater certainty for the larger funnel.
                  Maybe we need lenses fitted with much larger diameter lens hoods, to collect more photons ?

                  Jax

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

                    Lens hoods are designed to cut out light so you need to take them off!
                    Stuff from Cuba
                    More stuff from Cuba
                    It all started here

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

                      And before anyone asks, no Olympus pro cameras are not at a disadvantage because they are weather sealed.
                      Stuff from Cuba
                      More stuff from Cuba
                      It all started here

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

                        Originally posted by Beagletorque View Post
                        Lens hoods are designed to cut out light so you need to take them off!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

                          Too late Tim ! Hubble beat you to it, on their second attempt anyway

                          Jax

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

                            My A7 II has three tangible advantages over my more extensive M43 kit:

                            1. Dynamic range. I can shoot -2 stops with ease. If I use Capture One to process the raw, the penalty for this is almost unnoticeable.
                            2. Hand in hand with the dynamic range is native ISO-100. What I would give for an Olympus camera with true (well, as true as you can get) ISO 100!
                            3. The usual low light advantage, though the A7 II is considered relatively poor in this respect.

                            For my photo, DoF is not normally a disadvantage. If I shoot a scene at f8, on the A7 II, I can get very similar results, at equivalent focal length, by shooting f4 on my Olympus kit.

                            But what about size? There's not a great deal of difference between the A7II and E-M1 II. The A7 II is at it's best with a light (f1.8) prime, whereas some of Sony's fast zooms are huge. Of course, I also have a Pen F which is far smaller than either the Olympus professional body or the A7 II.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

                              That's a completely ridiculous idea and it will never work as anyone can plainly see.
                              You will of course make a shed load of cash on kickstarter and reviewers with absolutely love it.
                              Stuff from Cuba
                              More stuff from Cuba
                              It all started here

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: If Sensor Size Doesn't Matter, Why Buy a Bigger One?

                                What is native iso?

                                Originally posted by Internaut View Post
                                My A7 II has three tangible advantages over my more extensive M43 kit:

                                1. Dynamic range. I can shoot -2 stops with ease. If I use Capture One to process the raw, the penalty for this is almost unnoticeable.
                                2. Hand in hand with the dynamic range is native ISO-100. What I would give for an Olympus camera with true (well, as true as you can get) ISO 100!
                                3. The usual low light advantage, though the A7 II is considered relatively poor in this respect.

                                For my photo, DoF is not normally a disadvantage. If I shoot a scene at f8, on the A7 II, I can get very similar results, at equivalent focal length, by shooting f4 on my Olympus kit.

                                But what about size? There's not a great deal of difference between the A7II and E-M1 II. The A7 II is at it's best with a light (f1.8) prime, whereas some of Sony's fast zooms are huge. Of course, I also have a Pen F which is far smaller than either the Olympus professional body or the A7 II.
                                Stuff from Cuba
                                More stuff from Cuba
                                It all started here

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X