Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 61 to 64 of 64

Thread: Crop factor is a hindrance?

  1. #61

    Default Re: Crop factor is a hindrance?

    I don't care if it's a hindrance or not. I see what's in my viewfinder then work from there and i'm perfectly happy with what i get.

    What i want to do, is to understand how this whole thing works.


    If i use a "DX" lens on a Fx sensor. However when i get the results, and crop the usable image, it's 1.5 factor in. So a DX 18-105 lens on a Fx frame will have an "effective" range of 27-157. This meant that the FoV is less than a 18-105 lens made for Fx frame. (one gets more image on a Fx sensor compared to DX sensor at same focal length.)

    So in fact, Dx is the cheap version made for public consumption (cash cow). aye? Obviously the camera manufacturers could shift their entire production to Dx and it won't make a difference, except piss off all their existing users. Correct too?



    Oh yes, and the people who keep talking about extra reach and all that...
    Last edited by Complex13717421; 6th September 2009 at 11:38 PM.

  2. #62
    Senior Member darrrrrrrrrr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,208

    Default Re: Crop factor is a hindrance?

    Quote Originally Posted by Complex13717421 View Post
    So in fact, Dx is the cheap version made for public consumption (cash cow). aye? Obviously the camera manufacturers could shift their entire production to Dx and it won't make a difference, except piss off all their existing users. Correct too?
    obviously you can shift your entire set-up to FX and it won't make a difference, except make your wallet thinner. i wouldn't call DX a cash cow, just tt with current sensor technology, FX sensors are still too expensive for most users, hence the popularity of crop sensor bodies.

    anyway there isn't a 18-105mm lens designed for FX sensor. zooms starting at 24/28mm are the standard zoom lenses for FX, manufacturers designed the DX-only 18mm-XX zooms to give a similar FoV range.

    i wish you all the very best in your quest for knowledge. i for one am satisfied with my APS-C sensor. if someday pentax releases full-frame and i earn big bucks i may upgrade.

  3. #63
    Member eosandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Land of smiles
    Posts
    842

    Default Re: Crop factor is a hindrance?

    Crop sensors only exist as the cost of FF sensor production back when DSLRs were introduced was prohibitive. Now that sensors are lower cost items to make, it's actually in the camera manufacturers interest to have the FF "Pro" line of cams they can continue charging a premium for. Continued support for crop sensors which they were forced to produce for economic reasons will continue as the user base and lens range is extensive.

    Purists would say 35mm (FF) is what is required whereas in the digital age the sensor could be any size... bigger than the image circle produced by any lens would be best as it gives the opportunity to capture maximum image information. The ability to crop without loss of detail exists.

    Sony seem to be breaking the trend with the new A850 being at a more sensible price (~US$2K).
    Learning DSLR control http://stormtrigger.blogspot.com/

  4. #64

    Default Re: Crop factor is a hindrance?

    yea the 1.6 crop factor kills me too
    T_T
    Canon EOS 500D|BG-E5|18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit| 50mm f/1.8 II | 17-40mm f/4L | 580EXII
    HOLGA GCFN 120

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •