Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 43

Thread: DX vs FX

  1. #21

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by WhiteFields View Post
    i agree with u on the zoom point.. it's actually just giving u a zoom-ed effect..

    on the other hand, how it is that a aps user maintain the same fov as an aps-c user when they are at the same distance? unless they are using a different focal length at the same distance from the subject to achieve the same fov..

    p.s. pardon my ignorance
    U mean ff and aps-c right? well if they are using a zoom lens, then its no issue. if using prime lens, then the ff user just hv to walk closer then. think of it this way, its always easier to walk closer to ur subject, than to walk further away, especially in doors.

    Anyway as I mentioned earlier, with 24mp ff sensor, if I crop off the picture by 33%, I would hv an aps-c fov with around the file size of a 16mp roughly, which is still slightly more than all aps-c dslr except 550D.

    Or just switch to aps-c mode on ff dslrs (Canon ff dslr can't do this though, disadvantage for them).

  2. #22
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by torak View Post
    Apologies for the wrong info.

    So its the 1Dsmk3 which is ff and shoots at 10fps.

    But anyway the point is that saying ff is slow, is totally wrong.
    Ok... you are right. FF is not slow, if you are willing and able to pay the high price for the speed.

    In the end, it is about costs and weight, if one is to stick to DX.

  3. #23
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by torak View Post
    U mean ff and aps-c right? well if they are using a zoom lens, then its no issue. if using prime lens, then the ff user just hv to walk closer then. think of it this way, its always easier to walk closer to ur subject, than to walk further away, especially in doors.

    Anyway as I mentioned earlier, with 24mp ff sensor, if I crop off the picture by 33%, I would hv an aps-c fov with around the file size of a 16mp roughly, which is still slightly more than all aps-c dslr except 550D.

    Or just switch to aps-c mode on ff dslrs (Canon ff dslr can't do this though, disadvantage for them).
    I believe your number of 33% crop is inaccurate.

    APS-C sensor surface area is less than half of FF sensor surface area. So if you take a 24mp ff sensor and crop to APS-C size, the resolution will not be 16mp, but less than 12mp. Just look at the D700 - 12mp at FF, but crop mode is only 5mp.

    Would appreciate if you can at least make sure you get the facts right before saying it. If not many will blur out..
    Last edited by daredevil123; 21st September 2010 at 02:17 PM.

  4. #24

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by torak View Post
    Rubbish...

    1D mk4 can shoot 10fps right? And its a FF

    Besides sony's A55 (10fps as well), i don think any aps-c can reach this speed

    For those that says aps-c has more "zoom", u r getting it wrong...

    If I take a photo using a 24mp FF, then I crop it by 33%, I would have the same fov (or zoom if u like to use newbie terms) as an aps-c of a 1.5x crop, and still hv a slightly bigger file size to work with as well. So its an entirely misconception that aps-c allows u to "close up" more. it doesn't.

    Anyway nikon and Sony FF dslr has the option to go into an aps-c mode, so its pretty convenient if they don wanna crop in post processing.

    The main advantage of a FF sensor, besides having a better IQ and higher resolution, is the depth of field. An aps-c will never be able to achieve the shallow dof of an FF in the same fov and distance to subject. thus if u r those who love working with shallow dof, to blur the background and isolate the subject/model, then FF is the way to go.

    I don see any aps-c advantage over an FF sensor, besides cost.
    Firstly before I refute anything you say, please get your facts right before you start saying things like rubbish.

    As another cser mentioned it before, even a 24 mp ff camera cannot beat the iq of a apsc sensor, especially if it's a 18mp one like the 7D. 24 x 0.66 = 16 mp ya?
    Please search the threads for more info.
    Well you only mentioned about fov being different, but mentioned nothing of the compression that a longer focal length will give you. One last thing, the Sony a33 allows only 10fps for 10 frames after that it reverts to 6 frames.

    Nikon ff going into apsc mode gives you only 5 mp. I wonder how much info is already lost there.

    So please do your homework before running your mouth here so ill informed.

  5. #25

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by torak View Post
    U mean ff and aps-c right? well if they are using a zoom lens, then its no issue. if using prime lens, then the ff user just hv to walk closer then. think of it this way, its always easier to walk closer to ur subject, than to walk further away, especially in doors.

    Anyway as I mentioned earlier, with 24mp ff sensor, if I crop off the picture by 33%, I would hv an aps-c fov with around the file size of a 16mp roughly, which is still slightly more than all aps-c dslr except 550D.

    Or just switch to aps-c mode on ff dslrs (Canon ff dslr can't do this though, disadvantage for them).
    oh i see.. so the same FOV is actually achieved in pp by cropping? correct me if i am wrong..

    another question, from what u mentioned earlier, why is the dof shallower on a ff dslr when compare to an aps-c?
    e.g. both lenses are 50mm @ F2..

  6. #26

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by hotchoco1ate View Post
    Firstly before I refute anything you say, please get your facts right before you start saying things like rubbish.

    As another cser mentioned it before, even a 24 mp ff camera cannot beat the iq of a apsc sensor, especially if it's a 18mp one like the 7D. 24 x 0.66 = 16 mp ya?
    Please search the threads for more info.
    Well you only mentioned about fov being different, but mentioned nothing of the compression that a longer focal length will give you. One last thing, the Sony a33 allows only 10fps for 10 frames after that it reverts to 6 frames.

    Nikon ff going into apsc mode gives you only 5 mp. I wonder how much info is already lost there.

    So please do your homework before running your mouth here so ill informed.
    Quote Originally Posted by torak View Post
    U mean ff and aps-c right? well if they are using a zoom lens, then its no issue. if using prime lens, then the ff user just hv to walk closer then. think of it this way, its always easier to walk closer to ur subject, than to walk further away, especially in doors.

    Anyway as I mentioned earlier, with 24mp ff sensor, if I crop off the picture by 33%, I would hv an aps-c fov with around the file size of a 16mp roughly, which is still slightly more than all aps-c dslr except 550D.

    Or just switch to aps-c mode on ff dslrs (Canon ff dslr can't do this though, disadvantage for them).
    i'm starting to get a little confused here.. someone clarify?

  7. #27

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    I believe your number of 33% crop is inaccurate.

    APS-C sensor surface area is less than half of FF sensor surface area. So if you take a 24mp ff sensor and crop to APS-C size, the resolution will not be 16mp, but less than 12mp. Just look at the D700 - 12mp at FF, but crop mode is only 5mp.

    Would appreciate if you can at least make sure you get the facts right before saying it. If not many will blur out..
    even if he is right.... pentax k-5 can **** out 16 mgp, fyi

  8. #28
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by WhiteFields View Post
    oh i see.. so the same FOV is actually achieved in pp by cropping? correct me if i am wrong..

    another question, from what u mentioned earlier, why is the dof shallower on a ff dslr when compare to an aps-c?
    e.g. both lenses are 50mm @ F2..
    This is because:

    If you are at the same distance away from the subject, the FOV of a 50mm lens will be different between a FF cam and a APS-C cam. For APS-C cam, the subject will be a lot bigger in relation to the image frame, since the FOV is tighter than the FOV of the FF cam.

    So to get the same size of the subject in relation to the image frame. When shooting in the APS-C cam, you need to move backwards, further away from the subject than if you are shooting FF.

    We know for a fact that you get a thinner DoF the closer you are to the subject. That is why in FF, you get a thinner DoF. And for APS-C, you get a deeper DoF.

  9. #29

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by WhiteFields View Post
    i'm starting to get a little confused here.. someone clarify?
    suggest you read up more yourself

    and escape from the ill effects of two people comparing whose tool is larger on the net, because of the choice of underwear brand they had

  10. #30
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    even if he is right.... pentax k-5 can **** out 16 mgp, fyi


    In another thread, he says most wedding photographers shoot with flash, that is why they shoot only at base ISO...

    He must be reading some books we don't know about. Boy I am so out of date... all these new technology and new techniques I really need to learn.
    Last edited by daredevil123; 21st September 2010 at 02:33 PM.

  11. #31

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    In a nutshell,though it might be true that sensor size of FF is bigger than twice the size of the APSC, I don't think it translates to a proportionate amount of IQ.

  12. #32

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by hotchoco1ate View Post
    In a nutshell,though it might be true that sensor size of FF is bigger than twice the size of the APSC, I don't think it translates to a proportionate amount of IQ.
    let's be objective here and dissect your statement for the benefit of all who are reading:

    yes, sensor size is larger than twice , based on 2d area, but for the sake of clarification, what do you define to be IQ?

    i am all for all hobbyists using what they need, i.e. aps-c, at the price they should pay... but that said, we must also be fair and see all sides of the coin.

  13. #33

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    and if you want me to know what i think, IQ consists of much more than just details and sharpness.

    details and sharpness are also linked to NOISE, and there is also DYNAMIC RANGE.

    for the latter, i think let's be honest about it, FF > DX.

    would i pay the additional price for it? no. but do i have to go around insisting that my choice is the best? no again.

  14. #34
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by hotchoco1ate View Post
    In a nutshell,though it might be true that sensor size of FF is bigger than twice the size of the APSC, I don't think it translates to a proportionate amount of IQ.
    Actually it is very easy to find out...
    http://www.bobatkins.com/photography..._vs_aps-c.html

    Canon:
    FF = 36mm x 24mm = 864 sq mm.
    APS-C = 22.5mm x 15mm = 337.5 sq mm

    It is definitely not a 33% reduction...

    But as for IQ... you are probably talking about 1-2 stops of noise performance between FF and APS-C for an equally spec'ed camera of the same generation... (eg. 12mp FX vs 12mp DX) and FF sensors do capture slightly more dynamic range.
    Last edited by daredevil123; 21st September 2010 at 02:47 PM.

  15. #35

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by hotchoco1ate View Post
    Firstly before I refute anything you say, please get your facts right before you start saying things like rubbish.

    As another cser mentioned it before, even a 24 mp ff camera cannot beat the iq of a apsc sensor, especially if it's a 18mp one like the 7D. 24 x 0.66 = 16 mp ya?
    Please search the threads for more info.
    Well you only mentioned about fov being different, but mentioned nothing of the compression that a longer focal length will give you. One last thing, the Sony a33 allows only 10fps for 10 frames after that it reverts to 6 frames.

    Nikon ff going into apsc mode gives you only 5 mp. I wonder how much info is already lost there.

    So please do your homework before running your mouth here so ill informed.
    That's because u are using the lowest resolution ff sensor sensor as example, whereas I'm using a 24.6mp ff sensor in mine. If u wanna use a low resolution ff sensor in ur example, u should choose a low res aps-c sensor to compare against, to be fair.

    Let's say a 1.5crop aps-c using a 200mm lens, it will give a 300mm fov. An ff with a 300mm lens, cropping it 33% in PhotoShop, would have a fov similar to the aps-c at 200mm. Thus the 33% from ff gives equivilant fov to a 1.5x aps-c in post processing.

  16. #36

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    This is because:

    If you are at the same distance away from the subject, the FOV of a 50mm lens will be different between a FF cam and a APS-C cam. For APS-C cam, the subject will be a lot bigger in relation to the image frame, since the FOV is tighter than the FOV of the FF cam.

    So to get the same size of the subject in relation to the image frame. When shooting in the APS-C cam, you need to move backwards, further away from the subject than if you are shooting FF.

    We know for a fact that you get a thinner DoF the closer you are to the subject. That is why in FF, you get a thinner DoF. And for APS-C, you get a deeper DoF.
    okok.. that totally answer my question.. thanks!

  17. #37
    Moderator daredevil123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    lil red dot
    Posts
    21,627
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by torak View Post
    Let's say a 1.5crop aps-c using a 200mm lens, it will give a 300mm fov. An ff with a 300mm lens, cropping it 33% in PhotoShop, would have a fov similar to the aps-c at 200mm. Thus the 33% from ff gives equivilant fov to a 1.5x aps-c in post processing.
    Huh?

    If you use a 1.5x crop sensor cam with 200mm lens, your FOV will be exactly the same as FF with 300mm lens... no need to crop anything...

    But if you shoot FF 200mm and APS-C 200mm... you need to crop away more than half of the image to get the same FOV....

    I think you need to get your math right...

  18. #38
    Moderator ed9119's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    10,931
    Blog Entries
    26

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by daredevil123 View Post
    FF = 36mm x 24mm = 864 sq mm.
    APS-C = 22.5mm x 15mm = 337.5 sq mm

    .
    61% difference in sq mm between FF and APS-C ? i also learning
    shaddap and just shoot .... up close
    Walkeast

  19. #39

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    ok, the 300mm thingy is totally wrong... it should be 200 vs 200 for both sensor, cropping the ff to equivilant fov. donno why i typed 300 vs 200 justnow... my mistake for this.

  20. #40
    Member hotwork77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    119'37.70"N 10347'39.19"E
    Posts
    1,353

    Default Re: DX vs FX

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    this dead horse is immortal.

    everyone has learn to live with it.
    I turn off my comp for a few days and the immortal horse rises again.
    Dreamz is the Alternate Realty | Stand Up and Be Counted

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

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
  •