Throwing this one in!

[LongSticks]

Video from Zack Arias on the crop v full frame debate.....I know he's a Fuji shooter so he has an interest. But it's very funny and he does make some valid points, as well as being one of my favorite photographers.

Anyway, just gonna throw in this grenade and retire to a safe distance!


Link from Dedpxl and YouTube. http://youtu.be/PHYidejT3KY

 

[needfx]

ne-gli-gi-ble and spanked


very interesting vid, but at the end of the day, I would not spend that much money on the xt1 and the lenses available for it, among other aspects

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-6D-vs-Fujifilm-X-T1


-

 

[LongSticks]

ne-gli-gi-ble and spanked


very interesting vid, but at the end of the day, I would not spend that much money on the xt1 and the lenses available for it, among other aspects

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-6D-vs-Fujifilm-X-T1


-

As a canon to fuji convert myself I would say don't underestimate the photos from the Fuji's. And believe me the lenses are well worth the money and tend to be cheaper than the DSLR equivalents at that quality!

But I will always agree that it's horses for courses! You shoot what you feel works for you.

Interesting video though.

 

[BJMRamage]

I just watched this video at lunch.

he brings some valid points, the difference between those two sizes seem minimal when compared to the much smaller and much larger variants. Though I am sure someone could say the APS-C format to FF-35mm is a 25-30% increase or something, which could be substantial.

And boy, watching the video from 2010 is somewhat funny.

http://dedpxl.com/crop-or-crap-math-or-moment/

 

[Laird Knox]

That damn stick made the video nearly unwatchable.

 

[needfx]

That damn stick made the video nearly unwatchable.

that stick's persistence was funny!



did they really make a big fuss about this lens? I am looking for fuji lenses but can't seem to find any so called x-mount lenses

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_t1/

 

[LongSticks]

that stick's persistence was funny!



did they really make a big fuss about this lens? I am looking for fuji lenses but can't seem to find any so called x-mount lenses

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_t1/

If you are genuinely interested this is the current Fuji lens road map through to 2015. There are also rumors of more 3rd party lenses, flashguns etc coming through. This is a slightly old one now as the XF zoom lens you identified is now out.

Xf lenses are the "prime lenses" and XC the "standard lenses"

 

[Meister]

Funny video.

You might want to keep in mind that Zack is a spokesperson for Fuji and this video is entertainment.

The Fuji X-T1 is an excellent camera but for the price you can already go ff.

At the end of the day bigger = better. He would shoot digital medium format if it would be affordable.

 

[OreoCookie]

At the end of the day bigger = better. He would shoot digital medium format if it would be affordable.

That's simply not true: cameras with smaller sensors can be built smaller and lighter -- especially lenses can be built smaller and lighter. For instance, the lens of the Sony RX1 is larger than that of the X100s even though both have equivalent specs (both f/2, 35 mm equivalent). That makes the Fuji much more pocketable. There is a reason why in the past (»small format«) 35 mm rangefinder cameras were the weapon of choice for many street and travel photographers instead of medium format rangefinders (à la Fuji GW690). And the problem gets worse with focal length, 200 mm on 6x7 medium format isn't all that long (corresponds to 100 mm on 35 mm). (Nowadays I rarely take my dslr with me when I go traveling, I often just pick up my X100s.)

In the past, the sweet spot of film size/camera size/resolution/price was 35 mm, now it is APS-C.

 

[Meister]

That's simply not true: cameras with smaller sensors can be built smaller and lighter -- especially lenses can be built smaller and lighter. For instance, the lens of the Sony RX1 is larger than that of the X100s even though both have equivalent specs (both f/2, 35 mm equivalent). That makes the Fuji much more pocketable. There is a reason why in the past (»small format«) 35 mm rangefinder cameras were the weapon of choice for many street and travel photographers instead of medium format rangefinders (à la Fuji GW690). (Nowadays I rarely take my dslr with me when I go traveling, I often just pick up my X100s.)

In the past, the sweet spot of film size/camera size/resolution/price was 35 mm, now it is APS-C.

sonys a7 shows that you can put a ff sensor in small body.

 

[paolo-]

At the end of the day bigger = better. He would shoot digital medium format if it would be affordable.

He owns a Phase One kit.

His point is that it's not always the right tool for the job. He doesn't see a discernible difference in the prints when comparing his Fuji to his full frame gear so he'd rather travel light with a camera and lens kit he enjoys shooting with than go for the full frame gear.

Keep in mind that he's a portrait and editorial photographer, autofocus speed and high ISO performance are not big issues for him. Being able to move around town with your gear all day without breaking your back and not intimidating your subject probably account for quite a lot.

We're slowly getting to the point where smaller sensors really are good enough. We can pixel peep to our heat's content but paired with nice glass the smaller cameras really can get the job done.

 

[Meister]

He owns a Phase One kit.

His point is that it's not always the right tool for the job. He doesn't see a discernible difference in the prints when comparing his Fuji to his full frame gear so he'd rather travel light with a camera and lens kit he enjoys shooting with than go for the full frame gear.

Keep in mind that he's a portrait and editorial photographer, autofocus speed and high ISO performance are not big issues for him. Being able to move around town with your gear all day without breaking your back and not intimidating your subject probably account for quite a lot.

We're slowly getting to the point where smaller sensors really are good enough. We can pixel peep to our heat's content but paired with nice glass the smaller cameras really can get the job done.

you are right.
I still think that they will squeeze ff sensors into small mirrorless cameras. Thats the future.

 

[OreoCookie]

I still think that they will squeeze ff sensors into small mirrorless cameras. Thats the future.

Full frame sensors cost about 10x what an APS-C-sized sensor of the same generation costs (Canon has a white paper explaining that in detail, look at Section IV). And since most of that is attributable to geometry (an 8" wafer fits 20 full frame sensors but about 200 APS-C-sized sensors, but then there is also the problem of yield), the difference won't decrease significantly.

So I don't think full frame sensors will replace APS-C-sized sensors for the bulk of the market. There are full frame sensor-based mirrorless cameras available right now (e. g. Sony's A7, Leica's M and Sony's RX1), but these are sitting right where full frame dslrs are, at the top end. And don't forget that also other components and lenses for full frame sensors are bigger and more expensive.

Full frame sensors are already the present, but they will never become the sensor size of choice for the bulk of the market of mirrorless cameras and dslrs.

sonys a7 shows that you can put a ff sensor in small body.

So does the RX1. But the A7 costs $1500 and you need to plunk down $2800 for the RX1. Similarly equipped cameras with smaller sensors are significantly cheaper (e. g. Fuji's X100s costs $1300, Nikon's Coolpix A is end-of-life, so it is on sale for $1100 -- both cost less than half of the RX1).

His point is that it's not always the right tool for the job. He doesn't see a discernible difference in the prints when comparing his Fuji to his full frame gear so he'd rather travel light with a camera and lens kit he enjoys shooting with than go for the full frame gear.

Keep in mind that he's a portrait and editorial photographer, autofocus speed and high ISO performance are not big issues for him. Being able to move around town with your gear all day without breaking your back and not intimidating your subject probably account for quite a lot.

Bingo. Full frame sensors and medium format cameras won't go away, but they will never become main stream -- if only because of the price alone. I'm glad my mirrorless camera doesn't have a full frame sensor, because otherwise, I wouldn't have been able to afford it

 

[LongSticks]

Full frame sensors cost about 10x what an APS-C-sized sensor of the same generation costs (Canon has a white paper explaining that in detail, look at Section IV). And since most of that is attributable to geometry (an 8" wafer fits 20 full frame sensors but about 200 APS-C-sized sensors, but then there is also the problem of yield), the difference won't decrease significantly.

So I don't think full frame sensors will replace APS-C-sized sensors for the bulk of the market. There are full frame sensor-based mirrorless cameras available right now (e. g. Sony's A7, Leica's M and Sony's RX1), but these are sitting right where full frame dslrs are, at the top end. And don't forget that also other components and lenses for full frame sensors are bigger and more expensive.

Full frame sensors are already the present, but they will never become the sensor size of choice for the bulk of the market of mirrorless cameras and dslrs.

So does the RX1. But the A7 costs $1500 and you need to plunk down $2800 for the RX1. Similarly equipped cameras with smaller sensors are significantly cheaper (e. g. Fuji's X100s costs $1300, Nikon's Coolpix A is end-of-life, so it is on sale for $1100 -- both cost less than half of the RX1).

Bingo. Full frame sensors and medium format cameras won't go away, but they will never become main stream -- if only because of the price alone. I'm glad my mirrorless camera doesn't have a full frame sensor, because otherwise, I wouldn't have been able to afford it

Well said on all counts!