Skip to main content
6 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Aug 3, 2010 at 18:10 comment added Dave Van den Eynde I'm only trying to make the point that when you change something on one aspect, you also change something in another aspect. Everything's related, and the subjective thing is what you want to get out of it.
Aug 3, 2010 at 16:38 comment added jrista @Dave: I think that is a highly subjective concept there. I seriously doubt the idea that one would always try to make a full-frame sensor "behave" like an APS-C sensor. Sure, if you want identical field of view and depth of field and overall exposure, sure, you mitigate some (some, probably not all) of the gains a better sensor has to offer. I seriously doubt such a scenario is very realistic, however. I currently use an APS-C size sensor, and while it is great for wildlife shots, when I move to a full-frame, I will do so because of the wider field of view, not to keep the same FOV/DOF.
Aug 3, 2010 at 6:51 comment added Dave Van den Eynde @jrista Indeed, and that bigger sensor gives you a wider field of view, so you have to increase your focal length to get the same field of view. But this results in a smaller depth of field, so you have to close down your aperture, resulting in longer exposures, so you have to up your ISO again to compensate for that. If you want keep the same look, that is.
Aug 2, 2010 at 23:54 comment added jrista I think it should be noted that it is less so the sensor size, and more so the size and density of the photosites on the sensor that matter. You could have an 8mp sensor on both a full frame and an APS-C, and the full frame will have better noise performance because of the larger and less dense photosites.
Aug 2, 2010 at 21:55 comment added Craig Walker +1 for mentioning sensor size, as it's hugely important. Unfortunately it's probably not practical for the original poster. :-P
Jul 24, 2010 at 8:59 history answered Sam CC BY-SA 2.5