Frame vs aps c low light2/6/2024 ![]() I much prefer the ability to carry less or have more lenses with me with the same weight and being able to manoeuvre a smaller camera. ![]() Sure you could say why not go 35 mm then a d my response to that is: cost, size. where you need that extra ISO ability and action. I would say that the one area I would give 35 mm the king spot is concerts. Plus Journalistic work which I like to do on the side to keep my brains satisfied I got rid of it and focused on MF for anything where a meticulous setup is possible and my Fuji XT3 does all “on field” where action and speed is asked for and for Corporate Interiors which is sort of in the middle (less setup, more images asked for). 35 mm is definitely a safe bet but I found the results on APS-C to be so good ![]() I work in Architecture/Interiors and also have friends working in fashion and quite a few wedding / social photographers aswell. But there are some great adapters out there which substitute the need: Pentax on a Fuji GFX for example The one thing speaking for 35mm is the availablity of specialised lenses such as TS - actually in particular TS. APS-C scores in portability, journalistic work, video making, speed, cost (ie more flexibility/ bang for buck), and can do everything except ultra high res.īut when you really want ultra high res quality you may aswell have a Medium Format which simply is magic in depth of colours and shaping of subjects. Lens sizes have become a joke and so is the cost of your kit. ![]() So in reality 35 mm is the jack of all trades but doesn’t do anything perfectly. However if you really are after high resolution details - in say, Studio based Fashion shoot or Fineart Landscapes or Architecture/ Interiors you may as well go Medium Format. I can print at 2 meters in amazing quality and no issue on a Fuji XT3. Have you shot the same image in the same condition? I did that test and was surprised. That is not to say you don’t but there’s potentially confirmation bias you have to get over. I moved over from Nikon because precisely there is no difference if you know what you are doing. Hmm not sure - these days in Commercial work between 35mm and APS-C, APS-C is king. Going forward, I am going to put together a comprehensive and in-depth sensor size review, going from the smallest I can find through to the largest I can get my hands on, as I think a lot of the benefits of a full frame sensor are not as great as in the past, and for those who want it, the price jump to used medium format is far more viable than ever before.Ĭan you tell the difference between the two sensors? I don't think that the difference is that great considering the price jump. In this comparison video, I compare a Canon APS-C size sensor to a full frame offering. This has also made the price of a used medium format camera become far cheaper and almost identical to a pro full frame DSLR, which creates the questio:, if you want to move up from an APS-C size sensor and you don't shoot action, would jumping up to medium format be the answer? The resolution, low light performance, build quality, and autofocus have been dramatically improved in cameras that have smaller sensors than the 35mm full frame the same can also be said for cameras with larger sensors. Since the mid naughties, full frame digital cameras have reigned over their crop sensor counterparts for most genres of photography.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |