Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Other Stuff
Off Topic
Zack Arias Debunks the Full Frame / Crop Sensor Debate
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Eyelight" data-source="post: 338129" data-attributes="member: 24753"><p>The problem with photography discussions is everything works together and digital just makes the everything more complicated.</p><p></p><p>There are major differences in the complicated stuff that produces the image, but not in the end result for most photography.</p><p></p><p>Checked out the moments of math tutorial. Here's a number to add to it. My phone camera has a 1/3.2" sensor with roughly 500,000 pixels per square millimeter. That's more pixels in a square millimeter then the first digital sensors had total. I need to experiment some more, but it seems to handle low light better than the D3200. Now the whole package of the camera phone can't compete with a DSLR.</p><p></p><p>Point is the technology is passed the point of sensor size meaning much of anything and they are only going to get better. </p><p></p><p>Still might need an FX or MF or 8x10 for some other reason, but it's not really going to be the sensor if looking at newer cameras.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Eyelight, post: 338129, member: 24753"] The problem with photography discussions is everything works together and digital just makes the everything more complicated. There are major differences in the complicated stuff that produces the image, but not in the end result for most photography. Checked out the moments of math tutorial. Here's a number to add to it. My phone camera has a 1/3.2" sensor with roughly 500,000 pixels per square millimeter. That's more pixels in a square millimeter then the first digital sensors had total. I need to experiment some more, but it seems to handle low light better than the D3200. Now the whole package of the camera phone can't compete with a DSLR. Point is the technology is passed the point of sensor size meaning much of anything and they are only going to get better. Still might need an FX or MF or 8x10 for some other reason, but it's not really going to be the sensor if looking at newer cameras. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Off Topic
Zack Arias Debunks the Full Frame / Crop Sensor Debate
Top