Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. 720p in 2018? Looks horrible by today's standards. (don't confuse content for image quality) Is there a version of this video in 1080p? I suppose there isn't 4K version because of rolling shutter, and they wanted to show action.
  2. This is not true. Covered area remains the same, regardless aperture size. Changing the F-stop doesn't change coverage - it changes intensity of light (exposure). Aperture equivalent is useful for DoF, and also for determining the total amount of light the picture will be made from, and by that the expected quality and amount of noise. In essence, aperture equivalent is important when comparing cameras with different sizes of sensor, but also when comparing cropped image on the same sensor - like when trying to determine DoF, and quality/noise of severely cropped 4K video on EOS R.
  3. Manual focus only, which means almost useless or very bad for many photography tasks, and F0.95, which is equivalent to f/1.8 on FF. I don't see equivalents for f/1.4, even though these F0.95 lenses are plenty fast. But they are manual focus only. And for FF you get f/1.8 or f/1.4 lenses with automatic focus. And I suppose those Voightlanders are very, very expensive. I really don't understand why you are explaining this to me. BTW signal from sensor is analog - some value will always be read. It's just that smaller size photosites will generate signal of a lower voltage, which is more
  4. Not necessarily. Yes, there is size of photosites you don't want to go below, but the main reason is that MFT sensors in general receive less light per photo. Consider this - if you want to take a photo in low light, you might use 35mm f/1.4 on FF. To get the equivalent photo on MFT, you need 17,5mm f/0.7 lens. Does that kind of lens actually exist? If you use nifty fifty on FF (50mm f/1.8), to give the same amount of light to MFT sensor you would have to use 25mm f/0.9 lens. Does that lens even exist? Do MFT users use lenses that are that fast? No? No. They usually just use lenses with the eq
  5. No. f/2 is f/2 only in exposure triangle. f/2 is not f/2 when considering DoF or (total) amount of light per photo (not per pixel). Think about this - aperture is the size of the lens opening. If you do not use the whole lens opening, the whole aperture size, that means that you are using smaller than maximum aperture. What does it matter to you if lens has a certain aperture when you are not using the light that that aperture passes through - you are using only a part of it? So, on crop sensor that f/2 aperture is effectively smaller than it would have been on full frame senzor. What is
  6. It's all politics. It is clear that manufacturers try to advance their cameras as little as possible. They will cripple them on purpose (planned obsolescence). They are on a verge of creating almost perfect camera, but they just won't do it because they won't be able to sell newer cameras anymore. They just keep getting closer and closer to the verge, and slower and slower, but won't cross it - not because they can't, but because it would hurt future sales.   You can forget about Sony (and other manufacturers also) creating great universal camera (video + photo), because they still beli
  • Create New...