FalkirkEagle

On 1/22/2022 at 4:09 PM, Andrew Reid said:

"Nothing unique or special about the look"

"They are all equivalent... APS-C, full frame, medium format"

*Stops down GFX lens to F3.5...."Same look to DOF as APS-C at F1.8"

FUCK

When camera store salesman become an authority on photography and video...

You get this!

Widespread misinformation.

Sad to see how many people in the YouTube comments just accept it.

Stopping down a medium format camera and then complaining it can't do anything different to an APS-C model at F1.8????

Put a Minolta MD 58mm F1.2 on APS-C, full frame and medium format and tell me they all look equivalent!

With same lens, look would be completely different on all 3.

Equivalency is being taken to mean there is no difference in the look of different camera formats.

It completely ignores the fact that lenses are matched to sensor size.

If you take one designed for one format and apply it to another, it looks different!

I wouldn't be surprised if they punted this out just to generate the heat.

It is after all quite chilly in Canada.

I disagree with the contention that there is no real difference between medium format and full-frame, APS-C and Micro Four Thirds. Or that there is nothing special about the medium-format 'look'.

I have seen sample photos coming out of a Fuji GFX-50 or even a digital Hasselblad and noticed that they both produce dramatically better images - in terms of sharpness, colour, resolution and overall image quality. 

Fashion, commercial and corporate photographers used to use medium-format film cameras for various reasons, and I just named four of them. The bigger the image capture area, the more light you can capture, and the better the resolution. It's simple physics. 

Chris and Jordan have pushed full-frame, APS-C and M43 cameras because that's where their bread and butter is. In the consumer retail space, medium-format cameras are seen as somewhat exotic and don't sell nearly as well. 

Hello all,

I'm in the midst of simplifying my camera gear in hopes of getting one camera that does video as well as it does stills.

I currently own the following:

Sony NX80 camcorder

Canon XC10 camcorder

Canon EOS M6 Mk II with EF-M 18-150 and 11-22 lenses.

I bought the NX80 last summer (brand new) and found it was too much camera for my needs. I also bought the XC10 used and found I didn't like it that much. I like the M6, but don't care for the 4K video it produces, and it seems like Canon are going to be discontinuing EF-M lenses and EOS-M series cameras soon.

I did try to get a trade-in value for all this from a retailer, but what they offered was insulting and disrespectful - like they wanted to steal my stuff while still making big profits on what I was interested in trading for. 

I won't try to sell my stuff on eBay. Their listing fees are extortionate and if you list but your item doesn't sell, you lose money. Plus, eBay are flooded with listings for Canon EOS M6 and M6 Mark II cameras, so I'd likely not be able to sell my M6 camera and lenses without practically giving them away. And forget selling on Facebook - tons of tire-kickers, losers who expect you to give your stuff away for nothing, or people who have no intention of buying anything but use the buy and sell feature to try and harvest your personal details like home address, email address and phone number. 

So what could I buy to simplify things and be reasonably future-proof? Without losing my shirt on what I've bought? And give me decent stills and quality?