[Leica] The myths of crop factor

[john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster)]

I admit to being confused, you deride 'crop sensor' cameras but are then 
buying lenses which can only be used on APS-C?

john

-----Original Message-----
From: LUG [mailto:lug-bounces+john=mcmaster.co.nz at leica-users.org] On 
Behalf Of Mark Rabiner
Sent: Wednesday, 7 January 2015 1:32 p.m.
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] The myths of crop factor

There may be a compact light weight and cheap APS-C nikon body in my future 
yet and I'll find out how much of the hype pans out.
I'd guess a stop but will find out when the time comes.
I'm accumulating  new compact lightweight AF-S motor included lenses which 
would work focusing with these cameras. So it makes them more usable. Maybe 
even on dark streets with no streetlights as is the rage.
I'm getting the new 35mm 1.8 ED this week.


On 1/6/15 11:28 AM, "Aram Langhans" <leica_r8 at hotmail.com> wrote:

> I think you would need to compare a crop sensor and a full frame 
> sensor of the same vintage to demonstrate your hypothesis.  The D40x 
> and D200 are probably a few generations of chip/processor behind the 
> D700, so there is a lot more going on than just the difference in 
> sensor size.  A good comparison today would be the D7100 and a D600, 
> as they are both about the same vintage for their respective formats and 
> are both 24mp.
> 
> That said I do agree with your premis, Mark.  When I first started 
> reading your comments on sensors, I was shooting with a D7000, and 
> thought you were crazy, or snobbish, or some such adjective.  Then I 
> got the D600 and went, WOW.  There is quite a difference in tonality, 
> dynamic range and low light performance.  But even my situation is a 
> sensor generational difference observation.  The D7000 was almost two 
> years old at that time.
> 
> Aram
> 
> Aram Langhans
> (Semi) Retired  Science Teacher
> & Unemployed photographer
> ?
> ?The Human Genome Project has proved Darwin more right than Darwin 
> himself would ever have dared dream.??? James D. Watson
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Rabiner [mailto:mark at rabinergroup.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2015 10:03 PM
> To: Leica Users Group
> Subject: Re: [Leica] The myths of crop factor
> 
> I can tell you that when I was shooting cropped with nikon D40x and 
> D200 I could top off at a noisy iso 1600 but would have to set it down 
> to iso 800 for critical work. In those low light levels I certainly 
> tired not to crop so much.
> When I got my first full frame D700 walking home from movie shooting 
> as I walk my auto iso has always got me shooting at iso 6400.  That's 
> two stops faster than 1600 three more than 800. And my pix are near 
> noise free and very droppable.
> 
> 
> This and the fact well know to everybody except it seems here that 
> APS-C and 4/3's cameras  are clearly marketed to and used by amateurs. 
> Not pros ore serious armatures. They are just not pro level gear.
> This is my quirky opinion this is a well known fact of photography life.
> If you want to pretend your small format digital camera belongs in the 
> same conversation as a Leica M6, M7, or M240 you're in your own little 
> dream world. But your not going to argue any ideas or facts your just 
> going to sling personal insults. The idea being I'm looking bad as a 
> result. I think not.
> 
> 
> On 1/5/15 11:06 PM, "John McMaster" <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote:
> 
>> From: Mark Rabiner
>> 
>>>  A 20% crop is nothing for me.
>> 
>> So getting close to a well composed APS-C size ;-)
>> 
>>> I used to balk when people would say a DSLR replaced a Hasselblad.
>>> Now I half agree with it.
>> 
>> I have said that my handheld M9 shots were sharper than tripod 
>> mounted Hasselblad B&W negs but lacked the same tonal range, then the 
>> Monochrom was released...
>> 
>> John
>> 
>>