Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Will digital ever be replaced?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Showtime100
    O.K. then,


    If a light source covers 100% of a full frame sensor, or 35mm film frame, and if that same light source covers 100% of a smaller sensor...
    How, is that magnification? You obviously admit you cannot cover more then 100% of anything right?

    The difference is the smaller sensor misses out on a certain percentage around the edges that the full frame sensor or film receives. It receives a cropped version, or 'center cut' of the full frame.

    Take an 8"x10" print...cut it out to a size of 7"x9".... You have not maginified anything, yet you have changed the field of view of the original frame.

    If your theory was correct, then all you would have to do is shoot with a 50mm lens and crop the hell out of it and say you have a 300mm lens, because that is all that happpens to a 1.6x sensor, a crop of the full frame.
    Now we have a discussion

    What happens then, if you shoot a 757 that is say about 500 feet from you at 400mm on a full frame sensor? Now 400mm on a 1.6 sensor? Then what happens when you blow both pictures up to 20x30 uncropped? The picture shot with the smaller sensor will fill the poster much more than the larger sensor.

    So to go with your theory, to get the subject shot on the 35mm sensor to completely fill the frame (very important here to differentiate frame from size ) the same way that a smaller sensor would, you'd have to break out the scissors, but why do that? The subject shot on the smaller sensor already fills the frame, so you don't need to.

    Let us pretend that me and my friend, Joe-bob whitetrash, were out at the airport one day. I have a camera with a 35mm sensor, Joe-bob has a camera with a smaller APS-C sensor. We both have 300mm primes (the fact that it is 300mm is irrelevant as long as we both have the same focal length). We happen to snap our fingers at the very same time when an Israel is on short final. We then decide to both make uncropped 20x30 prints of our images.

    My result (35mm, uncropped):


    His result (APS-C, uncropped):


    So you see, both images above presented at 20x30. Which one fills the frame and which one doesn't?

    Now, me and Mr. Whitetrash both have pictures but I think his full-frame looks pretty damn good, so I'm gonna make my version of the Israel fill the frame, like his does.


    OOPS! I had to cut away a whole lot, but yet his is full-frame even at 20x30. Because his filled the frame from the start and mine didn't, his was magnified.


    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by E-Diddy!
      So to go with your theory, to get the subject shot on the 35mm sensor to completely fill the frame (very important here to differentiate frame from size ) the same way that a smaller sensor would, you'd have to break out the scissors, but why do that?.
      Sorry, but mine is not theory, it is a simple basic FACT of physics.

      You are assuming the aircraft does not already fill the frame. Poor assumption, and bad example.

      Originally posted by E-Diddy!
      The subject shot on the smaller sensor already fills the frame, so you don't need to.
      .
      ..because it has already been cropped in-camera due to the sensor's smaller size. It can only get that much, it has discarded quite a bit of the image the lens optics are offering it. The full frame sensor image is already full frame, and records the entire image as presented by the optics of the lens.

      I don't mean to dismiss you, but you are wrong, and there really is no other way to tell you this, other then for you to actually learn the physics involved, maybe then you will understand. If not, in the long run it should not make much difference, the airplane does not know what your thinking.

      Good luck to you, and I apologise for being led to believe you had not yet completed high school, an assumption made based on what I have been reading on here.

      -Duke

      Comment


      • #33
        Everyone just CHILL
        I was only trying to find out what people thought about this topic. I did NOT want to know whether certain members had, or had not finished high school.
        If this continues please can we have this thread locked?
        Thanks.
        Eagles may soar, but weasels never get sucked into jet intakes

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Burrd255314
          Everyone just CHILL
          I was only trying to find out what people thought about this topic. I did NOT want to know whether certain members had, or had not finished high school.
          If this continues please can we have this thread locked?
          Thanks.
          Well, if you are the newly elected "Chill" policeman, I guess we all might just have to, but I have not seen anything related to your nomination to that position on the home page yet... But thanks for caring enough to try! And I already apologised about the high school thing.

          The discussion has long since put your question to bed, and has moved on to a much more interesting discussion of the digital crop many dslr's suffer from and how it relates in comparison to a standard full frame of film, or it's digital cousin. But, this too has been beat like a dead horse and should probably be put to sleep as well.

          -Duke

          Comment


          • #35
            Whatever, I'll think what I want to think. Really does it matter that much other than being an interesting discussion? I rather say not, I'll just keep on shooting, cropped, magnified, or whatever we'll call it.

            But I will leave you with this from Canon's press release today concearning the EOS 5D and full frame:

            Originally posted by Canon press release
            Equivalent in size to a frame of 35mm film, the camera’s 35.8 x 23.9 mm CMOS sensor gives photographers a full angle of view without magnification or cropping effect.


            Comment


            • #36
              Certainly something to think about.....

              I have another question about full frame/cropped though, I hope this one won't start a fight.

              When looking though the view finder, what do you see? A full frame? Or what will end up in the picture w/the crop factor? If you were to fil the frame edge to edge with a subject, would you loose some of the subject? Or are the view finders changed to reflect the crop factor as well? Hope that made sense...

              Comment


              • #37
                Depending on the camera, you should see about 95-98% or so of what the sensor or film plane will get. So in other words if you filled the viewfinder with an aircraft nose to tail, your image should have a small amount infront and behind, as well as top to bottom. Some camera's viewfinder will show 100% but I can't think of one off the top of my head.

                Basically, it is what the sensor or film will receive, a WYSIWYG situation.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Showtime100
                  Depending on the camera, you should see about 95-98% or so of what the sensor or film plane will get. So in other words if you filled the viewfinder with an aircraft nose to tail, your image should have a small amount infront and behind, as well as top to bottom.
                  And that's saved my ass a couple times actually


                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X