08-22-2019, 03:24 PM
To me, it's just two reasons for FF: Shallow (and not more!) DoF (Depth of Field) for Portraits, but also for all pictures when I want to isolate the subject. The other reason is ultrawide-angle, which in APS-C has never the resolution of details. Saying so, I take very good glass for granted, not many lenses resolve 60 MP from corner to corner when it comes to ultra wide.
The expenses are higher, but the quality at certain circumstances is also higher. Plus, all FF can switch to APS-C (for saving diskspace or gaining a bit of tele-reach), but with APS-C one needs to stitch pictures to get better resolution. One can always crop FF. However, I still keep my Fujis: When it comes to batterylife, three batteries are hard to beat. Glass is also good although dated. All f/1.4 and f/1.2 are between 10 and 15 year old designs... the 8-16 ultra wide is not something compact, while a Nikkor S 14-30 is cheaper, lighter and can use screw in filters. I hate Nikon's slow pace of filling up the gaps in their lens line up, but in terms of handling and ergonomics Fujifilm falls short compare to the Z.
The expenses are higher, but the quality at certain circumstances is also higher. Plus, all FF can switch to APS-C (for saving diskspace or gaining a bit of tele-reach), but with APS-C one needs to stitch pictures to get better resolution. One can always crop FF. However, I still keep my Fujis: When it comes to batterylife, three batteries are hard to beat. Glass is also good although dated. All f/1.4 and f/1.2 are between 10 and 15 year old designs... the 8-16 ultra wide is not something compact, while a Nikkor S 14-30 is cheaper, lighter and can use screw in filters. I hate Nikon's slow pace of filling up the gaps in their lens line up, but in terms of handling and ergonomics Fujifilm falls short compare to the Z.