Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tamron SP 150-600mm mk I vs mk II
#31
Quote:Or just 1.5-1.6x. 
The FF sensor has 2.25X more area than Aps-c! 

 

 

     APS-c sensor 24X16= 384 square milimeters

 

     FF    sensor  24X36 =  864  "              "               2.25X more area.

 

 FL is one dimensional, area is two dimensional, therefore for area 1.5X 1.5 = 2.25!

#32
I know, it just makes no sense to talk about magnification measuring area size. So, just 1.5x instead of  2.25x area size.

#33
Hmmm...I think it's created more misunderstandings than explanations, 

 

     I know you know how it works BC but,

 

    many people "do"  think that the FF sensor is 1.5X bigger than APS-c and it isn't,  and it isn't a 1.5X magnification either, in fact it has become a common error...  which is exactly why I wrote in the manner that I did!

 

    So the supposed sweet spot is not so sweet as it seems, DXO's perceived sharpness ratings from FF to APS-c show that for the most part, FF scores are significantly better on FF than APS-c, often double (2.25 less a little)  that caused DXO to take a lot a unmerited flack, many "still" think DXO have it wrong, the Angry Photographer fro one!

 

IMHO it should not be called the "sweet spot" but the    "bitter-sweet spot."

  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)