There has been a lot of conversation in the forums [fora?] lately about sensor size. We've long recognized that basing electronic sensor sizes on old film sizes was specious at best. But there was one good reason for it...backwards compatibility with existing film-era lenses. Fair enough.
Who, especially at the dawn of digital photography, wanted to invest tens of thousands of dollars on both new bodies *and* lenses designed around what *someone* thought the new optical sensor size would be for ever and ever? No one.
OTOH, manufacturing costs in the early days dictated that a 4x5" sensor, should that large a chip be necessary, would be prohibitively expensive. Likewise a medium format [120 film] sized sensor for all but the very few working pros.
The full frame [FF] 35mm sensor was also really, really pricey...but offered image quality [IQ] that every year came closer to, and finally surpassed, film. Albeit still at a price only pros and well-heeled amateurs could consider.
Enter APS-C and other crop-sensor formats. I, for one, could not consider these hell-hound bastardized formats as a replacement for my beloved Canon, Bronica, Hasselblad, and Leica cameras. Adding insult to injury, Canon abandoned the breech-lock lens mount I'd invested so much in, so my 35mm lenses were worthless overnight. Instead, much to my later regret, I threw up my hands and went with tiny-sensored pocket cameras for a decade.
As expensive as they were, had I simply bought a Canon D30 or 10D and and a couple new EF lenses, my early 2000's images would still, if barely, stand the test of time. Instead I have two and three megabyte mush of some really great scenes.
Fast forward to 2019, and I have just two cameras. A 50MB FF Canon with a handful of carefully curated, first gen L lenses, and a Leica D-Lux Typ 109 4/3 sensor compact. Long way around the barn, but this brings us back to the sensor wars.
There are many who say that 4/3 or even 1" sensors are enough for images viewed on the web and printed to A4 or A3 sizes. And they're not wrong. In fact, the three winning images mentioned in my last couple of posts were all taken with the Leica. Not because that camera produces images that are spectacularly better than other cameras, but because it is small and light enough to be the one have with me [and, it also does a fantastic job.]
But when I bring out the FF camera with some 20yr old vintage L glass something really great happens.
Next time I talk about ditching it all and buying a flavor-of-the-month Fuji, Olympus, or Panasonic crop-sensor camera, just slap me. I see the difference between these crop-sensors and FF in the files and in the 17x25 prints. There's no substitute for sensor acreage.
My only challenge will be not to sell everything, and a limb, and move up to medium format, a la my friend Pascal. If that happens I won't be able to afford internet, so this site will go dark.
You'll know what happened. :)
Who, especially at the dawn of digital photography, wanted to invest tens of thousands of dollars on both new bodies *and* lenses designed around what *someone* thought the new optical sensor size would be for ever and ever? No one.
OTOH, manufacturing costs in the early days dictated that a 4x5" sensor, should that large a chip be necessary, would be prohibitively expensive. Likewise a medium format [120 film] sized sensor for all but the very few working pros.
The full frame [FF] 35mm sensor was also really, really pricey...but offered image quality [IQ] that every year came closer to, and finally surpassed, film. Albeit still at a price only pros and well-heeled amateurs could consider.
Enter APS-C and other crop-sensor formats. I, for one, could not consider these hell-hound bastardized formats as a replacement for my beloved Canon, Bronica, Hasselblad, and Leica cameras. Adding insult to injury, Canon abandoned the breech-lock lens mount I'd invested so much in, so my 35mm lenses were worthless overnight. Instead, much to my later regret, I threw up my hands and went with tiny-sensored pocket cameras for a decade.
As expensive as they were, had I simply bought a Canon D30 or 10D and and a couple new EF lenses, my early 2000's images would still, if barely, stand the test of time. Instead I have two and three megabyte mush of some really great scenes.
Fast forward to 2019, and I have just two cameras. A 50MB FF Canon with a handful of carefully curated, first gen L lenses, and a Leica D-Lux Typ 109 4/3 sensor compact. Long way around the barn, but this brings us back to the sensor wars.
There are many who say that 4/3 or even 1" sensors are enough for images viewed on the web and printed to A4 or A3 sizes. And they're not wrong. In fact, the three winning images mentioned in my last couple of posts were all taken with the Leica. Not because that camera produces images that are spectacularly better than other cameras, but because it is small and light enough to be the one have with me [and, it also does a fantastic job.]
But when I bring out the FF camera with some 20yr old vintage L glass something really great happens.
Next time I talk about ditching it all and buying a flavor-of-the-month Fuji, Olympus, or Panasonic crop-sensor camera, just slap me. I see the difference between these crop-sensors and FF in the files and in the 17x25 prints. There's no substitute for sensor acreage.
My only challenge will be not to sell everything, and a limb, and move up to medium format, a la my friend Pascal. If that happens I won't be able to afford internet, so this site will go dark.
You'll know what happened. :)
RSS Feed