Crop-sensor as good as double the resolution full-frame for birds?

Tonybeach_1961 said:

"I positively chaff at the terms "Full frame" and "Cropped sensor." They are simply larger and smaller formats, independent of one another except that you can get the equivalent of a smaller format by cropping a larger format and if they have the same mount you can use the same lenses on both formats."

This is off topic, but your technical nit ignores that there are many "terms of art" in which usages have pretty universal meaning. Do you think anyone here is confused by the use of these terms? In digital photography it's basically a given that "full frame" and "cropped sensor" are talking about 135mm cameras. Why get upset by it?

There is one case where you can make a direct comparison. The D700, and probably others, can do DX with DX lenses, cropping in the camera.

I suspect in very many cases, the DX camera is better when you need the magnification.

Everyone hates telextenders when you want the best image quality, but yes, you could compare

a DX camera to an FX camera with telextender.

Often enough I like wider shots, and bought a (used) D700 when I got a good price.

Even so, I use the D200 more often, as often enough I don't need resolution.

I suspect that we look at resolution way more than we should.

But yes, cropping is a big reason for needing resolution.

As for birds, if it is in frame then the DX is likely better, but the extra view angle from FX might help tracking moving birds, even if you crop it out later.

Just one more of the all things are not equal.

Tonybeach_1961 said:

"I positively chaff at the terms "Full frame" and "Cropped sensor." They are simply larger and smaller formats, independent of one another except that you can get the equivalent of a smaller format by cropping a larger format and if they have the same mount you can use the same lenses on both formats."

 

This is off topic, but your technical nit ignores that there are many "terms of art" in which usages have pretty universal meaning. Do you think anyone here is confused by the use of these terms? In digital photography it's basically a given that "full frame" and "cropped sensor" are talking about 135mm cameras. Why get upset by it?

It is the title of the topic and the article and they are two terms I do my best to avoid. There were other terms used to designate the formats, but it looks to me like clever marketing to describe one as "full" and the other as "cropped" became widely adopted. I have seen some people intentionally using "cropped" in a derisive way including the very first time I saw it used. Manipulating language has and continues to often be used to push opinions, and that's what I chaff at -- perhaps I took George Orwell too seriously. Anyway, if my rant bothers you then why bring it back up?

Tonybeach_1961 said:

Do you think anyone here is confused by the use of these terms? In digital photography it's basically a given that "full frame" and "cropped sensor" are talking about 135mm cameras.

Drilling down a bit on this. I think savvy users (by definition) understand the terms and what they mean. OTOH, I see a lot of confusion among non-savvy users when the topic of lenses and focal lengths arises. One of the biggest complaints old-timers raise about using "cropped" formats is that they want their 50mm to be a 50mm lens and not a 75mm lens. What?!?!? Again, savvy users understand what's being said, but a lot of non-photographers (probably most) immediately become confused, especially when they see (for instance) Nikon saying in their marketing material, "The 83x optical zoom of the COOLPIX P950 covers an incredible focal-length range, from wide-angle 24mm1 to super-telephoto 2,000mm (1) and everything in between." You have to go to the footnotes to see that is a "35mm format equivalent", and you have to be geek (which I am) to understand that a 357mm f/6.5 lens is equivalent to a 2000mm f/36 lens.

a 357mm f/6.5 lens is equivalent to a 2000mm f/36 lens

Or conversely, it's equivalent to a 2000mm f/6.5 lens with nearly 6x as much depth-of-field and 1/30th of the weight.

"Get a life.

I just realized there is an Ignore option here...for the first time since I joined I find that to be useful. Bye, bye" q.g

Chill out my friend. Bit of a family, here, along with the usual family squabbles. Hey, Ho. We still love you.

Such a deep person within yourself. Anyway, a mere 6 million pixels D200,: sad folk only use them

But, beat this pixel peepers.

"Get a life.

I just realized there is an Ignore option here...for the first time since I joined I find that to be useful. Bye, bye" q.g

Chill out my friend. Bit of a family, here, along with the usual family squabbles. Hey, Ho. We still love you.

Such a deep person within yourself. Anyway, a mere 6 million D200,: sad folk only use them

But, beat this, pixel peepers....

"realized there is an Ignore option here...for the first time since I joined I find that to be useful. Bye, bye" q.g"

You are a character; love you or leave you, Interesting contributions. Very direct. Upsets some folk ,who want everyone, just to be like them. The harmony of the sameness.

Me, I like your contributions, the directness.

Freedom of speech?

Anyone.

"Get a life.

 

(snip)

 

Such a deep person within yourself. Anyway, a mere 6 million pixels D200,: sad folk only use them

 

But, beat this pixel peepers.

D200 is 10 MP. Other that that.