A good article on sensor equivalencies

[Lance B]

A good article of sensor size equivalencies over at DP Review:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/what-is-equivalence-and-why-should-i-care?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=features&utm_medium=sidebar-block-Forums&ref=features

[Jorge Arguello]

Wow... very interesting link.

Reading it, I found this article as well (2 pages).

http://admiringlight.com/blog/full-frame-equivalence-and-why-it-doesnt-matter/
http://admiringlight.com/blog/full-frame-equivalence-and-why-it-doesnt-matter/2/

I thought that 35mm equivalence was just to have an idea on the angle of view range when a lens from 35mm camera is set on APSC sensor, especially when the first APSC cameras came into the market and we wanted to use our SLR lens. But it looks that this topic touches other sensitivities about size of sensors.

[Tannin]

An excellent concise summary of the basics, essentially a precis of the famous old article here: http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/ which has been a touchstone for many years.

Notice the Classic Comedy Gold Hour afterwards: the extraordinary series of rabid posts by a handful of highly motivated and barely rational users of one particular brand of camera with a very small sensor. It is amazing how these self-deluding tools manage to go on and on making the same discredited points their fathers and older brothers were making all those years ago. Their loyalty to a brand is one thing; their fundamentalist blindness to well-established, easily-tested facts in the "service" of that brand does them no credit - and doesn't do the reputation of that brand a lot of good either. It's a good brand with some great products. It doesn't try to match the best features of the Canikons, it treads its own path and happily accepts that there are limitations as well as advantages to it's unusual format. But that means nothing to the True Believers; they are utterly convinced that they just need to keep their fingers in their ears a little longer and chant nah-nah-nah a little louder and the laws of physics will curl up and crumble away to nothing in the face of their iron faith.

Funny old world, eh.

[Bennymiata]

An excellent concise summary of the basics, essentially a precis of the famous old article here: http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/ which has been a touchstone for many years.

Notice the Classic Comedy Gold Hour afterwards: the extraordinary series of rabid posts by a handful of highly motivated and barely rational users of one particular brand of camera with a very small sensor. It is amazing how these self-deluding tools manage to go on and on making the same discredited points their fathers and older brothers were making all those years ago. Their loyalty to a brand is one thing; their fundamentalist blindness to well-established, easily-tested facts in the "service" of that brand does them no credit - and doesn't do the reputation of that brand a lot of good either. It's a good brand with some great products. It doesn't try to match the best features of the Canikons, it treads its own path and happily accepts that there are limitations as well as advantages to it's unusual format. But that means nothing to the True Believers; they are utterly convinced that they just need to keep their fingers in their ears a little longer and chant nah-nah-nah a little louder and the laws of physics will curl up and crumble away to nothing in the face of their iron faith.

Funny old world, eh.

Sounds a lot like so many climate evangelists and Apple users........................................

[Lance B]

Sounds a lot like so many climate evangelists and Apple users........................................

LOL. Right on!

[Tannin]

As a matter of fact, lads, I had exactly those two groups in the back of my mind as I wrote. Well, three: Apple users, anti-vaccination kooks, climate change deniers, and BMW owners. However, after some reflection, I decided that the association was unfair to BMW owners.