Re: A900 crop vs. A700
Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 4:13 pm
Yah, it's logical that that would work quite good, especially with the med format coverage compared to the rudimentory 35mm AF on tele lenses of that era, in any case even with todays cams I bet they blast off lots and lots of frames in the hope that there will be a good percentage of winners...
The thing that is tough is, taking photos of reasonably small things from intermediate distance, it probably stems from the original design of the camera...ie. the original capability was more biased towards scenery or groups of people...large things, it probably was a long time before genuine macro ability emerged or even telephoto macro..
That's where I see the superiority of APS-C, when shooting at something small like birds, especially ones that are a bit nervous and jumpy, you have to have everything going for you, you can't afford too have the camera focussing on something other than the subject, (because the bird is often in position for a few moments only) the subject has to be a reasonable size in the frame anyway to even have a chance of the camera focussing on it and not something else, (if the area where the subject is is cluttered with leaves and branches).
I still reckon that in shooting small things APS-C easily beats FF (more DOF is also a bonus), because if you actually want to take a better photo of something small you have to hump a much bigger lens around to actually get more pixels under that subject, most of the time a FF shooter would be lucky to even get as many pixels under a given small bird subject as an APS-C shooter would, never mind more.
Greg
The thing that is tough is, taking photos of reasonably small things from intermediate distance, it probably stems from the original design of the camera...ie. the original capability was more biased towards scenery or groups of people...large things, it probably was a long time before genuine macro ability emerged or even telephoto macro..
That's where I see the superiority of APS-C, when shooting at something small like birds, especially ones that are a bit nervous and jumpy, you have to have everything going for you, you can't afford too have the camera focussing on something other than the subject, (because the bird is often in position for a few moments only) the subject has to be a reasonable size in the frame anyway to even have a chance of the camera focussing on it and not something else, (if the area where the subject is is cluttered with leaves and branches).
I still reckon that in shooting small things APS-C easily beats FF (more DOF is also a bonus), because if you actually want to take a better photo of something small you have to hump a much bigger lens around to actually get more pixels under that subject, most of the time a FF shooter would be lucky to even get as many pixels under a given small bird subject as an APS-C shooter would, never mind more.
Greg
If you want others to get your message, be short and precise. Just a free advice 
