Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/01/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 Frank Verizon1 <red735i at verizon.net>wrote: >Smaller format sensors can use smaller lenses. Less weight is important to many of us. Leica lenses are small but heavy. >The Fuji kit is small light and effective. A properly selected Nikon kit can do as well. Probably Canon too. >What you lose is on noise ( given same pixel count the sensor spacing is tighter which equals higher noise). You also lose big time on wide angle use. If you >are a really WA shooter, then small sensors are a pain. You need to get new really WA lenses or change how you shoot. >If you want MFT, APS-C, or Minox then go for it. Just know the advantages and challenges for your way to shoot. ======================================================================================================================== The APS-C of my X-E2 suits me fine. I can keep a 50mm on it all the time yet get my favorite 85mm angle of view with a 50mm lens' smaller size. I hardly ever want to get a wider view than a 50 gives on FF, and I get that with the 35mm Summicron. I take my few wide shots with the LX3. I once analyzed the stock slides I shot on my 1984 trip to Britain. The general breakdown by lenses was: 50mm (44%), 100mm (22%), 35mm (15%), 21mm (11%), and 300 mm (8%). The breakdown by my favorite pictures was 50mm (57%), 100mm (27%), 21mm and 300mm (6% each) and 35mm (3%). I didn't have an 85 for my OM's, or that might have been the favored lens. Alan Alan Magayne-Roshak, Senior Photographer University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Photo Services (Retired) UPAA POY 1978 UPAA Master of the Profession 2014 amr3 at uwm.edu http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Alan+Magayne-Roshak/ "All the technique in the world doesn't compensate for an inability to notice. " - Elliott Erwitt