On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:24 PM, J.C. O'Connell<[email protected]> wrote: > I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are > really retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mounts, > registration etc as FF cameras. The bottom line is that FF > DSLRs and lenses are hardly much bigger than the APS DSLRs/lenses > for these reasons. If APS had been designed from scratch > the difference would be more significant. > > For me, Image quaity trumps all. That's why people > spend big bucks for good lenses and are willing to > carry bulky lenses for better quality too. IQ is pretty > good now, but If I could get much better for a resonable > cost and size increase, I would certainly consider it. > > Another factor is system cost. With FF you don't need > as good optics as you do for APS for same quality. > This could reduce the cost of lenses considerably > and that would have a large effect of reduction > of the totals system cost. FF system could cost > way less that APS system for same quality which always > would be welcome. > > -- > J.C. O'Connell (mailto:[email protected])
If IQ trumps all and weight is not an issue, the answer is to buy a MFDB (there are at least 2 22MP MFDB's available new for costs similar to a 1DsmIII or D3X) and go medium format, not to go for the FF DSLR's. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
