They say a picture is worth 1000 words; well said Richard. Those two images sum up exactly what I was trying to say.
Printable View
They say a picture is worth 1000 words; well said Richard. Those two images sum up exactly what I was trying to say.
I guess then that image is worth two thousand words...:D
Richard,
Brilliantly explained. The only thing I would add is that regardless of whether an image was captured on a full frame sensor or a crop-factor sensor, the image captured is presented at the same size in a physical print (or for internet display). The image taken on the crop-factor camera - because it captures less area than a full frame camera's image circle - needs to be magnified more to end up the same physical dimensions - and thus gives the illusion of having been taken with a longer focal length. ie if one produced a 6 x 4 print from a full frame camera, one wouldn't settle for a 3 x 2 inch print from a crop-factor camera.
Colin,
You are right on that one!
And... that is why the minimum shutter speed of a crop camera should be 1/focal length x crop factor. Since the crop factor image needs to be enlarged to a greater degree than a full frame image in order to produce the same size final image, the crop factor image needs to be sharper...
Additionally, the expected enlargement to a 4x6 print from the native sensor size is the reason that many lenses which do not produce 1:1 images can be called macro (or in the case of Nikon: micro) lenses. These are most often relatively close focusing zoom lenses. Some ad-agency wiz-kid realized that crowning a lens with a macro or micro designator would increase customer interest.
Once enlarged to 4x6 or larger, the image ratio is usually greater than 1:1, even if the lens is not capable of natively producing a 1:1 image.