crop factor advantage for telephoto is a myth. Pixel density is what counts. As an example, the "full-frame" 1Ds II has more "reach" than the 5D, and also more than the 1.3x crop 1D II, which has the same pixel density as the 5D (thus, both the 5D and 1D II have the same reach.)
As a consequence, the real reach advantage of the 20D over the 5D is NOT 1.6X, but 1.28X (the factor of pixel density or pixel pitch). And that is before taking into account the AA filter, which is recognized to be weaker on the 5D, yielding sharper per-pixel pictures.
The fact that most 1.6x crop cameras have more reach is that they can afford to have more pixel density, because a full-frame with that pixel density would be too expensive, but as far as 1.3X and FF is concerned, this is not a practical rule.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Andy @ Mar 9th 2007 10:58PM
crop factor advantage for telephoto is a myth. Pixel density is what counts. As an example, the "full-frame" 1Ds II has more "reach" than the 5D, and also more than the 1.3x crop 1D II, which has the same pixel density as the 5D (thus, both the 5D and 1D II have the same reach.)
As a consequence, the real reach advantage of the 20D over the 5D is NOT 1.6X, but 1.28X (the factor of pixel density or pixel pitch). And that is before taking into account the AA filter, which is recognized to be weaker on the 5D, yielding sharper per-pixel pictures.
The fact that most 1.6x crop cameras have more reach is that they can afford to have more pixel density, because a full-frame with that pixel density would be too expensive, but as far as 1.3X and FF is concerned, this is not a practical rule.