[mst]

[quote name='Lomskij' timestamp='1286786840' post='3573']

I guess the same arguments can be applied to FF vs medium format :-))

[/quote]



Absolutely. However, FF DSLRs are in the reach of many amateur budgets, while even the most afordable digital MF cameras are not.





[quote name='Lomskij' timestamp='1286786840' post='3573']I don't get this one, care to elaborate? There are tons of FF lenses that look really poor on high density FF sensors, while still can be used APS-C because of sweet spot.

[/quote]



I'm sure what genotypewriter referred to was not sharpness alone, but the creative potential, especially regarding DOF, that is available to FF users by cheap or at least rather affordable lenses. Think about a 35/2.0 for example. Yes, you can buy a 24/1.4 for your APS-C camera instead, but the difference in price can almost buy you a FF body.



For me, this is the main advantage of FF: limited DOF. Personally, I don't care much about anything above ISO 1000, nor do I find the dynamic range lacking in any modern DSLR (at least not for my usage). However, the creative potential I have even with what is considered rather average glass is priceless to me. Plus, of course, the large and bright optical viewfinder.



However, thinking about FX one should also take into account some issues that many have "forgotten" about after a longer period of crop camera usage: vignetting can be surprisingly hefty, as well as distortion.



-- Markus