There is an amazing amount of false information floating around the internet when it comes to the benefits of form factors such as 35 mm full frame or APS-C. Typical examples include statements that full frame equals more shallow depth of field, less noise or unreasonably high sensor cost. Or that APS-C is better because it is good enough in a smaller and less expensive package. Unfortunately, such statements are too simple to be possibly true.
Full frame basically offers more choice or options which may or may not lead to better image quality or other benefits. It is necessary to look at each aspect in somewhat more detail. Therefore, I compiled a LumoLabs white paper listing the true reasons in favour of a full frame or APS-C camera:
Read the blog post at: http://falklumo.blogspot.com/2012/06/true-reasons-full-frame.html
Falk is one of the smartest guys I know. :-)
He is not talking about "filmic perspective" :-)
he is more focused in very accurate tech things.
Great in depth work. However; and this is something that is missed by many – even though dof, diffraction, background blur does indeed relate to the sensor size in the ways as described above, it does not say anything about light transmission of the lens, which remains the same regardless of the sensor size. (faster lenses are cheaper on smaller frame)
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!