Croasdail wrote in post #18847519
"EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18846798
The thought that one extra stop of DOF is going to completely make any image is still laughable to me."
Ok.... I hate these kind of threads because nobody here does all types of photography. No one. So some of these statements about things being categorically one way or another - are indeed laughable.
To a sports photographer like myself, 1 stop is critical. It makes the difference between your images being selected, and not being called back to do another event in the future. It makes the difference of a player being the focus of a shot, or there being too much visual noise in the background.
Looking at the shots that EverydayGetaway has posted, most of them wouldn't be that effected by 1 stop +/- either way. But to make statements that someone can represent all photographers styles and needs, and deem what is laughable or not, is in of itself laughable. If everyone shot the same way, this would be an effort in futility. Everyones images would look the same.
An example. I do very little birding at all. But this year in my backyard I put up a bird feeder. Hundreds of birds became my new best friends. At first I shot high iso, high shutter speed. I got tons of frozen in air shots of birds that bored the heck out of me. So I opened up more, lowered my shutter speed to being always below 1/800, and ended up loving the results. I love the motion in the shots. Most would argue I'm doing it wrong. But I have achieve a lot of motion in the images... my style.
DoF is a personal thing. There is a visible difference between images shot at f4 and f2.8, and again between images at f1.4. How important that is depends of what the photographer is trying to show. Saying that is "laughable" is laughable. Or maybe I misunderstood the point trying to be made.
Your argument is fair, and I see what you're saying, but I still maintain what I said. I have yet to see any image that would be completely ruined by having one stop less DOF, but again, that's my take (as I clearly said was MY take). My whole point was that if the TS clearly has experience and bought the 50-140mm they likely know the difference they'll see compared to FF and are fine with the "compromise".
I've stated on numerous threads (including this one) that there are niches where that might be their thing and they "need" it, doesn't mean it makes sense to me, but that doesn't matter... I'm not the one using the equipment. The point is that blowing a stop of DOF out of proportion like it's going to have a massive impact on the average person's photography, is indeed, laughable (at least to me, still waiting for someone to change my mind).
cug wrote in post #18847678
Yep. That's forums (and humanity in general).
It's the same thing as people saying "f/2.8 is f/2.8 and it let's in the same amount of light no matter the sensor size". That's like saying a full two seater car transports as many people as a full four seater, just because every available seat has exactly the same number of people in it. Many people ignore context or bend the context to their argument – generally by leaving out part of the information that doesn't support their argument.
It's why I've given up reading Fuji specific internet forums – you just can't argue with stupid, and it's feels more abundant there. I don't read many other forums either for similar reasons.
The downside (and the upside) of the internet is that is has given everybody a platform to (potentially) the world stage – no matter whether they know what they're talking about or not. Sometimes I wish we still had the good old times of printed publication where you at least had to work a bit to get your sermon out in the wild.
Go back and read the whole thread, carefully.
Saying something like "you just can't argue with stupid" is a really stupid statement in general that really just a way to dodge any actual debate.