Does 16.16MP FF cropped = 10.1MP xxD image? Where's the reach?

JeffreyG wrote in post #5570296
OK, lemmie rephrase this. If you are going to shoot the longest telephoto you can afford and still be cropping down to an APS-C sized negative or smaller then you will be best served by the highest pixel density you can get.

Right, the key point is pixel density, not the size of the sensor.

nadtz wrote in post #5570480
Right, the key point is pixel density, not the size of the sensor.

That's correct. If you wanted to crop a full frame sensor image so it had the same framing as a crop sensor image, whilst maintaining the same number of pixels that the crop sensor has, then it would require that the full frame sensor has the same pixel density as the crop sensor.

If you took the 40D pixel count and multiplied each side by 1.6x, a FF camera would need to have 25.8Mpixels for it to have the same pixel density. Therefore a FF camera would need to have that pixel count to permit you to crop its 24x36mm down to the 40D sensor size and result in the identical image. That is where the so-called 'reach' comes from.

can't touch this

yep, it is percieved. the light coming through the lens is exactly the same.

also the large size of the photo sites of the 1d and 5d series sensors, is what gives it the unbelievable high ISO performance over the rest of the range.

nadtz wrote in post #5570480
Right, the key point is pixel density, not the size of the sensor.

thats if you want more pixels... higher IQ and noise tolerance, you dont want smaller pixels/photo sites

mzivtins wrote in post #5572904
thats if you want more pixels... higher IQ and noise tolerance, you dont want smaller pixels/photo sites

Yes, but as the question is about reach, you do want more pixels.

mzivtins wrote in post #5572904
thats if you want more pixels... higher IQ and noise tolerance, you dont want smaller pixels/photo sites

I was referring simply to the format comparison and "extra reach". The other side of that coin is if you had more pixels and they were the equal of APS-C pixels (or less APS-C pixels) there would be no 'extra reach' discussion.

How about if we add fire to this and say APS-H 10mp image vs 35mm digital at 21.1 mp. Would they be similar?

<snicker>

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=45388