I agree Ted why and what situations are the questions that should be asked not the my dog is better than your dog which these always without fail turn into. Frankly as a workshop owner, instructor, working pro and forum owner if these type of questions that don't get into that makes my life a blessing because i am always willing to help people make rational decisions on there purchases and I hate the e-mails that say oh shit I just spent 40k and made a big mistake. My heart falls to the ground when I get those and I get them a lot. Rather people be well informed and make great decisions out of the gate for sure.
Well, I have to say I'm rather surprised at how sensitive some of you guys are. I've already admitted that the larger sensor, by virtue of the fact it gathers more light, will always
tend to produce smoother tones and less noise than the smaller sensor. If the larger sensor has more pixels, it will also produce higher resolution than the smaller sensor. That's a given. No need to argue about that.
The principle of using the best camera for the job is a principle I appreciate. I'm reminded of a story from David Bailey who was asked by a client who was particularly impressed with the quality from 4x5 film, if David would use that format for the job he was being offered. Not wishing to engage in complicated discussions as to why 4x5 was not the best tool for the job, and presumably not wishing to risk losing the job to someone else, David agreed, but used 35mm anyway because he knew it was the best tool for the job. The final images that appeared in the client's magazine were all from 35mm. The client was very pleased.
If you are going to make a case that the MFDB system is more flexible than 35mm and allows you to shoot a particular type of scene or job with greater ease or precision than 35mm would allow, then I'm all ears.
Give me some specific examples. If you wish to make the point that you already own hundreds of lenses that fit a number of different camera bodies and that a single DB can be used on all those camera bodies, thus giving you access to all those lenses, then that's fine. I understand that. It's a bit like someone who prefers Nikon because he has accummulated lots of Nikon lenses over the years that still fit a modern Nikon DSLR even though some of the auto features might not work.
Ultimately, the technical quality of the result is dependent upon the lens at one end and the sensor at the other end. What's in between is just stuff to hold the lens and sensor in place.
Perhaps you could make a point that the 'tilt, shift and swing' options of some technical cameras are more flexible than the limited movements of the Canon TS-E lenses?
