The Absurdity of Full Frame


Man is the measure of all things, so said the Greek philosopher, Protagoras. At least when we compare the size of animals we compare them with ourselves to get a sense of their relative scale. The size of an average adult becomes the standard size reference point. The comparative size of a human = 1.


What about cameras? A commonly used standard comparative reference point is the 35mm format camera after it was popularised by the Leica I released in 1925. The odd thing about this comparison is that some people refer to a 35mm format camera as being "full frame". The reason for this is that its comparative size is set at relative size = 1. This makes it a 100% sized camera and hence "full frame". This is like saying that a human being is a full frame animal because its comparative size is set at 1, making it a 100% sized creature.

Large circle: 640mm diameter of the LSST space telescope's digital sensor
Civilian digital camera sensor formats shown for comparison
A 35mm format sensor is often called "full frame"

The problem is that size is always comparative, and hence a relative concept. That hardly means that comparing the size of something to itself to conclude that compared to itself its relative size = 1 and that therefore it is "full frame". That is truly an absurdity. An ant is 100% the size of itself and an elephant is 100% the size of itself. The fact that 35mm format cameras are often used as a standard comparative reference point no more makes 35mm format a "full frame" format any more than the fact that other animals are commonly compared in size to an average-sized adult human means that humans are "full frame" animals.

Now here is something that proves the point. In a Fujifilm GFX 44 x 33mm ("4433" in the diagram above) sensor sized medium format camera, there is a function called 35mm format mode. This is essentially a 35mm crop mode when people mount 35mm subframe format lenses onto a 4433 format camera:


Some people would insist on calling it "full frame crop mode" instead of "35mm crop mode" but that is truly an absurdity!

Size is comparative. As such a 35mm format sensor is a "crop" or "subframe" sensor relative to a sensor larger than it. The crop factor of a 35mm format sensor compared to the LSST sensor is huge, like comparing a sauroposeidon with a human. Some would conclude on the basis of this comparison that the human is the "full frame" animal:



The notion of comparing something as small as a 35mm format sensor to something much larger and then concluding that the smaller sensor is "full frame" because it is 100% the size of itself is truly bizarre. Yet such nonsense is unquestionably accepted as being "self-evident" by millions on the grounds that "if many believe so, it is so". 

Advertisers obviously regard photographers as imbeciles willing to swallow any idiocy they are spoon-fed.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

PROOF that the Larger the Camera Format the Shallower the Depth of Field!

Image
It is a sad fact that today some algorithm ensures the populist proliferation of gross misinformation on the internet. In an age of misinformation being spread like wildfire over the internet, readers are asked to critically evaluate the information they have been presented with: 1. Is the source of information credible? 2. Is it mechanistically plausible (in photography, on the basis of the science of optics)? 3. If objections have been raised, have these objections been adequately dealt with? Sadly, the chances are that the internet will ignore credible sources of information along with science and unquestioningly listen to Suckerberg-type algorithm driven popularisations of egregious falsehoods instead. But despite the chances that all reasoned arguments and scientifically credible evidence will be ignored, proof that the claims made in this YouTube segment are utter nonsense will be shown to the rare thinkers amongst readers: This flies in the face of what Canon st...
Read more

PREDICTION: The Canon 1DX II Successor Will be a Pellicle Mirror Global Shutter Camera

Image
The latest news is that a Canon ambassador has been found talking about an upcoming camera that can shoot at 30fps: https://www.canonrumors.com/a-new-canon-dslr-seems-to-be-getting-teased-on-social-media-by-a-canon-ambassador/ People are commenting that the camera must be designed to shoot at 30fps in the mirror up position, which is totally absurd. That is like saying that the mirror is a redundant piece of equipment that needs to be locked up and forced to get out of the way for the camera to function properly. It is much more likely that the 1DX Mark II successor will have no mechanical reflex mirror but that it will instead have a pellicle mirror. That way, the mirror does not need to be moved out of the way for it to function and contributes positively to the accuracy of the autofocus. Some may wonder if Canon has found a way to get the reflex mirror to move fast enough to achieve a 30fps frame rate, but that is unlikely. At some point, Canon have NO CHOICE but to elim...
Read more

PREDICTION: Canon Will Reintroduce the Pellicle Mirror to their DSLR System

Image
This is a bold prediction, but Canon (and Nikon) will reintroduce the pellicle mirror into their DSLR line camera systems some time within the next 4-8 years. The last pellicle mirror camera released by Canon was the EOS-1N RS introduced in 1995 and only discontinued in 2001: A semi-translucent pellicle mirror replaces a moving reflex mirror that lifts up to capture the image. The key prediction being made here today is that the pellicle mirror will return to a 1D equivalent camera some time in the next 4-8 years. Nikon, in the more distant past, has also had pellicle mirror film cameras like the Nikon F2H from 1976, and they too will introduce a pellicle mirror digital single-lens translucent mirror (DSLT) camera with an electronic viewfinder (EVF) replacing an optical viewfinder. Canon tends to be more conservative than Nikon but in this instance Canon appears to own recent patents relevant to pellicle mirror cameras, whereas no DSLT relevant Nikon patents have be...
Read more