>>4505933Anon, you must be trolling.
>Nothing in >>4505916 (You) talks about light. It talks about specs.This post didn't talk about specs. It was about equivalent aperture diameter and different sensor sizes resulting in different light intensity after equalization. I specifically even said to ignore more "spec" related things like light transmittance which is often superior on full frame. This is all about light. If you have X amount of light and need to cover Y amount of mm2, when all that light is focused onto a smaller sensor with less area... the light intensity goes up.
This greater light intensity hitting the sensor is why full frame loses its advantage in low light if you normalize for DOF at the same FOV.
>Either larger formats are better or smartphones are king.LargeR formats give potential for cleaner images, more resolution, and sharper detail with enough light.
If shooting conditions mean you're stuck with ISO in the thousands AND you want a deep DOF, sensor size no longer matters as much. If your subject doesn't move and it exists in an environment where lighting conditions aren't rapidly shifting, you are always better off using a larger sensor.
Smartphones are never really king but they're more capable than you probably want to admit.
Tripod, plus cleaned lens, shutter timer, good lighting, and enough exposure time, and proper RAW capture (no aislop, no ProRAW bs) on a phone will get pretty good images.
What smartphones can't do (yet at least) is operate with a flash.
You can blast micro four thirds, 1", APS-C, full frame or medium format with an ultra bright flash and freeze motion and get proper exposure and crisp images but with smartphones they're stuck with rolling e-shutters that can't handle one brief momentary flash of light and sample it. Smartphones can only operate using continuous lighting and that makes them unfit for any real professional use case (even if you use custom lenses and modify the damn things).
