>>3818207>Is there an ISO limit on pixel shift? Or was this just dpreview being lazy?Yes, as I said in
>>3818204.
>You mean lenses you can continue to use when you decide to go FF which is where the entire industry is going.I don't see full frame glass as a disadvantage either but if you use EF glass you're probably going to need to use adapters in the future, fuckers are killing DSLRs. Fuck Sony and what they did to the market.
>>3818208>Also: you're not getting a brighter image with all cameras stopped down for the same DoF, you're basically getting the same brightness.No, you're getting a darker image for the same DoF. f-stop equivalency is about DoF, not about light intensity which is only determined by the f-stops. Since you're using wider lenses on crop, you achieve deeper focus with lower f-stops than you would on full frame.
>That said, all formats are capable, and Olympus makes fine equipment. For primarily wildlife I would go Canon 32mp crop or Olympus. For primarily landscape/portraits I would go something FF. It's a shame that Olympus sold out their camera division because they did make great tools, and who knows if the fuckers that bought it will continue to do so.I guess we'll see. I hope JIP doesn't fuck up.
FF does have a small edge over MFT but it's remarkable how close MFT gets. A lot of the credit goes to their amazing glass. I would never guess it's a sensor with 1/4 of the area competing with the big boys there.
