>>3830040I'm arguing that to anybody using multiple formats - even more so when multiple aspect ratios are involved - all those things are self evident and beyond question. You can't be using a format even casually for a couple months, without figuring out what's what and how your lenses affect your images.
So the ones left arguing are either shitposters brandfagging their system; or newfags that are genuinely confused and ripe for misinformation and pedantry because they spend hours reading trivia of other people using cameras instead of getting a system themselves and going the fuck out to use it.
All those issues about equivalencies are solved in larger formats. You get the lens' FoV angle and image circle, as well as aperture, and that tells you all you need to know.
There are so many different formats and aspect ratios, that talking about "equivalences" would be hugely impractical because of all the different combinations.
Modern digital is in the unfortunate position, that while it's not a single format, it's also not a dozen formats to render "equivalences" silly.
It's just a couple formats, which makes it too tempting/possible to start talking about equivalences and get lost in a sea of pedantry.
