>>3870484>You're so wrong I can't even dispute a single thing you said >:(Ftfy
>Printing is a red herringOh, so you export digital images at different sizes depending on the sensor size used then? (That makes you look even more retarded)
>What matters is if the lens provides the sensor with enough informationEnough info for what? Any lens will give enough 'info' to give an image, even if it's made of old plastic bottles and cum.
>Smaller lenses are cheaperThen why are FF lenses cheaper and with faster equivalence?
>Make it more preciseMore precise than what? Because we've ascertained they don't come anywhere close to full frame lenses.
>You don't know what lp\mm meansYes I do, it's how many distinct pairs of contrasting lines can be resolved per mm. An mft sensor is 13mm tall, a FF sensor is 26mm tall, so the mft has to resolve twice as many lp\mm to give comparable final image resolution.
What did you think it meant? Lmao.
>Mft is better for deep dofNo, at equivalent apertures on equivalent focal lengths, they have identical dof, and the 2 extra stops the FF camera has to stop down can be accounted for with iso, and as FF has a 2 stop improvement in iso performance, both would have similar noise performance; but you could also raise the shutter speed by 2 stops and have 2 stops less noise and the same dof as your mft option.
>Mft is superior for streetWrong, street often relies on low light situations and fast shutter speeds, FF cleans house.
>Only the best old lenses work on mftAnd they still resolve 4 times as much detail on full frame, and show the correct fob and dof.
>Cad is oldCad for optics is CPU intensive and this wasn't feasible until the late 90's, by 2010 it was affordable enough for even Chinese startups - hence samyang, laowa, etc.
You're dumb.
>>3870483Are you interested in photography or larping?
If you're interested in photography, get a full frame camera, if you're interested in larping, get an old film camera.
