>>3940554Full frame gives more than 1 stop of light, it's more than twice the surface area.
Trackers work on full frame just as well as crop, even the cheapest, travel star trackers have a 5kg weight limit, or enough for 3 a7r's with 14mm f1.4 lenses.
For aperture and FL equivalence, full frame lenses are also more affordable and lighter than crop lenses.
Trackers also work better on full frame as they have a greater surface area per picture height, so are more forgiving for small errors in motion.
Also, that post isn't mine, but one further up is; there's far more than just me that thinks you're an insecure dumbass.
And where are these "20 other lenses" that can do a 30s exposure without a tracker? If you had used a tracker you would know that they turn the foreground into whatever motion blur you're trying to avoid from the stars in the first place. People want to take photos with context. Like pic related. Can't do that with a tracker. This is the number one hit on Google images when you search astrophotography, and guess what it's shot on ;)
If you know better, post one of your examples.
Or just do what you usually do and scream my name whilst you furiously masturbate as you're getting your much needed social interaction with me - regardless of how stupid you have to look in the process of doing so.
And where's your screengrab? Running out of ip's to be banned from? Lmao, retard.
