>>4387925Equivalence is a lie, gearfag. f2 is f2. period. as long as every f2 is a t2, 2 exposes the same everywhere for every sensor size and focal length.
DOF curves don't follow equivalence 1:1.
Exposure doesn't change with sensor size. The apparent amount of quantization noise does.
Equivalence does not include ISO because crop sensors only have more quantization noise. Other sources of noise are not enhanced.
Sampling rate changes processing options for noise reduction efficiency so not just theoretically, but factually, a sensor with a finer sampling rate has less noise if not used at 1:1 zoom. This is frequently abused in video. Oversampled 4k is less noisy because the pixels are averaged together. Line skipped 4k is more noisy because the pixels are NOT averaged together. Stillsfags are still confused about it because they can pick their own downsampling algorithm and lean towards sharper ones, which dont average the noise out as effectively. But if you have say, an x-t5, xh2, or x100vi, if you use your 40mp xtrans to create 24mp, or smaller, photos, the noise basically fucking vanishes and you get performance within a fractional stop of full frame. Sometimes better because xtrans has less chroma noise, and finer luma contrast preservation. It shits the bed on red and blue textures like cardinals but everything else comes out better than 24mp FF.
If you wanna bitch about fuji harp on the autofocus, write fuji a letter, we'd like it if they were as good as sony too
But due to the nature of high res xtrans ,equivalence is totally fucking irrelevant.
