What does the photographer mean by half a picture?

Friends who want to buy a SLR must have seen the full-width and half-width discussion. What exactly do full-width and half-width mean?

We know that the current digital SLR camera is the same as the traditional film SLR in optical principle, except that the original photosensitive film is replaced by electronic photosensitive element CMOS or CCD.

Full width and half width refer to the dimensions of electronic photosensitive element (CMOS/CCD).

The full-width electronic photosensitive element is as big as the traditional 135 film, that is, 24× 36 mm

The size of a half frame is about 23.7× 15.6mm, or an APS-C frame.

On the surface, they are the difference in the size of photosensitive elements, but for us ordinary consumers, what is the specific difference between full-width and half-width?

1. In terms of price, the advantage of half width is obvious;

2. In terms of size and weight, the half width is lighter and has obvious advantages;

3. In terms of lens groups, the two use different lens groups, so they are far from having more advantages. If we must say the advantages, I think it is still slightly superior, because half of the fuselage and half of the lens can be used, while the full-size fuselage can only use the full-size lens;

4. In terms of depth of field, the depth of field of a full-frame camera is shallow. Because we usually need both large depth of field and shallow depth of field, it is hard to say which is better and which is worse.

5. In terms of image quality, the whole picture has certain advantages. Take a closer look at this advantage. First of all, the advantage of detail in large-scale printing is of little significance to most ordinary consumers, because we rarely print photos over 30 inches to look closely, but it is difficult to see the difference between printing ordinary photos and watching them on the computer. Followed by better high-quality image quality. High sense is very helpful for taking clear photos in some special scenes, such as theater performances, wedding stages and sports, such as basketball and racing. If we are not professional sports photographers, and we don't eat by wedding photography or stage photography, then most photos such as travel, parties and portraits are usually taken with low sensitivity.

Everyone has the pursuit of "faster, better and higher", which is understandable. If there is no cost to achieve such a goal, of course we will not refuse; If you have to pay a considerable price, you need a proper balance. Everyone will take things that don't cost money for nothing, and things that need money to buy need to be carefully considered. Common sense of life also applies to the current topic.

Conclusion: Unless you have an urgent need for high-quality images and are willing to pay a high price, half a camera is enough for the average consumer.

Some people have read a lot of information and may ask, although the whole map is expensive, isn't this the mainstream direction in the future?

I want to say that the mainstream direction in the future will not be full-size, but miniaturized cameras.

Generally speaking, the development of cameras is also a process of miniaturization. The widely used 135 system is the product of the larger 120 system revolution. Just looking at the "better" equipment in everyone's hands, it is not difficult to find that the road to miniaturization still has a long way to go. As far as the film system is concerned, it is also striving for miniaturization, and APS is the result of its efforts. If it weren't for the impact of the digital wave, APS might have formed a certain climate today.

The development track of digital system seems to be the opposite, starting from a small volume and then trying to develop to a large scale. For many people, "full size" seems to be the ultimate goal in the near future. This seems to run counter to the pursuit of miniaturization, in fact, it is not difficult to understand: at the beginning, due to technical limitations, CCD was too small, and many indicators could not meet the basic needs, so large-size CCD naturally became the primary task of this period. With the continuous development of electronic photosensitive components and chip technology, the image quality of half-frame cameras has approached or even surpassed the needs of ordinary consumers, while the continuous development of full-frame cameras is just like blindly pursuing high pixels, which is just a misunderstanding to cater to the market.