In that last sentence, I would say both, IMO. When I went full frame, it was a night and day difference in both IQ and in high ISO performance over my previous 1.6x crop sensor.
I hear ya. This isn't the first time I've read you make this same comment. When I got back into the hobby, all of the past memories came flooding back. In my case of 35 years ago, I remember lusting after the Nikon F body camera, which of course was the pro standard for so many years. When I started into larger format 120mm, my lust was the Mamiya something or other...can't remember the model number. That lust wasn't quite as strong though because back then I just couldn't afford shooting regularly in larger format film. I just wasn't specialized enough and my shooting was for fun...whereas most large formal Mamiya owners were professionals using it for wedding photography.
Notice how that guy used some standard lenses. He used a borrowed sigma lens for one of those pano's. For some of the video I think he used a 50 1.2.
Yeah, that's what makes those images all the more impressive and convincing. This is the primary reason I asked the initial question I did. My reasoning was, if the lens is limiting, then why the f-awe-king uk-some pictures!
So, basically all of you have answered that, when I read that the lens has become limiting, I now agree based on these pictures that's basically bullcrap.
There has been a lot of negative hype saying too much resolution will make your lenses obsolete and only the best L glass will work. Well, the images I have been viewing with the lens pairings state contrary to this. I just keep reading and looking at people's work with this camera and am amazed at the clarity, sharpness, detail and performance from this camera.
I don't know if it's a good analogy, but the 120mm camera that I owned way back when was not a very high quality camera. I did consider my AE-1 with prime lenses to be a reasonably HQ 35mm camera back then. Even so, the images I got with the 120mm blew away the best shots with my AE-1. That was a fixed focus camera...I'm pretty sure that the lens wasn't all that great quality in terms of what it could have been. The point is that in that case the film format was 3 times larger, so it was obvious to me that was a HUGE factor in improving image quality.
I think this is kinda the same point that both phanophish and freelunch are making in the previous comments too.