A warning on Full Frame

menthel said:
You can with the right kit and technique. My point is that kit isn't the be all and end all. There is enough control with a 1.5 to 1.6 crop camera for the vast majority of photography. FF is not the panacea that some here believe it to be to fix poor photographic skill. Not that I know about great photos!
Click to expand...

If I'm using the same lens on the same subject I get more pleasing out of focus areas with the 1Ds than I do the 7D. That's a point of fact and is why I have both.
 
jj_glos said:
If I'm using the same lens on the same subject I get more pleasing out of focus areas with the 1Ds than I do the 7D. That's a point of fact and is why I have both.
Click to expand...

Slightly bizarre point but correct. Use a different lens on the crop to give a similar effect. If you buy for a crop camera there are lenses out there that will allow you to do this! :)
 
MomentCapture said:
^^^
According to DXOMark my D7K is about even to the 1Ds MK III Lol!
I personally don't put too much weight on DXO mark as I don't think it takes into account the strength of things like AA filters etc, that can have a noticeable impact on things like sharpness.
I can't give you a comparison, but the following is my opinion.
The 60D may give better results in things like colour depth and dynamic range due to new processes and architecture, but what it won't do (obviously), is have any effect on field of view and depth of field (the last one being the biggest draw for me), and it also won't increase the effective resolution of your glass.
Click to expand...
I agree that the scores on DXOMark don't tell the whole story, there is definitely more to this than the lab report can capture.

The FoV/DoF point is moot for me because I'm set up for APS-C and I've never been in a position where I wanted less DoF than I could get with my gear, but I fully accept that this could be down to the style of photos I take and it may well not be the case for everyone.

What did you mean by 'it also won't increase the effective resolution of your glass'?
 
SixToes said:
Clearly the 1Ds will have a much nicer viewfinder (large viewfinder - mmm :))
Click to expand...
I'm very disappointed by current digital viewfinder. 5D, 1Ds, D700, D3 all with a lousy ~0.7x magnification. Sod this, I want OM2 0.92x back. Hell, even the "consumer" SLRs hat 0.8x. The 5D viewfinder vignettes even without any magnifier.

So yes, while it is nice to have a larger viewfinder, it isn't that much of a step up. Certainly not enough to accurately focus faster than f2 manually without taking a focus series. This is especially annoying when you compare it to what Panasonic manages to achieve with their m4/3 electronic viewfinders.
 
Cistron said:
I'm very disappointed by current digital viewfinder. 5D, 1Ds, D700, D3 all with a lousy ~0.7x magnification. Sod this, I want OM2 0.92x back. Hell, even the "consumer" SLRs hat 0.8x. The 5D viewfinder vignettes even without any magnifier.

So yes, while it is nice to have a larger viewfinder, it isn't that much of a step up. Certainly not enough to accurately focus faster than f2 manually without taking a focus series. This is especially annoying when you compare it to what Panasonic manages to achieve with their m4/3 electronic viewfinders.
Click to expand...

Yup I know what you mean, even cheap film SLRs seem to have massive viewfinders compared to DSLRs. I've never handled a 1 series so I don't know how big they are, I'd assumed they were much better but it looks like I'm wrong.

I also miss split prism viewfinders (I know you can get replacement ones for digital but I don't want to lost the focus points in the VF)... but thats another story :)
 
menthel said:
Slightly bizarre point but correct. Use a different lens on the crop to give a similar effect. If you buy for a crop camera there are lenses out there that will allow you to do this! :)
Click to expand...

I've got both, so I do know my options :) For example I have the Sigma 30mm f1.4 which I love on the 7D. The problem is, I also have the Sigma 50mm f1.4 so I have roughly the same equivalent field of view on both. The 50mm on the FF gives me better oof areas than the 30mm on the crop. Juggling the two formats is proving to be bit of a nightmare, I don't really want to sell the 30mm as it's a stellar lens but it's difficult to justify keeping it. Especially when I'm trying to fund a stabilised 70-200 f2.8! :D
 
Cistron said:
I'm very disappointed by current digital viewfinder. 5D, 1Ds, D700, D3 all with a lousy ~0.7x magnification. Sod this, I want OM2 0.92x back. Hell, even the "consumer" SLRs hat 0.8x. The 5D viewfinder vignettes even without any magnifier.

So yes, while it is nice to have a larger viewfinder, it isn't that much of a step up. Certainly not enough to accurately focus faster than f2 manually without taking a focus series. This is especially annoying when you compare it to what Panasonic manages to achieve with their m4/3 electronic viewfinders.
Click to expand...

I disagree that it isn't much of a step up - I literally went 'wow' when I looked through a 100% viewfinder for the first time.

But then I've never actually shot film, and at the time I was using a 1000D - it looks like you are looking through a door peephole after that.
 
SixToes said:
I agree that the scores on DXOMark don't tell the whole story, there is definitely more to this than the lab report can capture.

The FoV/DoF point is moot for me because I'm set up for APS-C and I've never been in a position where I wanted less DoF than I could get with my gear, but I fully accept that this could be down to the style of photos I take and it may well not be the case for everyone.

What did you mean by 'it also won't increase the effective resolution of your glass'?
Click to expand...

I was going to try to it explain, but the below link by KR does a better job than I could...

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/full-frame-advantage.htm
 
menthel said:
Slightly bizarre point but correct. Use a different lens on the crop to give a similar effect. If you buy for a crop camera there are lenses out there that will allow you to do this! :)
Click to expand...

Unless you resort to a long telephoto and stand miles from the subject (which also compresses the background greatly, which may or may not be what you want), there isn't really a lens that can easily produce great bokeh if your doing a full length, as with a crop, you have to stand further back, and the further back you stand from your focus point the more your DOF increases.

Sure I can use my 50 at 1.4 (pretty soft at this aperture though) or my 35mm 1.8 to get the background a little OOF, but it just can't get close to what FF can achieve.
If you already have enough shallow DOF on your crop, then FF will allow you to shoot at smaller apertures where the lens is sharper...
 
MomentCapture said:
Unless you resort to a long telephoto and stand miles from the subject (which also compresses the background greatly, which may or may not be what you want), there isn't really a lens that can easily produce great bokeh if your doing a full length, as with a crop, you have to stand further back, and the further back you stand from your focus point the more your DOF increases.

Sure I can use my 50 at 1.4 (pretty soft at this aperture though) or my 35mm 1.8 to get the background a little OOF, but it just can't get close to what FF can achieve.
If you already have enough shallow DOF on your crop, then FF will allow you to shoot at smaller apertures where the lens is sharper...
Click to expand...

Technique is your friend. It is possible in most situations, you just have to separate the subject from the background enough. Again, using good techniques (if you have enough room!) will give you good results.
 
menthel said:
Technique is your friend. It is possible in most situations, you just have to separate the subject from the background enough. Again, using good techniques (if you have enough room!) will give you good results.
Click to expand...

^^^
That's the point though isn't it, crops are less flexible in this matter, and you need allot more space to pull off a similar effect.
It's not as simple as learning a 'technique' because a crop has very real physical constraints in this area Vs FF, and increasing the subject to background distance should be blatantly obvious for anyone who's got a moderate understanding of photography, it's just increasing the background to subject distance, is often not possible, or is inconvenient.
 
menthel said:
Technique is your friend. It is possible in most situations, you just have to separate the subject from the background enough. Again, using good techniques (if you have enough room!) will give you good results.
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree with this, it's not something that is generally possible with the photography I do. I rarely take any "prepared" shots. The vast majority of what I shoot is capturing the subject in their environment going about whatever it is they are doing. I don't have the ability to move the subject to a more ideal position, so I need all the help I can get from the tools I use :)
 
Then the ff camera is also constrained at the long end, the reach of a crop will win out every time! ;)

I guess the point is that no one camera will do it all perfectly but that all cameras can do the job well enough. That goes for ff and crop. ff cameras here are recommended as a cure all but actually a lot of the time they are not needed, but actually an improvement in technique or the right kit for the job.
 
menthel said:
Then the ff camera is also constrained at the long end, the reach of a crop will win out every time! ;)

I guess the point is that no one camera will do it all perfectly but that all cameras can do the job well enough. That goes for ff and crop. ff cameras here are recommended as a cure all but actually a lot of the time they are not needed, but actually an improvement in technique or the right kit for the job.
Click to expand...

Not much, if at all, FF tends to crop well also as the IQ is better to begin with.
I tend to think of crop camera's these days as just that, a frame that's been cropped strait out of camera...
 
menthel said:
Then the ff camera is also constrained at the long end, the reach of a crop will win out every time! ;)

I guess the point is that no one camera will do it all perfectly but that all cameras can do the job well enough. That goes for ff and crop. ff cameras here are recommended as a cure all but actually a lot of the time they are not needed, but actually an improvement in technique or the right kit for the job.
Click to expand...

Exactly, which is why I have both :D
 
which camera's are FF? just the 1d's and 5d's? what about the awsome 7d?

Also, will my tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and canon 50mm f1.8 work on a FF? i assume that all L lenses work on FF?
 
7d isn't FF, and your 17-50 I don't think your 17-50 will work on FF, as opposed to physically working but showing vignette like the Nikon DX lenses on FF.
 
FF does seen to make a big difference to photos that I've seen, using the same glass.

Whilst a really unfair comparison, it's very easy for me to tell the difference between my bro's 5d mark 2 and my 20d even when the photos are printed out at 6*4. Newer tech, sure, but also sharper and better subject separation for me.

I think of it as the difference between expensive hifi speakers and REALLY expensive speakers...
 
mrthingyx said:
FF does seen to make a big difference to photos that I've seen, using the same glass.

Whilst a really unfair comparison, it's very easy for me to tell the difference between my bro's 5d mark 2 and my 20d even when the photos are printed out at 6*4. Newer tech, sure, but also sharper and better subject separation for me.

I think of it as the difference between expensive hifi speakers and REALLY expensive speakers...
Click to expand...

Don't bring hifi into this, its even more full of snake oil and charlatans than photography kit! ;)
 
Hifi and snake oil? Heresey!

Seriously, though... The difference is only worth it if you, the person taking the photo, think so. I love the photos that come out of my bro's 5d 2, so that's what I aspire to.
 
mrthingyx said:
Hifi and snake oil? Heresey!
Click to expand...
Yes, and when you debunk most of it with well reasoned technical arguments (easy to do with digital audio for example) you get labelled cloth eared or that your system needs setting up properly or your speakers/amplifiers/sources are not up to hearing the differences.... Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Spent lots and lots of money on hi-fi over the years, but always avoided buying snake oil ;)
 
I just refuse to have a go on a full frame camera because I know what will happen when I do. Not a good thing for a poor student!
 
I tried a 1Ds classic for a while (normally use a 50d)... it changed me.. The interface was clunky, the screen was poor and it was slow... But the pictures it produced were something else!
I now have a hankering for either a 5Dii or a newer 1D/1Ds....

Sam
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top