Downgrade from Full Frame to Crop?

Just thought I'd let you know that I'm not doing product photography any more, it was a small business idea that I've given up on.

I may consider a crop body in the future, but right now I'll stick with full frame. The R5 is a nice camera. Probably too many pixels, but I'll stick with it.
 
Both FF and Crop cameras can produce excellent results in all the fields you are interested in.
The major difference is in your out.put requirements.
If the output is limited to web and screen display there will be no discernable difference between them.
However if the output is intended for large prints then FF would be the winner every time.

Unless you intend too end up with a smaller and lighter kit, and are prepared to change both your lenses and bodies, you will not achieve your aim. The difference in size and weight by just changing a body is hardy noticeable.

If money is no object then there is no problem, just go for two kits and problem solved.
 
Dael_Pix said:
I should have siad to gain more reach with crop than full frame
Click to expand...
That is not necessarily true, unless you are making extra large prints there could be no visible difference between using a crop camera or cropping the FF image.
Pixel count, pixel size, and magnification are all factors in the final result
 
Having now the Panasonic G9 and the G9ii four thirds cameras I prefer this to crop frame wigh heavier cameras and lenses
P1060571.JPG
The G9ii is an improvement and a failure in my opinion. the improvements are better picture quality and better menu layout and more features . Unfortunately viewing RAW files does need an editing suite capable of this. Seeing RAW files with microsoft on a monitor produces an overall blank pink screen. this doesn't happen with the G9 earlier version.
Panasonic are supposed to have fixed this in their latest update2.2 version for the G9ii but it doesn't work with windows 11, so their update is possibly for window 10 or earlier.
The other thing left off is the ability to tether a flashgun to a socket from remote flash. the G9 has this option. It has been replaced with the G9ii logo and lamp
So now to go remote I use my Gotox V860iii(0) flashgun I use a Gotox X2T trigger on the coldshoe.

Having said that instead of the top screen it now has dials when used to are better if one can remember what each dial position does.
 
Last edited:
realspeed said:
Having now the Panasonic G9 and the G9ii four thirds cameras I prefer this to crop frame wigh heavier cameras and lenses
View attachment 436971
The G9ii is an improvement and a failure in my opinion. the improvements are better picture quality and better menu layout and more features . Unfortunately viewing RAW files does need an editing suite capable of this. Seeing RAW files with microsoft on a monitor produces an overall blank pink screen. this doesn't happen with the G9 earlier version.
Panasonic are supposed to have fixed this in their latest update2.2 version for the G9ii but it doesn't work with windows 11, so their update is possibly for window 10 or earlier.
The other thing left off is the ability to tether a flashgun to a socket from remote flash. the G9 has this option. It has been replaced with the G9ii logo and lamp
So now to go remote I use my Gotox V860iii(0) flashgun I use a Gotox X2T trigger on the coldshoe.

Having said that instead of the top screen it now has dials when used to are better if one can remember what each dial position does.
Click to expand...


LibRaw 0.22 supported cameras | LibRaw

www.libraw.org www.libraw.org

This is used by Affinity Photo, which is why it opens them fine now, though it is not on the list. Info from the Affinity forum.
 
Last edited:
realspeed said:
Having now the Panasonic G9 and the G9ii four thirds cameras I prefer this to crop frame wigh heavier cameras and lenses
Click to expand...
I don't buy into the weight argument much these days, you can get FF setups which are just as light as m4/3, in fact the A7c series is lighter than the G9 II. You can get plenty of lightweight FF lenses, the only area where m4/3 still has an advantage in weight imo is with telephotos lenses.
 
snerkler said:
I don't buy into the weight argument much these days, you can get FF setups which are just as light as m4/3, in fact the A7c series is lighter than the G9 II. You can get plenty of lightweight FF lenses, the only area where m4/3 still has an advantage in weight imo is with telephotos lenses.
Click to expand...
I'd agree with this, especially seeing as the m4/3 G9ii is using a body modelled on the FF S5ii with less than 100g difference between them.

I still think there are great use cases for m4/3 cameras though in certain scenarios with the advantages in readout speeds for video (like for like) and of course as you mention, more manageable telephoto options. The lens selection for m4/3 is vast too and they're incredibly reasonably priced for what you're getting.
 
Adam-G said:
I'd agree with this, especially seeing as the m4/3 G9ii is using a body modelled on the FF S5ii with less than 100g difference between them.

I still think there are great use cases for m4/3 cameras though in certain scenarios with the advantages in readout speeds for video (like for like) and of course as you mention, more manageable telephoto options. The lens selection for m4/3 is vast too and they're incredibly reasonably priced for what you're getting.
Click to expand...


The only FF camera I have is a 5Diii, and the weight difference between that and the G9 is huge, however it is nut just about weight (though that was a prime reason when I changed) it is also about features and ergonomics, and as you do say, especially weight with a long lens. But forgetting the weight, being able to use an 800mm (FF eq) lens hand held at 1/15s is quite useful to me (though I imagine others makes will be catching up)
As you also say, the lenses are incredible value, and extremely good. 14-800mm (FF eq) in 3 lenses with superb quality.

I have tried the lenses I have and some I borrowed for the 5Diii, and I can't get any where near the results I get on the G9 in terms of clarity and sharpness.

As a system, it has a lot going for it, and if it has the features you want, it would be hard and certainly many times the cost, to get something else.

The G9ii has some features I like, though I much prefer the control layout and top screen of the G9. Guess you can't have everything :) They feel the same weight
 
If its more reach you want with the 100-400 use an extender, I have the 5d MK4 and I use the 1.4 extender iii on my 100-400 and its is a great set up, it gives me just slightly less than just the lens on crop sensor. ok it shoots at F8 minimum but with better high iso its great
 
Sangoma said:
The only FF camera I have is a 5Diii, and the weight difference between that and the G9 is huge, however it is nut just about weight (though that was a prime reason when I changed) it is also about features and ergonomics, and as you do say, especially weight with a long lens. But forgetting the weight, being able to use an 800mm (FF eq) lens hand held at 1/15s is quite useful to me (though I imagine others makes will be catching up)
As you also say, the lenses are incredible value, and extremely good. 14-800mm (FF eq) in 3 lenses with superb quality.

I have tried the lenses I have and some I borrowed for the 5Diii, and I can't get any where near the results I get on the G9 in terms of clarity and sharpness.

As a system, it has a lot going for it, and if it has the features you want, it would be hard and certainly many times the cost, to get something else.

The G9ii has some features I like, though I much prefer the control layout and top screen of the G9. Guess you can't have everything :) They feel the same weight
Click to expand...

Yeah, there'll be a huge weight saving from older DSLR's, what I was reiterating was @snerkler's point that in the mirrorless landscape, the body size and weight differences are nowhere near as pronounced anymore but also, with modern sensor advancements, the image quality differences are less pronounced and the viable use cases are also increased.

I don't think anyone can make an objectively bad choice in the modern camera landscape unless they ignore that a particular niche they want to shoot is affected by a limitation in the camera body/ecosystem they buy in to and those cases are rarer and rarer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top