Full Frame----You glad you made the move?

I had a D70 for a few years, and it always seemed fine. Then one day I took a look through the viewfinder of my wife's old OM10 with. 50mm 1.8 attached.

It was a complete "Wow" moment and from that point I couldn't wait to go full frame. Couldn't go back for viewfinder reasons alone.

(Though I might buy a cheap DX body for video use soon).
 
Will take some shots and get them up, basically both cameras at 1600 iso, f2.8, 1/100 at 24mm. took shot focused on same spot with some detail, zoomed in on result so the detail was similar size to compare and the 5D seemed to be a good bit softer :( anyway will get some other shots up tomorrow for you guys to discuss and see what you think.

Either way, I will not be buying this camera, I've put myself off for just now. If I see another crop up though I may be tempted again haha!

I do like the Tamronlens though, the focal range and the constant 2.8 is great!
 
Managed to do a quick test. Both cameras set to identical setting with the same Lens (Tamron 28-75 2.8), f2.8, 1/80, iso 1600, shot in Large Jpeg, colour set to neutral. Focused on the '7' on the iPhone box.

5D 28mm

5d Test.jpg by M+M Morrison, on Flickr

500D 28mm

500d Test.jpg by M+M Morrison, on Flickr

5D 75mm

5d Test 2.jpg by M+M Morrison, on Flickr

500D 75mm

500d Test 2.jpg by M+M Morrison, on Flickr

I'm just not happy I don't think, was I expecting too much? I know there is the 'Crop Factor' to think about, is the extra reach a positive for me? Would selling my 10mm through to 250mm range and settle for one lens (of around £250 to spend on) worth the big jump? I think I will have to have a good think over the next while and not jump into something that I am not 100% sure of yet.

If I was offered a 5D2 and had the money its a no brainer haha!
 
I don't really know what I'm looking at here. The images are too small to tell anything, really, and the only thing that I can really see is the "crop factor."

I went from 20D to 5D and I too was a little disappointed as I didn't and still don't see a night and day difference. IMVHO the 5D is better than the 20D to some degree but it's hard to quantify, but it is better and increasingly so as the ISO rises.

As long as there's nothing actually wrong with your camera I'd suspect that things should be the same for you too. You should see that the FF camera is a little better than the APS-C, but how much better may be difficult to say.
 
If you follow through to Flickr you should see them at a higher res, didn't want to post in the forum something well over sized. I do see a difference in the way viewfinder is great, DoF is better and easier to get very shallow and the size of the camera is good too.

I shot at a fairly high iso to see what the noise was like, they seem on par so happy with that, I know the crop factor does take away from the test, if I zoomed slightly on the 5D to accommodate the crop it might have changed the softness due to the lens it's self.

I suppose I too was looking for a night and day performance difference but just never got it. I dont mean to put down on FF because I can't I do know the newer FF's are 20x better than what I have and I would love to get one, but my option here doesn't allow for that.

Not everything from this test has been a downer though, the lens i got to borrow with it (Tamron 28-75 2.8) is pretty dam good! I think I might have to get one!
 
Last edited:
I did look at the Flickr images.

Were you shooting JPEG or RAW?

I suppose it's possible that the newer camera has a better JPEG engine than the older camera. I'd expect it too as it's more of a consumer orientated model and I believe that newer more consumer orientated cameras tend to have better JPEG engines than older more enthusiast orientated cameras. Personally I always shoot RAW and therefore any shots I compare between cameras are processed the same to see what they're like and then differently to get the best out of them.

You may be right and the newer APS-C camera may be better than the older FF, but I'd still be a little surprised if it is once shots from both are processed to give the best possible final image.
 
Yea I do usually shoot raw with my lightpainting ect, these wre jpegs though. Might do a raw test tomorrow, also didn't want to d any pp on them as I wanted to see the out of camera results, I'm sure with some pp the 5d would be pretty good.
 
When comparing stuff I think there are different approaches. I used to think that comparing out of camera shots with nothing at all done to them was the best way but now I've come to believe that it's the final result that matters so that's what I now judge kit on.

Of course if what you want is an out of camera JPEG which is good to go that's a perfectly valid criteria to judge the kit on. I personally have the luxury of having the time to spend on processing a RAW, although in reality I only spend a few minutes at most on each shot and usually I just spend a matter of seconds or a minute at most. I realise that not everyone has the luxury of time.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top