Is Full Frame worth it?

[GreenNinja67]

Well that obviously doesn't work.

I have a few shots at 600mm on FX but the results say my max used is 218.9mm

 

[Cagey75]

Well that obviously doesn't work.

I have a few shots at 600mm on FX but the results say my max used is 218.9mm

Do you have the exif data showing for the 600mm images? It shows my longest as 420mm, which was the 300mm F4 + 1.4x TC so it has picked up on that.

 

[Mr Badger]

Snip:

Here's a useful site if you have been using Flickr for a while, input your Flickr username and it'll scan all you images and give results of your most used settings. If you rarely go above ISO 1600, and tend to favour mid range focal lengths, and don't tend to crop images much, then Full frame might not be so necessary for you. http://stats.ghusse.com/

Interesting to know that's available, but it's not much use to me I'm afraid, as all but two or three of mine on Flickr were taken on rolls of 400, or 100, 200, 800, 1000 and 1600... and those are full frame (or significantly larger) already!

 

[antonroland]

Seriously people, this debate deserves NO waste of mental energy since about 2012... get out there and create, regardless of what you have

 

[GreenNinja67]

Do you have the exif data showing for the 600mm images? It shows my longest as 420mm, which was the 300mm F4 + 1.4x TC so it has picked up on that.

Yes exif is visible

 

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

Photographers asked to cover events:

60's - 90's: "Sure, I have a nifty 50 and some rolls of 400"
2017: "Oh my, I don't know! My 4 high end cameras do show some light noise at ISO 6400 and one of my 10 lenses is max F4 "

Here's a useful site if you have been using Flickr for a while, input your Flickr username and it'll scan all you images and give results of your most used settings. If you rarely go above ISO 1600, and tend to favour mid range focal lengths, and don't tend to crop images much, then Full frame might not be so necessary for you. http://stats.ghusse.com/

Thanks for the link,thats really useful site

 

[lemo]

and I'm thinking about what my next body should be.

That's completely wrong. You should think about what your next lens will be and if it will fit to your current camera.

If you find superb glass for your 750D, buy it!
If you find superb glass, which only makes sense on an FF body, buy them.

 

[john.margetts]

That's completely wrong. You should think about what your next lens will be and if it will fit to your current camera.

Sometimes the body is far more important than the lens. My lenses are fine for what I do, but my 650D body was letting me down in the medieval churches where I do most of my photography - my new(ish) 80D has made a significant difference, beyond what new lenses could have achieved.

 

[hamster100]

That's completely wrong. You should think about what your next lens will be and if it will fit to your current camera.

If you find superb glass for your 750D, buy it!
If you find superb glass, which only makes sense on an FF body, buy them.

Well I am thinking about lenses as well. I don't want to buy ef-s lenses that won't fit a FF bost, so that's why I'm looking at the system as a whole. I want to invest in better glass and therefore get the best out of it.

Plus I have a 70D not a 750D

 

[lemo]

Plus I have a 70D not a 750D

OK, not that much difference when it comes to choose a lens.

I am using mainly a 24-70 mm and a 16-35 mm which do not make much sense on a APS-C body. So I started with a 5D and later bought a 5D III, using both now. Eventually I put these on a EOS 1V and shoot on film too.

It it has to be smaller for hiking in the mountains, and I have to carry much other stuff, I'm using a 500D and a 17-50 mm and a 10-18 mm

So it depends on size, weight and money which system to use. If you have the money and don't care about weight and size go for full frame. For FF, you'll get the better lens for wide angle and standard zooms, that's all (for me).

 

[hamster100]

I was thinking about the 24-70 & the 16-35 and agree that a crop they don't make much sense. I will probably just get a 10-18mm and go FF when I'm in a position to invest on an upgrade to my body.

 

[johnf3f]

I was thinking about the 24-70 & the 16-35 and agree that a crop they don't make much sense. I will probably just get a 10-18mm and go FF when I'm in a position to invest on an upgrade to my body.

I use the 16-35 F4 L IS and 24-70 F2.8 L Mk2 on both crop and full frame and they work excellently on both. If around 25/26 mm is wide enough then they are a great combination for your 70D. If not then you could consider getting a used 10-18 in the meantime and sell it if/when you go FF - you would loose little on that deal.

 

[hamster100]

I use the 16-35 F4 L IS and 24-70 F2.8 L Mk2 on both crop and full frame and they work excellently on both. If around 25/26 mm is wide enough then they are a great combination for your 70D. If not then you could consider getting a used 10-18 in the meantime and sell it if/when you go FF - you would loose little on that deal.

The 10-18 is what I will probably get & look to upgrade in the future

 

[woof woof]

The 10-18 is what I will probably get & look to upgrade in the future

There's always the excellent Sigma 12-24mm which is quite wide on APS-C and as it's a FF lens it'll fit nicely onto any future FF camera you may buy. I had one and used it on both my Canon APS-C and FF cameras. It's a very good lens and the lack of distortion will amaze you.

 

[hamster100]

There's always the excellent Sigma 12-24mm which is quite wide on APS-C and as it's a FF lens it'll fit nicely onto any future FF camera you may buy. I had one and used it on both my Canon APS-C and FF cameras. It's a very good lens and the lack of distortion will amaze you.

I had considered the 12-24mm however the fixed lens hood put me off as I also want to get some decent filters. The Sigma 10-22mm F3.5 is also an option, but is the extra £100 worth it when compared to the 10-18mm?

 

[woof woof]

I had considered the 12-24mm however the fixed lens hood put me off as I also want to get some decent filters. The Sigma 10-22mm F3.5 is also an option, but is the extra £100 worth it when compared to the 10-18mm?

You could always look at the possible workarounds such as leaving the bucket hood in place at the longer focal lengths or fixing the filter directly to the hood at the shorter and thinking about how often you'll actually use filters at these focal lengths. I'm struggling to remember the last time I used any filter other than an ND to reduce the shutter speed.

Other than wide angle FF lenses your other choice is one of the several APS-C choices. The only one I've owned is the Canon EF-S 10-20mm which I wouldn't recommend.

 

[Byker28i]

Photographers asked to cover events:

60's - 90's: "Sure, I have a nifty 50 and some rolls of 400"
2017: "Oh my, I don't know! My 4 high end cameras do show some light noise at ISO 6400 and one of my 10 lenses is max F4 "

Here's a useful site if you have been using Flickr for a while, input your Flickr username and it'll scan all you images and give results of your most used settings. If you rarely go above ISO 1600, and tend to favour mid range focal lengths, and don't tend to crop images much, then Full frame might not be so necessary for you. http://stats.ghusse.com/

It's quite fun sometimes to look in the Lightroom module and sort on the metadata to look at your lens choice, focal distances etc

So that says my most used is 24mm, second is 105mm, with every mm in between...
Hum wonder why that is...

 

[hamster100]

You could always look at the possible workarounds such as leaving the bucket hood in place at the longer focal lengths or fixing the filter directly to the hood at the shorter and thinking about how often you'll actually use filters at these focal lengths. I'm struggling to remember the last time I used any filter other than an ND to reduce the shutter speed.

Other than wide angle FF lenses your other choice is one of the several APS-C choices. The only one I've owned is the Canon EF-S 10-20mm which I wouldn't recommend.

I agree about the Canon 10-22mm, so that's why I am looking at the Canon10-18mm and given it some thought or possibly the Sigma 10-20mm F3.5. Both won't break the bank and should I go FF in the future. Now if Canon made a 10-30mm F4 L spec lens for around £500, then I would buy that, if only...

 

[lemo]

They sell a 11-24 mm f/4 L for a lot more money and I guess that range is at the technical limits. The 10-18 is very good, especially for the money. It's cheap. When buying a used one, you'll probably wont loose money, if you'd switch to FF one day.

Here are some examples, what I did with the 10-18: https://www.flickr.com/photos/lenzmoser/albums/72157670693313176
And here, what I did with the 16-35: https://www.flickr.com/photos/lenzmoser/albums/72157660690765146

The 16-35 overlaps with my 24-70, but that"s good, because I will not have to change lenses that often, as I could also shoot at 35 mm the whole day, if it depends.

 

[hamster100]

They sell a 11-24 mm f/4 L for a lot more money and I guess that range is at the technical limits. The 10-18 is very good, especially for the money. It's cheap. When buying a used one, you'll probably wont loose money, if you'd switch to FF one day.

Here are some examples, what I did with the 10-18: https://www.flickr.com/photos/lenzmoser/albums/72157670693313176
And here, what I did with the 16-35: https://www.flickr.com/photos/lenzmoser/albums/72157660690765146

The 16-35 overlaps with my 24-70, but that"s good, because I will not have to change lenses that often, as I could also shoot at 35 mm the whole day, if it depends.

At over £2500 for the Canon 11-24mm L that's one I'll have to pass on!

The route I'm thinking of going is to get the 10-18mm now and see how I get on with it. I can justify spending £200 at the moment. Should I go FF then I will get the Canon 16-35mm F4L and the 24-70mm F4 L to complement it. But as a 6D MKII and these lenses would cost getting on for £3500 this will have to wait for a bit. I could go down the interest free credit route now, but I would prefer to save up first.

 

[lemo]

but I would prefer to save up first.

Best to do. From my experience, if you have to spend your money on other things, you could be happy and not less creative with an APS-C system too. Your results may be mostly the same.

On the 500D I'm using the Sigma 17-50 mm f/2.8 and it gives me similar results in terms of quality as the Tamron or Canon 24-70 does on my 5D or 5D III.