Joining the full frame club

[amtaylor]

Just splashed out on a 5D with grip and 3 batteries. A serial number starting with 2 so better screen. No visible dust and low actuation for £800. I'm chuffed. I can't wait, never used a FF camera before. My 24-105 F4 is almost as eager as I am.....I reckon that on the FF and my 70-200 F4 IS in my 50D is a pretty decent combination. I want a couple of primes soon too but that's another story. Can you tell I'm happy
All I got to do now is sell my trusty 30D and Tokina 12-24 to fund it.

Hurrah Hurrah Hurrah Hurrah

 

[martyp]

Congrats, the 5D is a great camera. Dust is an issue with them though so be prepared to preform a few more sensor cleans than normal.

I had the exact combo, 24-105L and 70-200L and it worked great, teaming it up with the 50d will be great if you need a few more FPS or reach though.

 

[amtaylor]

It's the first time I will use a battery grip as well. A chapter of firsts. Glad it uses the same batteries. I have 5 already. Suppose I will have 4 when I sell the 30 but that will leave me with 7. I've heard the 5D had good battery life too so with the grip I'm expecting great things. The 50D isn't so good on batteries.

 

[martyp]

Yeah, the battery life was good on mine. Depends on the age and condition of the batteries too I suppose although with a grip it should be awesome with two good batts.

 

[joescrivens]

just joined the club today too with the mk 2 - did you get the mark 1 or mark 2?

 

[janbokev]

Congrats . the 5D is a great tool , I shot over 4500 photos this weekend and was glad it had the grip on , makes it feel well balanced with the 70-200 on

 

[amtaylor]

just joined the club today too with the mk 2 - did you get the mark 1 or mark 2?

Mark 1. Can't afford a mark 2 for a while.

 

[amtaylor]

Yeah, the battery life was good on mine. Depends on the age and condition of the batteries too I suppose although with a grip it should be awesome with two good batts.

Just got some Generic 2000 mAh or whatever the letters are and they work a treat as they got loads more juice.

 

[Gel]

Once you've had full frame you'll never want to go back.

 

[amtaylor]

Once you've had full frame you'll never want to go back.

That's what I'm thinking. I think the 5D classic is probably one of the best bargains to be had at the moment.

 

[Trig's]

I joined the FF club as well (yesterday) but it was with Nikon thou

 

[Jelster]

Will you lot shut up !!

I'm already in trouble for the 7D and 70-200..... It's not the expense of the camera that's the issue, it's the divorce I can't afford !!


Steve

 

[trencheel303]

welcome to the FF club. There's tea and biscuits round the corner.

 

[amtaylor]

welcome to the FF club. There's tea and biscuits round the corner.

Wow! If I knew that I would have joined long ago even if it had meant selling my guitars and hifi and going down to a dusty crossroads and making a deal.

 

[Gel]

When you used full frame for a while and then try crop, even at 1.3x it feels alien.

 

[R.Y.K. LEE]

Congratulations on going the FF route Andy Time to get those fast primes in and shoot some moody ambient scenes!

 

[AndyWest]

OK so what do you think? I am in the midst of deciding whether to save up for a 5D Mk2 or Mk1 or stick with the 40D which I love.

It's all down to IQ and if FF is better then it's a good reason for me to move up. I just need to find some comparison images to see IQ differences.

 

[Scarecrow]

OK so what do you think? I am in the midst of deciding whether to save up for a 5D Mk2 or Mk1 or stick with the 40D which I love.

It's all down to IQ and if FF is better then it's a good reason for me to move up. I just need to find some comparison images to see IQ differences.

I bought the 5DII and kept my 40D as a backup. Since owning the 5D, I haven't used the 40D once. That sums it all up really.

 

[rookies]

Me wonder how you lot afford these high end Dslr as I am on a 40D which I love and thinking getting a 5D MKII if funds allows Having a newborn is hard with funds

 

[chris321]

Me wonder how you lot afford these high end Dslr as I am on a 40D which I love and thinking getting a 5D MKII if funds allows Having a newborn is hard with funds

Saving

I've been planning to get a 5DII since about Christmas I think.... Then saving, changing my lens line-up to suit a full-frame camera, and now I've got a job for summer I've just hit my target, and my new toy should be arriving in the next few days, providing Ian ('Kerso') gets stock in as expected

 

[rookies]

Well I a suppose if you not kids it easier to save Unless you on a well paid job ha ha....

What lens you got as I think my lens line up is already there for the 5D

17 - 40 L
70 - 200 F4 L
50mm 1.4 Prime

If and when I get a 5D MKII I get it with a 24 - 105 L I think

 

[AndyWest]

Problem I have is justifying spending all that money on a camera body when all I do with 99% of my images is process them in Lightroom/Elemens and pop them up on Flickr and some on here at 800pix as this is all this forum allows.

If I sold my 40d and the EF-S lenses that I won't be able to use on FF I'll have about £1,400 so not too far of a 5D Mk2 I have a 24-105mm f4L which will be my primary lens as it covers 70% of what I like to shoot and I can then save for an Ultra Wide lens.

 

[rookies]

Problem I have is justifying spending all that money on a camera body when all I do with 99% of my images is process them in Lightroom/Elemens and pop them up on Flickr and some on here at 800pix as this is all this forum allows.

If I sold my 40d and the EF-S lenses that I won't be able to use on FF I'll have about £1,400 so not too far of a 5D Mk2 I have a 24-105mm f4L which will be my primary lens as it covers 70% of what I like to shoot and I can then save for an Ultra Wide lens.

That how I feel sometime as I all I do with my images is edit them and store them on my computer...

 

[chris321]

Well I a suppose if you not kids it easier to save Unless you on a well paid job ha ha....

What lens you got as I think my lens line up is already there for the 5D

17 - 40 L
70 - 200 F4 L
50mm 1.4 Prime

If and when I get a 5D MKII I get it with a 24 - 105 L I think

Very true! Personally I'd suggest going for a 24-70 f/2.8, but I prefer my walkabout lens to be fast (can't afford the canon one, so using the sigma). Other than that, I'd say you're all set!

Problem I have is justifying spending all that money on a camera body when all I do with 99% of my images is process them in Lightroom/Elemens and pop them up on Flickr and some on here at 800pix as this is all this forum allows

Who says you have to be able to justify it . Unless there's something more urgent that needs the money spent on it (children, mortgage, food etc), then why not eh? . I'm in the fortunate position to not have any financial commitments, so while I'm not earning a great deal, I keep it all!

 

[rookies]

Hmmm might look into the Sigma lens is it a good lens how would it compare to the canon?

Yeah I have a Baby mortgage etc to pay too so that why I need to be careful

 

[AndyWest]

Who says you have to be able to justify it . Unless there's something more urgent that needs the money spent on it (children, mortgage, food etc), then why not eh? . I'm in the fortunate position to not have any financial commitments, so while I'm not earning a great deal, I keep it all!

It has taken me a long time to get to a point where I am taking images for me and not for other people to look at. This is also a hobby and I guess if I'm producing images that I'm happy with (IQ wise) then the expense is then justified

I'm going to Park Cameras next week with my memory card and 24-105 L and have a play, see what I think. If I'm impressed enough then the for sale section will be hit hard!!

 

[jimiking]

Congrats I hope I will get 5DC at some point this year. Can't wait.

 

[kallope]

Saving

I've been planning to get a 5DII since about Christmas I think.... Then saving, changing my lens line-up to suit a full-frame camera, and now I've got a job for summer I've just hit my target, and my new toy should be arriving in the next few days, providing Ian ('Kerso') gets stock in as expected

I'm in the same boat. Can't wait for the stock to come in, so I can get my hands on it :nuts:

 

[AndyWest]

Had a look round and Kerso looks to be the cheapest!!

 

[trencheel303]

OK so what do you think? I am in the midst of deciding whether to save up for a 5D Mk2 or Mk1 or stick with the 40D which I love.

It's all down to IQ and if FF is better then it's a good reason for me to move up. I just need to find some comparison images to see IQ differences.

One of the things I noticed when I moved to full frame is how much harder it was to fill the entire frame with the lens, particularly a fast prime. Taking what appeared to be a "close in" shot of a small cat with a 50mm prime was no problem on the 450D I had, but on the 1Ds I'd hit minimum focus distance long before I had filled the frame. The MFD for the next prime I am going to get (either 100/2 or 85/1.8 - I haven't yet decided) is much the same (in terms of magnification) as the fifty so I have actually factored a 12mm extension tube in so I can once again frame these closer shots. If you do a lot of "close up filling the frame" shots with your 40D, this is something you'll want to consider - it's hard to appreciate just how much more you "see" on an FF camera. In the first place, your 24-105 will appear really wide at 24, and probably lacking at the 105 end. Secondly, you'll see right to the corners so vignetting and other complications will be a LOT more apparent. You may well end up selling it and going for other focal lengths

Me wonder how you lot afford these high end Dslr as I am on a 40D which I love and thinking getting a 5D MKII if funds allows Having a newborn is hard with funds

I paid £560 for my 1Ds; the batteries were as flat as a fluke and it didn't come with a PC interface cable, but as far as I am concerned that's a fantastic deal. It's old, slow and heavy, but very well built, has amazing AF and EF lenses perform as they were originally intended to. On top of that I sold my previous camera (450D) to cover around half the costs. FF doesn't have to be an expensive game.

 

[petersmart]

Just splashed out on a 5D with grip and 3 batteries. A serial number starting with 2 so better screen. No visible dust and low actuation for £800. I'm chuffed. I can't wait, never used a FF camera before.

Really?

I used to use them all the time.

Mind you we called them 35mm cameras and the sensor was something called a film -

Things have definitely moved on.

.

 

[rookies]

One of the things I noticed when I moved to full frame is how much harder it was to fill the entire frame with the lens, particularly a fast prime. Taking what appeared to be a "close in" shot of a small cat with a 50mm prime was no problem on the 450D I had, but on the 1Ds I'd hit minimum focus distance long before I had filled the frame. The MFD for the next prime I am going to get (either 100/2 or 85/1.8 - I haven't yet decided) is much the same (in terms of magnification) as the fifty so I have actually factored a 12mm extension tube in so I can once again frame these closer shots. If you do a lot of "close up filling the frame" shots with your 40D, this is something you'll want to consider - it's hard to appreciate just how much more you "see" on an FF camera. In the first place, your 24-105 will appear really wide at 24, and probably lacking at the 105 end. Secondly, you'll see right to the corners so vignetting and other complications will be a LOT more apparent. You may well end up selling it and going for other focal lengths

Hi thank for this little info and now you have made me think as I do like to do close up portraits too so I guess my 40D will do a better job at this but if i want a better camera i best getting a 7D then Also when does the vignetting accure when we use Wide Lens I guess for Landscapes?

 

[Mr THX]

Nice purchase Andy, you'll not be disappointed. Took some really great pictures with mine over the time I had it. Never had the dust problem that is often banded around, once clean just be mindful to take care when you change a lens.

Enjoy

 

[trencheel303]

Hi thank for this little info and now you have made me think as I do like to do close up portraits too so I guess my 40D will do a better job at this but if i want a better camera i best getting a 7D then Also when does the vignetting accure when we use Wide Lens I guess for Landscapes?

Vignetting is just the darkening of corners on any lens. Some lenses are better at combatting vignetting than others, but most show some vignetting until stopped down around 1-2 stops from wide open. The reason I mentioned vignetting, is that EF lenses (which have a "full frame" image circle) will appear to have a distinct lack of vignetting on a crop body, even wide open, as the centre "crop" is all you see on the lens. Moving up to full frame exposes the edges of the lens (the worst parts) for what they really are. This became really apparent for me when I used a 50mm prime. On the 450D, I never saw any vignetting, but on the 1Ds, wide open, the vignetting was almost comical, as you can see in this photo:

What I am essentially saying is, expect EF lenses to behave differently on full frame. They appear shorter, and optical shortcomings are much more apparent.

 

[existent]

What I am essentially saying is, expect EF lenses to behave differently on full frame. They appear shorter, and optical shortcomings are much more apparent.

sorry if I am going a bit off topic here, but something sprung to my mind after reading this...

is it safe to say that you get sharper image across the whole sensor on crop with EF lenses compared to FF since you are only using the center part of the lens and image circle (which should be the sharpest part) ??

 

[trencheel303]

realistically, yes.

But you can be missing out on other benefits. The use of EF-S lenses for wider angles, being one, and secondly, an UWA lens on FF becomes a wide-medium lens on crop. The "wideness" is wasted.

HoppyUK (a member here) can explain more about the advantages of EF-S lenses for wide angles on crop sensors.

 

[HoppyUK]

realistically, yes.

But you can be missing out on other benefits. The use of EF-S lenses for wider angles, being one, and secondly, an UWA lens on FF becomes a wide-medium lens on crop. The "wideness" is wasted.

HoppyUK (a member here) can explain more about the advantages of EF-S lenses for wide angles on crop sensors.

If you put the same lens on a full frame and a crop camera, I think that it will pretty much always look a lot better on full frame. The image is just 2.5x bigger, the magnification is lower, the lens is working 2.5x less hard to deliver the same level of sharpness and it's got 2.5x the area to do it with. So the sensor is working less hard also to gather plenty of photons. There will probably be more pixels too, but that's less important.

That's the advantage of full frame - bigger is better. Simple as. There are a few factors at play apart from the lens, but they all compound one on top of the other to deliver much better image quality.

Just on the lens side, what is certainly true is that the centre will always look a lot better on full frame, if only because it doesn't have to find as much resolution at the lower magnification, so contrast and 'punch/pop' is greater.

The edges are a different question because they have never been seen before on a cropper - that's the bit that's been cropped out. So if it's a rubbish lens with poor edge sharpness that's going to show. But I think that the standard of optics we're probably talking about here will have pretty good performance right across the frame, so the edges too will also look good.

It's a complicated question that invloves a lot of variables, including focal length and f/number and image circle etc etc, but the bottom line is, if you compare like for like as best you can, full frame will win comfortably - often spectacularly so.

That's what happened to me when I went to try a new 7D against my old 40D, and pretty much by accidenct also tried the same lens on a 5D2. I had to look hard to see the improvement on the 7D vs 40D, but the 5D2 (with roughly the same pixel count as a 7D) was just miles better. Effortlessly wonderful quality. It was like comparing 35mm film to medium format, which for those that remember was absolutely no contest at all.

You do need a big print to really see the benefit though, and of course full frame costs more.

 

[HoppyUK]

Oops sorry! I think the post above missed the point re EF-S lenses.

It's simply that at short focal lengths, producing a large image circle (ie full frame) is hard, and doing it at a low f/number is very hard. When the lens gets moved further away from the sensor, particularly when released from the constraints of the inverted telephoto design which is forced by the need to clear the mirror, life gets much easier, but below about 50-60mm there are substantial advantages to an EF-S lens.

The best example is the 17-40L for full frame, vs the EF-S 17-55. The latter has a lot more range, and is also a whole stop faster at f/2.8 against f/4. And it's got IS. To offer the same spec on full frame, the lens would have to be huge and very costly, and probably have rubbish edges sharpness and tons of vignetting. Basically, you wouldn't want it.

 

[arad85]

If you put the same lens on a full frame and a crop camera, I think that it will pretty much always look a lot better on full frame. The image is just 2.5x bigger, the magnification is lower, the lens is working 2.5x less hard to deliver the same level of sharpness and it's got 2.5x the area to do it with. So the sensor is working less hard also to gather plenty of photons. There will probably be more pixels too, but that's less important.

Sorry, but that's completely wrong (or you're description is misleading at least). If you put the same lens on ff/crop and focus on the same object at the same distance, the lens is "working" just the same. It gathers the same number of photons and bends the light just as much. The thing that is different between crop and ff is that you are sampling more or less of the image plane. The reason ff needs bigger and better lenses is that you are covering more of the image plane so you need to take more care of the photons further from the centre of the lens axis. As aperture gets larger, the more difficult this is to do well particularly when you have a larger sensor.

I also think magnification is a red herring as it is only really useful for understanding the size of object you can use to fill the frame when in macro mode. IMHO, what is more important is angular resolution of each pixel. Let's compare the 7D and 5Dm2. The 7D has 5184 pixels in 22.3mm, the 5Dm2 has 5616 pixels in 36mm. If you make the flawed assumption that each pixel is 100% sensor, that gives the 7D 4.3um pixels and the 5Dm2 6.4um pixels. Now, the photon capturing abilities of each pixel is determined by the area of the sensor, so the 7Ds pixels are 18.5um^2 and the 5Dm2 are 41um^2. Which ever way you look at it, the larger sensor will win as it can gather over 2x the light if the image is zoomed so you have the same field of view (assuming the same f/ number) and if the image is not zoomed to cover the full sensor (i.e. same lens, same zoom setting, same f/number) you are getting more light by virtue of the fact you are covering more of the scene with each pixel which means more photons hitting each pixel. Whichever way you look at it, the FF wins - it's just you need to spend more on glass to do it well.

 

[arad85]

The best example is the 17-40L for full frame, vs the EF-S 17-55. The latter has a lot more range, and is also a whole stop faster at f/2.8 against f/4. And it's got IS. To offer the same spec on full frame, the lens would have to be huge and very costly, and probably have rubbish edges sharpness and tons of vignetting. Basically, you wouldn't want it.

Sorry, but I'm not sure I agree with you here. What do you mean by the "same spec"? To me, the same spec as a EF-S 17-55 would be an EF 27-88 which Canon (nearly) do in the 24-70 f2.8. The recent significant price drop suggests (as does the canon rumours site) that a reworked lens with IS is on its way. Yes, it may turn out to be more costly than the EF-S 17-55, but then you have more light to gather and spread over the larger image plane at 70 than at 55 for f/2.8.

To me, an equivalent to the 17-40 would be an EF-S 10-25 as then you'd be covering the same field of view with your sensor.