Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 14 Mar 2011 (Monday) 19:07
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

I still don't understand the point of the full frame camera

 
daviz121
Mostly Lurking
13 posts
Joined Jun 2009
     
Mar 14, 2011 20:31 |  #31

Joe Ravenstein wrote in post #12020782 (external link)
The larger the sensor size is the larger the individual pixels are and the better the iq as a result. with lenses being = the image taken using the larger sensor will have the better iq compared to a crop sensor. Same reason large format film like 120mm,4"X 5",8"X10"delivered better large prints than smaller size film like 35mm could.

Personally, I'm waiting for an 8"x10" digital sensor.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
RandyMN
Goldmember
3,131 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2005
     
Mar 14, 2011 20:33 |  #32

From what I've read I think eventually all cameras will be increasing sensor size once technology has driven the cost down. I read this in a 'future' camera technology article someplace.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
x_tan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,147 posts
Gallery: 137 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 463
Joined Sep 2010
Location: ɐılɐɹʇsnɐ 'ǝuɹnoqlǝɯ
     
Mar 14, 2011 20:33 |  #33

jimlp wrote in post #12020994 (external link)
I think that FF has more meaning to older photographers like myself who used to shoot film.

Then I'm shooting crop (as I'm over 35+) which will make me cool :lol:

Or, young / teen with FF might make you looking like grandmum/pap ;)


Canon 5D3 + Zoom (EF 17-40L, 24-105L & 28-300L, 100-400L II) & Prime (24L II, 85L II, 100L, 135L & 200 f/2.8L II; Zeiss 1,4/35)
Sony α7r + Zeiss 1,8/55 FE
Nikon Coolpix A; Nikon F3 & F100 + Zeiss 1,4/50
Retiring  (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimlp
Senior Member
574 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 6
Joined Sep 2004
Location: Winchester, Mass
     
Mar 14, 2011 20:38 |  #34

x_tan wrote in post #12021053 (external link)
Then I'm shooting crop (as I'm over 35+) which will make me cool :lol:

Or, young / teen with FF might make you looking like grandmum/pap ;)

I meant in correlation to focal lengths being more familiar on FF for film shooters, you make some valid points though!


Canon 1DsMk2, 1DsMark lll, Canon 5Ds, 24-70 f4.0L, Canon 35mm f2.0
Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS vlll, Sigma 85mm f1.4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bendel
Senior Member
Avatar
323 posts
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Wisconsin
     
Mar 14, 2011 20:40 |  #35

jimlp wrote in post #12021073 (external link)
I meant in correlation to focal lengths being more familiar on FF for film shooters, you make some valid points though!

Well I'm 19, shoot full frame, and absolutely love the focal lengths on my 5D over my former 40D. The 70-200 on my 40D was too long to be usable for anything outside sports photos.


Brandon
Canon 5D, 24-105 F4L, 70-200 F4L, 85 F1.8, 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sportsshooter50
Member
249 posts
Joined Nov 2008
     
Mar 14, 2011 20:53 |  #36

Here are exerts from the Canon white paper on sensor design. It's a little dated, but the information is still valid. The full document can be found at:

http://www.usa.canon.c​om …ArticleAct&arti​cleID=1787 (external link)

Compare two sensors with the same number of pixels, one a
full-frame unit and one smaller. The pixels of the full-frame sensor are larger. Each
larger pixel has a greater surface area available for gathering light.

Larger pixels help full-frame sensors to produce a higher dynamic range and
finer tonal gradations than their smaller brethren.

Well-designed big pixels also avoid false colors, eliminate unnatural tonal jumps
and produce smoother and more subtle gradations of color:

Canon’s full-frame sensors have reached another image quality milestone as
well. Their gradations and dynamic range are now the equal of the best positive
films, and their resolution and lack of grain are superior. No smaller sensor has
achieved this level of performance.

One of the most appealing characteristics of full-frame sensors is that they
allow every lens to have its own original, as-designed optical signature, something
which is lost with the change of coverage and the elimination of a substantial part
of the cone of light that the lens projects rearward.

For any comparison of full-frame and APS-C sensors in which image quality is
paramount, full-frame wins, hands down. For low light, bright light, vivid colors,
subtle colors, any focal length or film speed, full-frame is the champion.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cccc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,017 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 172
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Sacramento, CA
     
Mar 14, 2011 20:55 |  #37

cameraperson wrote in post #12020436 (external link)
If it is more about the photographer than the camera, then I don't understand why someone would pay big money for a full frame camera. In other words, I don't understand why they are using it. Maybe they can get great results from an XTi but they can get spectacular results from a FF camera. But, again, I don't know why they would get better with the FF camera.

edit: btw, I know what ff is and it relation to 35mm photography but don't understand why it matters compared to other cropped cameras.

perspective, low light performance DOF control and color rendition...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,642 posts
Gallery: 158 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 6726
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Mar 14, 2011 20:57 as a reply to  @ cccc's post |  #38

A crop camera is a smaller format period and if you really use a lot of fast, wide angle glass, then FF is absolutely the way to go.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cameraperson
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
817 posts
Joined May 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA.
     
Mar 14, 2011 21:02 |  #39

sportsshooter50 wrote in post #12021167 (external link)
Here are exerts from the Canon white paper on sensor design. It's a little dated, but the information is still valid. The full document can be found at:

http://www.usa.canon.c​om …ArticleAct&arti​cleID=1787 (external link)

Compare two sensors with the same number of pixels, one a
full-frame unit and one smaller. The pixels of the full-frame sensor are larger. Each
larger pixel has a greater surface area available for gathering light.

Larger pixels help full-frame sensors to produce a higher dynamic range and
finer tonal gradations than their smaller brethren.

Well-designed big pixels also avoid false colors, eliminate unnatural tonal jumps
and produce smoother and more subtle gradations of color:

Canon’s full-frame sensors have reached another image quality milestone as
well. Their gradations and dynamic range are now the equal of the best positive
films, and their resolution and lack of grain are superior. No smaller sensor has
achieved this level of performance.

One of the most appealing characteristics of full-frame sensors is that they
allow every lens to have its own original, as-designed optical signature, something
which is lost with the change of coverage and the elimination of a substantial part
of the cone of light that the lens projects rearward.

For any comparison of full-frame and APS-C sensors in which image quality is
paramount, full-frame wins, hands down. For low light, bright light, vivid colors,
subtle colors, any focal length or film speed, full-frame is the champion.

Thank you for this detailed response. Very helpful.


Xsi, 18-55

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bang ­ Bang ­ Boy
Goldmember
Avatar
1,347 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: South Africa
     
Mar 14, 2011 21:08 |  #40

jimlp wrote in post #12020994 (external link)
I think that FF has more meaning to older photographers like myself who used to shoot film. I am only 43 but it is still a far cry from 21 so old is relative I guess! I know that when I went digital with a 10D from my 1 Series film bodies I was not a happy camper as my lens collection (as small as it was) was built around the actual focal lengths on a FF body, the performance of the lenses was the same as far IQ but I found that my 70-200 f2.8 my go to people lens was getting to long for studio work on the 10D body. The combo of the 24 -70 and 70 - 200 that worked so great on a FF body was no longer as balanced a pair on the crop body. Younger photogs who have started with digital will not notice the difference and will look at a 15 - 85 as a normal zoom range just as I used to see the 28 - 105, they will see the crop format and lenses as the new "normal" and take great inspiring pics. That being said I love my 5D2 for it's FF capabilities but I am an "old" guy.

You shouldn't feel old. I started my photo"career" shooting my uncles beat up FX and my dads T70.
I started shooting for real a year ago! Im just 19 and I still think that fullframe is the way to go simply because 50mm should be 50mm and not 80.
And I have to say it, people that **** about ff being to expensive! Buy a 5dc! They are deadcheap for the quality they give you! The build and image IQ is incredible for less than 1000 USD!


Lots of old stuff but hey I am a student
Photojournalist in Johannesburg.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mattograph
"God bless the new meds"
Avatar
7,693 posts
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
     
Mar 14, 2011 21:18 |  #41

cameraperson wrote in post #12020436 (external link)
If it is more about the photographer than the camera, then I don't understand why someone would pay big money for a full frame camera. In other words, I don't understand why they are using it. Maybe they can get great results from an XTi but they can get spectacular results from a FF camera. But, again, I don't know why they would get better with the FF camera.

edit: btw, I know what ff is and it relation to 35mm photography but don't understand why it matters compared to other cropped cameras.

I shoot architecture. FF at 16mm looks worlds better than 1.6x at 10mm.


This space for rent.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jim_T
Goldmember
Avatar
3,306 posts
Likes: 80
Joined Nov 2003
Location: Woodlands, MB, Canada
     
Mar 14, 2011 21:22 |  #42

Doesn't the full frame cause the DOF to be thinner?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,666 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6308
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Mar 14, 2011 21:23 |  #43

I love these types of discussions about APS-C and FF, back when I had the 7D and the 5D2. Here is a quick test between the APS-C and FF.

The equipment: 5D2 vs the XTi, using the 70-200 f2.8 and the 580EX, both at ISO 1600, 1/25th, f2.8, shot in raw, adjusted the wb for both, then saved out to JPG via DPP.

I resized the 5D2 down to match the size of the XTi, giving the 5D2 even a further advantage. I ran both through the same exact action. Many base their conclusions by comparing different images by different folks with different glass, or they shoot with their own same glass they did on with a crop body, but different situations. I always think it is best to compare the two under the same conditions with the same glass in order to draw my conclusions.

You decide your own conclusions from these results. I can see the better noise handling from the 5D2, which is no surprise, the color differences (partly different wb, didn't shoot a custom wb, and should have), and then the DOF differences. Nothing else really stands out that much. Sure this is just one limited test, I understand that. :)

The 5D2 and XTi images...


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
37,666 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6308
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Mar 14, 2011 21:23 |  #44

Here are the crops... I can see a bit more detail on the 5D2, but a bit of that is the better noise handling at 1600 over the XTi.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
r31ncarnat3d
Senior Member
633 posts
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Mar 14, 2011 21:26 |  #45

cameraperson wrote in post #12020436 (external link)
If it is more about the photographer than the camera, then I don't understand why someone would pay big money for a full frame camera. In other words, I don't understand why they are using it. Maybe they can get great results from an XTi but they can get spectacular results from a FF camera. But, again, I don't know why they would get better with the FF camera.

edit: btw, I know what ff is and it relation to 35mm photography but don't understand why it matters compared to other cropped cameras.

Because while the photographer is responsible for making great photographs, giving him the right tools makes the work much easier and better if he knows how to use it.

Analogy: Not everyone can drive a stick shift properly, but those who do can control a car with stick much better than they can with an automatic.


Canon 80D | Canon SL2 | Sigma 30mm f/1.4 ART | Canon 24mm f/2.8 STM
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 | Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

15,627 views & 0 likes for this thread
I still don't understand the point of the full frame camera
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such!
1015 guests, 204 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.