How do you survive the lust for Full Frame?

JeffreyG wrote in post #13339700
There is one thing about my old 5D that I really like about it better than my crop 1D Mark IV. For general work and 'walkabout' type shooting I really prefer how the FF sensor matches up to the 24-XX range lenses. I find 28mm (or 17mm on EF-S) to be just not quite wide enough on the wide end.

On the 1D thus I usually use the 16-35, but then the long end isn't long enough. Basically, when I want to carry one body and a zoom, the FF bodies offer a match to the lenses I most want to have with me.

I'll also point out that this point brings up a second topic relative to Magnus3D's example images above. Sure, the 1.6X sensor 7D isolates the subject with a 300mm f/2.8 lens. I think where people find FF Canon dSLRs useful for control of DOF is on the wide end.

There are precious few choices for 1.6X bodies that are both very wide and very fast. Also, a handy wide angle zoom like the 24-70 has no functional counterpart on 1.6X.

All this doesn't mean everyone needs a FF camera. Heck, there isn't even much snobbery to be found in owning one given the used 5D market. But if you look at the specific points I mention, this may match up well to some people's needs. Those folks should look at a used 5D possibly.

I agree with you and in fact it is the lens selection that draws me to full frame. Wide primes like the 24L just are not the same on a crop. Same goes for the 24 tse or in fact the very affordable samyung 14mm. Just seems the primes are designed around the full frame format.

I'm not sure when full frame became such a big fuss. A decade ago, most people shot full 36x24mm frame. You could go to the gas station and for a literally few bucks get a cardboard and plastic disposable full frame camera that had almost no shutter lag. Go back a few more years and even point and shoots were mostly full frame. Even now, Canon EOS 35mm full frame film SLRs can be had for less than $20 on Craigslist and you can shoot full frame with all of your lenses. Add a scanner and you have a complete full-frame digital photography system.

I bought a 5D instead

wfarrell4 wrote in post #13340280
Printing big is where the results differed for me.

Stop giving me reasons a 5D2 is more optimal for my Epson 3880 then the 7D.

I use film

Darkwand wrote in post #13338607
I don't get it how can people live their lives without lusting for a full frame camera all the time?

I just go crazy when i see those shallow DoF images full frame produces with the same lenses i have. Right now the thing stoping me is that i want the newer metering system.
And the enormous stupididy of the purchase on eceonomic grounds.

Live was easier when the 5D2 was more expensive.

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.

Then you climb that fence, fall on the other side and discover what the other side uses for fertilizer!

I fell for that full frame height, sold one of my two 7D's to buy a 5D2.

Pretty soon my 5D2 will be history ... hopefully by this Saturday!

.

As much as the 5D2 was my dream camera, I decided to ditch my 40D and buy the "ancient" 5D classic, which can be had for under $1000 now. Best move I ever made and finally satisfied my quest for IQ after bouncing from XTI-20D-30D-40D. I know the 7D/60D produce very good images but still lack the FF magic so I do not regret buying the old "dinosaur." And yes all my lenses look much better now, except the 85mm which is too short gotta get my hands on a 135L at some point.

DStanic wrote in post #13341409
As much as the 5D2 was my dream camera, I decided to ditch my 40D and buy the "ancient" 5D classic, which can be had for under $1000 now. Best move I ever made and finally satisfied my quest for IQ after bouncing from XTI-20D-30D-40D. I know the 7D/60D produce very good images but still lack the FF magic so I do not regret buying the old "dinosaur." And yes all my lenses look much better now, except the 85mm which is too short gotta get my hands on a 135L at some point.

You just needed some faster wider lenses!

Quite a bit of that "magic" is in the coupling of the correct glass with the format in question.

I like the 5D classic too, once they start to hit the $700 range (I figure by about April of next year), I will pick another up.

However I find that the 1D4 is the best all-around body at this time, giving me the FF look, with a bit of "reach", etc. It is nearly the perfect camera for what I shoot. It is how I solved the "crop vs FF" problem.

I survive the lust by looking at the price and then referencing my checkbook balance. Pretty cut and dry.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #13341452
You just needed some faster wider lenses!

Quite a bit of that "magic" is in the coupling of the correct glass with the format in question.

I did have a Sigma 30mm 1.4 (which was awesome- replaced it with the 50mm for FF), had a Sigma 10-20mm which was fun but I didn't use it enough to warrant another UWA lens, and I had used the Canon 17-55IS which I was close to buying before changing my mind and going with the 5D instead.

I don't shoot to much in the way of moving objects so it was easier for me to buy a 5D and not buy a 7D or some other modern crop body.

I ordered a refurbed one. Will order one for the wife for Christmas.

Naturalist wrote in post #13341456
I survive the lust by looking at the price and then referencing my checkbook balance. Pretty cut and dry.

5d is at the $900 range now.

It's pretty easy. My wife says NO!

Honestly, I really have no desire to go to full frame. I like the flexibility of having EF and EF-S lenses, the "bonus reach" of a crop, and the massive on-subject pixel density. Oh and the smaller overall size and less massive mirror to shake the camera.

This is a pretty interesting discussion. I'm surprised no-one has talked about the difference in dynamic range or high-iso. I know high-iso is closer than it used to be, but it is not the same and the dynamic range of my 5DII images is definitely better. That being said, it really depends on the type of shooting you are doing. For a lot of photography, it just won't make that much difference, but that doesn't mean it isn't there. Images out of my 5Dii just have a certain quality that the 7D can't match and they also respond better when I don't get exposures quite right or the lighting was extreme - particularly at high-iso. I will also agree that the 70-200 is a much better focal length on the 5Dii than a 7D, but if I was looking for reach, the 7D would work better.

However, the 7D is far superior to shoot with from a performance standpoint. It has much better autofocus and metering and is just more responsive overall. I use it all the time and really enjoy shooting with it. The images are great, just not quite as good in bad lighting and less malleable in post-processing.

So, I don't think it's the biggest deal, but there are certain qualities from a full-frame sensor that can't be matched in a crop sensor. Lenses are much more important and the eye and brain behind the lens is the most important.

james_in_baltimore wrote in post #13341570
So, I don't think it's the biggest deal, but there are certain qualities from a full-frame sensor that can't be matched in a crop sensor. Lenses are much more important and the eye and brain behind the lens is the most important.

We probably need to be careful in just throwing around the crop term. I know this statement was made in relation to the 7D earlier in your reply though.

The 1D4 is a crop body too, and it has all the benefits of both cameras, DR, better ISO, etc, along with the performance and half the extra reach of the APS-C.

The 1D3 is no slouch, and being in the same price point as the 5D2, if you don't need video or all the extra resolution, the 1D3 comes in very close to the same IQ, and even high ISO is pretty darn close (within .5 to .75 stops).

I lasted close to a year from when I first felt the urge. Then I caved. There is definitely a mystical quality that is hard to quantify. It may be all in the mind of the FF owner's head. On the other hand, the shallower DOF is not. I definitely feel that the distant background gets crushed even more on FF than on crop. It's at a good stop better in high ISO/noise. And as was brought up, the FL's feel much more natural to me on FF than on crop.