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 09 Apr 2012 (Monday) 19:40
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

What is it about full frame?!

 
Numenorean
Cream of the Crop
5,013 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Feb 2011
     
Apr 10, 2012 07:45 |  #31

Ugh.

I don't have time now, but I'll post some pictures later.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,474 posts
Likes: 153
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Apr 10, 2012 08:39 |  #32

Buchinger wrote in post #14238189 (external link)
Can someone explain WHY these images have this "look". I realize the sensor is much bigger, BUT are there other factors in the electronics, processing, pixel density etc. I mean, isn't the technology of the 5D MKII old by comparison to my 60D? Even the 5D Classic photos just look different to me.

I seriously doubt that the differences you have seen really have anything at all to do with the format (size of the film frame or digital sensor in a camera) of the two cameras.

The answer could be as simple as your not being able to set up your camera to optimize the image qualities in-camera for the photos you make. At least when I bought my 20D, most DSLRs were not set up at the factory to optimize things such as sharpening, contrast, color intensity, and so forth. It was up to the user of the camera to make the settings according to the user's desires.

Many new users of digital cameras simply don't know enough to choose the best settings. Thus, when they compare their results to those made with cameras that have been set up optimally - even point-n-shoot cameras that have been "tweaked" by the factory for the average user - they are not satisfied with their own camera.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Buchinger
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
467 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Mar 2010
     
Apr 10, 2012 09:38 |  #33

I'm not unhappy with my camera, and I'm not a seasoned veteran. I know my camera is more capable than I am. I'm actually very happy with my results, they just don't have that "look".

I cannot describe the diffeence I see in words - as I said, its not lighting, its not resolution or contrast or saturation, its an emotion or feeling. It is not camera settings, its not post processing. I mentioned snap shots as I'm not talking about perfectly composed and lighted studio shots. Im talking about kids running around the house with an on camera flash - a literal snap shot - and even those I see the difference. I've read all of the threads about full frame kool-aid etc. - and I sit and think "kool-aid? The difference is obvious to me!"

Anyway, I follow the depth of field thing, that makes sense to me. My biggest question, was is the technology simply superior because its a $3000 camera or is it more to do with the inherent properties of a sensor that size.

So dollar for dollar, would a 5Dc or an older 1Ds be a better platform to launch onto full frame?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
booja
Goldmember
1,638 posts
Likes: 97
Joined Jan 2008
Location: houston, tx
     
Apr 10, 2012 09:57 |  #34

its the lens?!?!?!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
archer1960
Goldmember
Avatar
4,930 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 81
Joined Jul 2010
     
Apr 10, 2012 10:02 |  #35

frugivore wrote in post #14238486 (external link)
For me it was the lens selection. There is no wide fast prime for a crop. And no 70-200mm f/2.8 IS equivalent (until just now )

Huh? You can put any EF lens on a crop, including the fast wide primes and the 70-200/2.8. The results of course don't look as wide, but otherwise the quality will be the same (given the same quality sensor and body).


Gripped 7D, gripped, full-spectrum modfied T1i (500D), SX50HS, A2E film body, Tamzooka (150-600), Tamron 90mm/2.8 VC (ver 2), Tamron 18-270 VC, Canon FD 100 f/4.0 macro, Canon 24-105 f/4L,Canon EF 200 f/2.8LII, Canon 85 f/1.8, Tamron Adaptall 2 90mmf/2.5 Macro, Tokina 11-16, Canon EX-430 flash, Vivitar DF-383 flash, Astro-Tech AT6RC and Celestron NexStar 102 GT telescopes, various other semi-crappy manual lenses and stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TooManyShots
Cream of the Crop
10,203 posts
Likes: 512
Joined Jan 2008
Location: NYC
     
Apr 10, 2012 10:07 |  #36
bannedPermanent ban

The look becomes apparent when you shoot wide open. A full frame body would have a shallower DOF. Also, a full frame body tends to create the in-camera vignette effect. This gives off a somewhat a moody feel to the shot.


One Imaging Photography (external link) and my Flickr (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
harcosparky
Goldmember
2,407 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 44
Joined Mar 2010
Location: Harford County - ( Bel Air ) Maryland
     
Apr 10, 2012 10:09 |  #37

SkipD wrote in post #14240854 (external link)
Many new users of digital cameras simply don't know enough to choose the best settings.


I have always, and will continue to advocate that anyone who wants to get serious about photography take classes and that first class should be Photography 101.

That class should be one that requires the student to use a Fully Manual FILM Camera.

Why?

Because it forces the student to learn how to use a camera, how to be a photographer.

I audited such a course recently at a local community college. It was so refreshing to see photography taught from the basics on up.

People came away from that course knowing how to think a shot through, and more importantly how to setup the camera so that they can obtain the results they desire.

The students who took that course will be the ones who get the most out of their cameras capabilities, the ones who don't will probably spend a lifetime chasing the 'ultimate camera' and spending tons of cash doing so.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,630 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4916
Joined Sep 2007
     
Apr 10, 2012 10:35 |  #38

archer1960 wrote in post #14241241 (external link)
Huh? You can put any EF lens on a crop, including the fast wide primes and the 70-200/2.8. The results of course don't look as wide, but otherwise the quality will be the same (given the same quality sensor and body).

I guess what he means is that the 35mm's and 24mm's behave like they should on FF. The 24mm equivalent FOV for crops is 15mm. There is no 24mm 1.4 equivalent, or even 15 2.8. 24mm on crop is close to 35mm on FF, minus 1 stop or more DOF at same FOV's. So at those focal lengths, FF has a big advantage. My 35mm F2 is nearly equivalent to a 24mm F1.4 on a crop for about a quarter of the price for the lens.


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Buchinger
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
467 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Mar 2010
     
Apr 10, 2012 10:36 |  #39

So those that are adament I don't know how to use my camera (which seems to be the answer to many questions on this board) are saying setting up a shot, with the exact same settings, and framed identically (5D foot zoomed closer) on a Canon 60D and a 5D Mk II (let's say @ ISO 100 to rule out noise), there will be no discernable difference in the images? I find that impossible to believe....




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,567 posts
Likes: 15
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Utah, USA
     
Apr 10, 2012 10:37 |  #40

Razeus wrote in post #14238434 (external link)
I just went FF. Now 50mm is 50mm and f2.8 is f2.8. Period. Can't wait until Friday!

50mm and f2.8 are also 50mm and f2.8 on my APS-C camera.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickr (external link)
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2x4b523p
Senior Member
266 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Puget Sound
     
Apr 10, 2012 10:55 as a reply to  @ tkbslc's post |  #41

I've been auditioning a 5DII for the past couple of weeks, and comparing it to my 7D. This is subjective, but one thing I've noticed is that the data for the 5DII does seem to have more "depth"; i.e., there seems to be quite a bit more headroom for processing, cropping, noise reduction, etc. before hitting the resolution or noise barrier (at least in my experience using Lightroom 3).

The 5DII files just look cleaner to start with, although the 7D is no slouch. I don't know how that might relate to the "feel" of the full-frame images, but I agree that the 5DII images have a different "look" than the 7D images. Not necessarily better in all circumstances, but different.

It's still a tough decision which one to keep because the 7D is a very good camera and I have some nice lenses for it. Prints up to 13x19 look great, but I've never tried anything larger (I'd like to, which is a reason for trying out the 5DII).


7D2 - Samyang 14mm - Sigma 17-70 - Sigma 50mm f/1.4 - Canon 40mm - Tokina 50-135 - Canon 70-200 f/4 (non-IS) - Canon 300mm f/4 IS - Canon 100-400 v.1 - Canon 1.4x TC - Kenko 1.4x TC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidc502
Goldmember
Avatar
3,456 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 31
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Tennessee
     
Apr 10, 2012 10:56 |  #42

This is a good resource to find out about Digital camera sensor sizes and how they influence photography.

***Good Resource Below***

http://www.cambridgein​colour.com …al-camera-sensor-size.htm (external link)


_
My Gear is ---> Here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stsva
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,360 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 284
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
     
Apr 10, 2012 11:00 |  #43

Buchinger wrote in post #14241472 (external link)
So those that are adament I don't know how to use my camera (which seems to be the answer to many questions on this board) are saying setting up a shot, with the exact same settings, and framed identically (5D foot zoomed closer) on a Canon 60D and a 5D Mk II (let's say @ ISO 100 to rule out noise), there will be no discernable difference in the images? I find that impossible to believe....

You're correct. With focal length and f-stop unchanged between cameras, shooting both types of cameras so that the framing is the same (requiring that the full frame be closer to the subject compared to the crop) will result in shallower depth of field from the full frame compared to the crop, so there will be a discernible difference in the images.


Some Canon stuff and a little bit of Yongnuo.
http://www.pbase.com/s​tsva/profile (external link)
Member of the GIYF
Club and
HAMSTTR
٩ Breeders Club https://photography-on-the.net …=744235&highlig​ht=hamsttr Join today!
Image Editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
booja
Goldmember
1,638 posts
Likes: 97
Joined Jan 2008
Location: houston, tx
     
Apr 10, 2012 11:00 |  #44

Buchinger wrote in post #14241472 (external link)
So those that are adament I don't know how to use my camera (which seems to be the answer to many questions on this board) are saying setting up a shot, with the exact same settings, and framed identically (5D foot zoomed closer) on a Canon 60D and a 5D Mk II (let's say @ ISO 100 to rule out noise), there will be no discernable difference in the images? I find that impossible to believe....

there really isnt...

the background may be a little more blurred but only noticeable when you view the pics side by side. if i showed you pics one at a time you probably cant tell.

if you want when im free ill use my friends t2i and my 85L or 135L and shoot wide open. ive done this before with my 7d. framing the same using the same lens and then using equivalent lenses... like my 85L on crop and 135L on FF. and also did the sigma 50 on crop and my 85L on FF. dont get me wrong there is a difference. just not as "oh wow FF looks so magical" as everyone thinks.

i like FF for one main reason. i use my 24L and 35L almost all the time wide open. pics have this 3dish wide pop to them. i love wide angle with shallow DOF. something a crop camera cant do bc of lens selection

its probably more of you wanting a FF camera and justifying what you see. but in short if you want one get one.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stsva
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,360 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 284
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Northern Virginia
     
Apr 10, 2012 11:06 |  #45

booja wrote in post #14241610 (external link)
there really isnt...

the background may be a little more blurred but only noticeable when you view the pics side by side. if i showed you pics one at a time you probably cant tell.
* * *

If you can see a difference viewed side-by-side, that's a "discernible difference," which is what he was asking about. There may be little practical difference, but that's not the same thing. I don't disagree with you that, for most people, there's probably very little difference between full frame and crop images if they're both shot and post processed properly.


Some Canon stuff and a little bit of Yongnuo.
http://www.pbase.com/s​tsva/profile (external link)
Member of the GIYF
Club and
HAMSTTR
٩ Breeders Club https://photography-on-the.net …=744235&highlig​ht=hamsttr Join today!
Image Editing OK

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

29,776 views & 0 likes for this thread
What is it about full frame?!
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 is mangurian
441 guests, 355 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.