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 03 Sep 2013 (Tuesday) 19:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

How does FF improve image quality?

 
John_N
Goldmember
Avatar
1,182 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 20
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Mansfield, UK
     
Sep 04, 2013 13:34 |  #76

Reduced DoF for me is the biggie - things just pop, although another thing to consider is that FF require EF type lenses, many of which are the expensive L lenses, so you end up with a larger proportion of shots taken with (mostly) better glass.



flickr (external link) (magsnorton)
: Google+ (external link) : My Site (external link) : 5oopx (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
flashpoint99
Senior Member
411 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Dec 2012
     
Sep 04, 2013 13:43 |  #77

David Arbogast wrote in post #16267174 (external link)
Who is saying that amazing imagery cannot be captured with a crop frame camera? I'll likely never have the opportunity to shoot Medium Format, but I'm not going to be defensive about it and whine about "snobs" that claim medium format cameras have better sensors.

I've shot crop and full-frame cameras - and from that experience I've developed a strong preferance full-frame. I don't appreciate being called a snob for having that preference. ;)

quote the person who called you a snob!....maybe you should read your own posts




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Submariner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,028 posts
Likes: 47
Joined May 2012
Location: London
     
Sep 04, 2013 14:26 |  #78

My last camera was a 7D ( it was a very good if not excellent copy) and I was totally happy with the image IQ. I did find it liked good glass.
The portraits it produced were good enough for me.
I got the 5D3 for better low light performance. 2012 RADIO flash compatibility, and hypersensitive Af points.
I am very pleased with the 5D3.
It somehow has a richer look to the JPEGS.
IF I want to crop an image say crop the face from a full frame. I think it is slightly better with the same glass.
I got a good deal at £2300, had I bought it at £3000 I don't think it would have justified the price difference to the £1100 7D.
It just about justifies the price difference now.

To me the only benefit is the reach provided by the 7D. Reach inFF with Canon is outrageously priced.
If it were not for the difficulty switching formats, it would be cheaper to buy a new 7DII than buy long Canon lenses.

Do I regret moving along . No.


Canon EOS 5DS R, Canon EF 70-200 F2.8 L Mk II IS USM, Canon EF 70-300 F4-5.6 L IS USM, EF 40mm F2.8 STM , RC6 Remote. Canon STE-3 Radio Flash Controller, Canon 600 EX RT x4 , YN 560 MkII x2 ; Bowens GM500PRO x4 , Bowens Remote Control. Bowens Pulsar TX, RX Radio Transmitter and Reciever Cards. Bowens Constant 530 Streamlights 600w x 4 Sold EOS 5D Mk III, 7D, EF 50mm F1.8, 430 EX Mk II, Bowens GM500Rs x4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RLJSlick
Senior Member
Avatar
416 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 196
Joined Mar 2006
Location: SE Wisconsin
     
Sep 04, 2013 14:31 |  #79

YashicaFX2 wrote in post #16267669 (external link)
I am not too surprised that I missed that thread. I don't own a 7D, or a 5D3, and the closest thing I have to a birding lens is a 100-400L. I prefer to think of it as my daytime-nephew-has-game-today lens. I am sorry I missed all the great shots in that thread, too. My wife would laugh is she heard me say I missed something on POTN. She is totally convinced that I waste (her term) way too much time here. That is why she bought me a Harley for my retirement present. I can't surf the forums and ride at the same time.

ROFL, that's totally ok, I'm still trying to catch up here, after being gone a long time. I loved the 100-400L!!! Great walk around lens. I just found it a bit hard to use on a crop sensor in lower light. I really miss my 100-400L, in decent light it's a great lens!! Talking about Harley, I only live about 25 miles from The Home of Harley, Milwaukee! Did you make it to the 110th Yashica?


Ricky L. Jones
Canon 7Dmk II, 5Dmk III, 7D, 50D
About me (external link)
Twitter (external link)
Google+ (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RLJSlick
Senior Member
Avatar
416 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 196
Joined Mar 2006
Location: SE Wisconsin
     
Sep 04, 2013 14:37 |  #80

Submariner wrote in post #16267847 (external link)
My last camera was a 7D ( it was a very good if not excellent copy) and I was totally happy with the image IQ. I did find it liked good glass.
The portraits it produced were good enough for me.
I got the 5D3 for better low light performance. 2012 RADIO flash compatibility, and hypersensitive Af points.
I am very pleased with the 5D3.
It somehow has a richer look to the JPEGS.
IF I want to crop an image say crop the face from a full frame. I think it is slightly better with the same glass.
I got a good deal at £2300, had I bought it at £3000 I don't think it would have justified the price difference to the £1100 7D.
It just about justifies the price difference now.

To me the only benefit is the reach provided by the 7D. Reach inFF with Canon is outrageously priced.
If it were not for the difficulty switching formats, it would be cheaper to buy a new 7DII than buy long Canon lenses.

Do I regret moving along . No.


The 7D MkII will be a great camera for someone like me that need or want that extra 1.6 crop. Can't wait to see it. With the price of the price of the new Super Zooms crop sensor maybe the only way to go. I mean $10,000 for a 500mm lens!!!!


Ricky L. Jones
Canon 7Dmk II, 5Dmk III, 7D, 50D
About me (external link)
Twitter (external link)
Google+ (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gremlin75
Goldmember
Avatar
2,727 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 216
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Sep 04, 2013 14:37 |  #81

FF is an inferior format! Medium is so much better. Wait medium format cost how much compaired to FF??......Oh yeah, that's right, photography is a compromise between IQ, needs, and cost!!!!

Anyone saying one format over the other is pointless is just overy opinionated and their opinion is pointless. Each format, from the phone in your pocket to larger format, has its strengths and weaknesses. The thing that matters is knowing the strengths and weaknesses of each and figure out where your needs and wants fall into that.

Hell right now, all new prices, you could get a 5D3 for $3500 or you could get a 70D + sigma 18-35mm f1.8+ sigma 50-150mm f2.8 OS for $2950. A body plus two of the best crop format lenses out right now for less then a ff body. Don't gets wrong, there is an advantage to ff compaired to APS-C. Dynamic range, high ISO, and sharpness are just a few. If I had the money or if I was a Pro I would be shooting FF and all canon L lenses. But again, wants and needs, it's where you need to make a compromise.

But that's all just the opinion of an overy opinionated person.....so by my own omission it's all pointless :p




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,271 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 7881
Joined Aug 2010
Location: West Point, Georgia
     
Sep 04, 2013 15:19 |  #82

RLJSlick wrote in post #16267881 (external link)
The 7D MkII will be a great camera for someone like me that need or want that extra 1.6 crop. Can't wait to see it. With the price of the price of the new Super Zooms crop sensor maybe the only way to go. I mean $10,000 for a 500mm lens!!!!

I'm really eager to see what the 7D II looks like too! :) I would love to see a 1-stop or more improvement on the ISO performance.


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12mm, FE 12-24mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, CV 40mm, FE 50mm ZA, Loxia 85mm, Batis 85mm, Batis 135mm

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
luigis
Goldmember
Avatar
1,399 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina
     
Sep 04, 2013 15:21 |  #83

John_N wrote in post #16267708 (external link)
Reduced DoF for me is the biggie - things just pop, although another thing to consider is that FF require EF type lenses, many of which are the expensive L lenses, so you end up with a larger proportion of shots taken with (mostly) better glass.

There's really no difference in DOF.
You just need to use a smaller aperture (large f-number) in FF than in APS-C.
The shutter speed can be the same.
And the FF camera would use a higher ISO. (Noise is then the same!)

Then DOF, Noise, exposure everything is the same.

It doesn't make sense to use different sized sensors in the same aperture and claim the DOF is different.


www.luisargerich.com (external link)
Landscape Photography & Astrophotography
Follow me on Twitter (external link)
My Awesome Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RLJSlick
Senior Member
Avatar
416 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 196
Joined Mar 2006
Location: SE Wisconsin
     
Sep 04, 2013 15:25 |  #84

David Arbogast wrote in post #16268017 (external link)
I'm really eager to see what the 7D II looks like too! :) I would love to see a 1-stop or more improvement on the ISO performance.

1-stop more, and a newer sensor package and the new Digic 5+ processor! Nice work on Flickr BTW.


Ricky L. Jones
Canon 7Dmk II, 5Dmk III, 7D, 50D
About me (external link)
Twitter (external link)
Google+ (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
John_N
Goldmember
Avatar
1,182 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 20
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Mansfield, UK
     
Sep 04, 2013 16:22 |  #85

luigis wrote in post #16268020 (external link)
There's really no difference in DOF.
You just need to use a smaller aperture (large f-number) in FF than in APS-C.
The shutter speed can be the same.
And the FF camera would use a higher ISO. (Noise is then the same!)

Then DOF, Noise, exposure everything is the same.

It doesn't make sense to use different sized sensors in the same aperture and claim the DOF is different.

I'm sure you're right - but whoever said I'd step down - 9/10 I'm wide open unless it really calls for it, I keep it open and use the sensor for whats its good at - making things pop out.



flickr (external link) (magsnorton)
: Google+ (external link) : My Site (external link) : 5oopx (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
aladyforty
Goldmember
Avatar
4,111 posts
Gallery: 234 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6301
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Albany: Western Australia
     
Sep 04, 2013 17:50 |  #86

David Arbogast wrote in post #16267174 (external link)
Who is saying that amazing imagery cannot be captured with a crop frame camera? I'll likely never have the opportunity to shoot Medium Format, but I'm not going to be defensive about it and whine about "snobs" that claim medium format cameras have better sensors.

I've shot crop and full-frame cameras - and from that experience I've developed a strong preferance full-frame. I don't appreciate being called a snob for having that preference. ;)

I don't recall singling anyone out. I also prefer full frame but find the bagging of anything other than it pathetic

its comments like this that made me comment as I did


"Seriously crop is such a waste of time. Price difference has come down a lot and one can get a used 5D2 for probably cheaper than the new 70D. Also 24-105 is cheaper than 17-55.

I mean why would anyone stay on crop and compromise your lenses?"

yes we all know that you get a cleaner image out of full frame but the crops are still pretty good, as someone who use film for many years I think todays photographers are spoiled for choice and spend too much time talking technical instead of learning the craft. I will take a talented photographer with a 450D who shoots jpegs over a boring photographer with all the latest gear anyday


5D3 7D2 Canon G1X Fuji X100 Fuji X10 canon glass & the odd other brands https://500px.com/alad​yforty (external link)
My youtube channel https://www.youtube.co​m …wlc4zg?view_as=​subscriber (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chauncey
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,696 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 462
Joined Jun 2007
Location: MI/CO
     
Sep 04, 2013 18:02 as a reply to  @ aladyforty's post |  #87

Medium Format...I'd buy one in a NY minute if I could use my Canon glass.


The things you do for yourself die with you, the things you do for others live forever.
A man's worth should be judged, not when he basks in the sun, but how he faces the storm.

My stuff...http://1x.com/member/c​hauncey43 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,491 posts
Gallery: 41 photos
Likes: 578
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Sep 04, 2013 18:05 |  #88

aladyforty wrote in post #16268406 (external link)
yes we all know that you get a cleaner image out of full frame but the crops are still pretty good, as someone who use film for many years I think todays photographers are spoiled for choice and spend too much time talking technical instead of learning the craft. I will take a talented photographer with a 450D who shoots jpegs over a boring photographer with all the latest gear anyday

The OP actually asked a very specific question, one that was not about noise, or reach, or shallow DOF. He just wanted to know what effect a larger format has on image quality.

And the generic answer is that larger formats can generally deliver greater resolution in the final print because they require less enlargement from the capture media to the print. And then we can drive off into side discussions about corner performance of lenses and things like that.

The reason these threads always devolve into about 100 pages of nonsense isn't because we as photographers should not talk about technical topics. It is because too many people seem to regard any kind of discussion about format size as some kind of value judgment on the format they are actually using.

It's pretty straightforward in some ways. In applications where the photographer is not focal length limited, a larger format offers some physical advantages over smaller formats. These advantages are especially going to be the case if the photographer is also able to afford lenses that do not suffer from edge performance problems. And finally, the differences between what a larger format can do vs. a smaller format may matter a little bit or may matter a lot depending on what you are shooting and what your intended output is. Canon's smaller 1.6X format is certainly very capable of making great pictures, which neither means that FF is pointless, nor that everyone needs a FF camera.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
moltengold
Goldmember
4,296 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jul 2011
     
Sep 04, 2013 18:07 |  #89

after all of this
i can live with one compact camera like the Fujifilm x20 or the x100s :)
who wants a big elephant ?
i need a small fly :)


| Canon EOS | and some canon lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
11,271 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 7881
Joined Aug 2010
Location: West Point, Georgia
     
Sep 04, 2013 18:36 |  #90

moltengold wrote in post #16268442 (external link)
after all of this
i can live with one compact camera like the Fujifilm x20 or the x100s :)
who wants a big elephant ?
i need a small fly :)

Sony is supposed to be coming forth with a FF NEX...you can have your cake and eat it too! :)


David | Flickr (external link)
Sony α7R II | CV 12mm, FE 12-24mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, CV 40mm, FE 50mm ZA, Loxia 85mm, Batis 85mm, Batis 135mm

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

34,691 views & 0 likes for this thread
How does FF improve image quality?
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 HamPhoto
1030 guests, 326 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.