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 27 Aug 2014 (Wednesday) 14:36
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

The path of the full frame

 
frankwite
Senior Member
Avatar
400 posts
Joined May 2008
     
Aug 29, 2014 09:19 |  #46

Charlie wrote in post #17122080 (external link)
I'de skip right to FF. You know what it offers, and grabbing more lenses for crop just means you'll end up selling it later.

Consider this, grabbing more glass, your just doing a single upgrade at once, but you go FF, your 50, 35, and 135 all get upgraded. Save money by going FF now, rather than build up a crop kit, then selling it off again later.

IMO this is probably the best answer given in this entire thread. In the beginning I fell for the glass before camera bit and it was total BS. When I finally moved to ff it was exactly what I was looking for and it made my L and non L lenses even better.

I'm not going to suggest any cameras that you didn't ask about which so many here will do and have already. IMO if the 5D2 is in your reach go for it, however if it isn't then go for the orginal 5D. It's still an incredible camera and even though I have the 5D2 I still use my 5D all the time.

The orginal 5D and 50 1.8 combo can create amazing photos> just look in the 50 1.8 and 5D threads. I use that combo all the time when I want to travel light with better IQ than my sl1 can offer. I pack my sl1 and 40 when I'm taking snapshots only or even my lx7.

Just know that using the 5D/50 1.8 combo has it's limits if you are trying to shoot in the dark. The 50 1.8 will struggle to focus, but in my case that's when I use my 50 1.4 to handle that.

The 5D is a great investment without breaking the bank and you don't have to baby it. You can get out and use it >even bang it up (if that happens). If you don't like it you can still get your money back when you sell it. Just think you're buying a $2500 camera for $600-500. It's a win win! Also canon will still repair the orginal 5D if you need to send it in. Win win again!


5D ll | 5D | SL1 | Lumix LX7 | 24-105L| 70-200L| 135L| 85 1.8| 50 1.4| 28 1.8| 50 1.8 ll| 40 2.8 STM| 35 2.0|75-300 lll|18-55 STM| 28-75 2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
datamon
Junior Member
26 posts
Joined Dec 2012
Location: Montgomery Village, MD
     
Aug 29, 2014 19:47 |  #47

I would think that your lenses are more limiting than your camera, but it depends on what you like to shoot. Maybe buy new EF lenses instead of EF-S in case you do upgrade to FF.

You said you like shooting portraits, and I use a 50mm f1.8 v1 and an 85mm f1.8 USM. Both are great for portraits on a crop (about 85mm and 135mm effective focal length) and are fairly low priced. The 50mm is a real bargain and when stopped down to about f4 or so is very sharp.

Do you have any studio lighting or are all your portraits natural light?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chinch
Member
185 posts
Joined Jun 2005
Location: USA
     
Aug 29, 2014 19:51 |  #48

frankwite wrote in post #17124370 (external link)
IMO this is probably the best answer given in this entire thread. In the beginning I fell for the glass before camera bit and it was total BS. When I finally moved to ff it was exactly what I was looking for and it made my L and non L lenses even better.

I'm not going to suggest any cameras that you didn't ask about which so many here will do and have already. IMO if the 5D2 is in your reach go for it, however if it isn't then go for the orginal 5D. It's still an incredible camera and even though I have the 5D2 I still use my 5D all the time.

The orginal 5D and 50 1.8 combo can create amazing photos> just look in the 50 1.8 and 5D threads. I use that combo all the time when I want to travel light with better IQ than my sl1 can offer. I pack my sl1 and 40 when I'm taking snapshots only or even my lx7.

Just know that using the 5D/50 1.8 combo has it's limits if you are trying to shoot in the dark. The 50 1.8 will struggle to focus, but in my case that's when I use my 50 1.4 to handle that.

The 5D is a great investment without breaking the bank and you don't have to baby it. You can get out and use it >even bang it up (if that happens). If you don't like it you can still get your money back when you sell it. Just think you're buying a $2500 camera for $600-500. It's a win win! Also canon will still repair the orginal 5D if you need to send it in. Win win again!

Indeed. I would add to get the 6D however as the 1Ds and 5D are dated in many regards and the little extra $ for the 6D would pay off long term (plus have much higher resale $).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Didereaux
Senior Member
Avatar
415 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 253
Joined Jun 2014
Location: Upper Texas coast
     
Aug 29, 2014 20:39 |  #49

Right now on CanonUSA the 6D is under $900. GET ONE! I have one and wouldn't part with it. The low light sensitivity is just like getting new faster glass. You won't believe what 400-800 ISO can look like!


Couple of Canon bodies, a couple of Canon lens, few gadgets all stuffed in a bag...and a stick, and a tripod.
https://www.flickr.com …ringandmontepho​tos/albums (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,871 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5765
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Aug 29, 2014 21:12 |  #50

Didereaux wrote in post #17125461 (external link)
Right now on CanonUSA the 6D is under $900. GET ONE! I have one and wouldn't part with it. The low light sensitivity is just like getting new faster glass. You won't believe what 400-800 ISO can look like!

Where? I don't see that on the refurb Canon site. I am quite sure Canon isn't ready to sell the 6d for that price just yet. :)


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
melcat
Goldmember
1,122 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Aug 30, 2014 00:13 |  #51

OP is in Serbia and Canon USA doesn't ship refurbs outside the US (not even all of there).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Reservoir ­ Dog
A Band Apart
Avatar
3,279 posts
Gallery: 469 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 435
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Out of the pack
     
Aug 30, 2014 06:39 |  #52

Throw away your CZJ Pancolar and your Porst, and buy real lenses !
You bought a DSLR and you put the bottom of a bottle glass in front of your sensor, for sure the IQ is not present ...


150 Free online photos editing application (external link) / 100 Free Desktop Photo Editor Software (external link) / Free Photography eBooks (external link) / My photography blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rolfe ­ D. ­ Wolfe
Senior Member
Avatar
484 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2011
Location: NJ
     
Aug 30, 2014 07:57 as a reply to  @ Reservoir Dog's post |  #53

I will share some of my examples.

I have a 550d and a 5dc.

It was a huge awakening for me. I was able to produce amazing photos with the 550d while also have the "reach" and 1080p video option.

The biggest reason for me to go FF was to lose the "reach" and be able to enjoy my 50mm 1.8 and other 50mm lens at their intended FL and to upgrade to a larger sensor that can resolve a little better.

It didn't make me a world renowned photographer, but I immediately noticed a difference in my pictures.

Also because of the larger footprint of the 5d, it made me rethink my composing.

I also got nice features such as the top mounted LCD to quickly check settings and the back wheel to adjust settings on the fly and the lock mechanism to lock in my settings and not have them accidently adjusted.

Here is a shot with the 5dc. I forget which lens I had on. It was my 28 2.8 I believe. Was 1/1600 and ISO of 100. I could never get a shot like this SOOC with my 550d. With the exception of recovery, this was sooc of my 5dc.

IMAGE: https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2919/14215108121_f6d5844872_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/nE99​p4  (external link) Untitled (external link) by rjr.photography (external link), on Flickr

and this was shot with the Yashica 50 1.9 - highly recommend this lens.
IMAGE: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5559/14063369963_13a006faa0_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/nqJr​VV  (external link) Dream fields (external link) by rjr.photography (external link), on Flickr

and for comparison-

this was shot with my 550d and my minolta rokkor-x 50 1.4
IMAGE: https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7388/14109587275_77bf04e7df_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/nuPj​J8  (external link) Warmth (external link) by rjr.photography (external link), on Flickr

I have my examples on my flickr.

I got some really good images out of my t2i.

I would agree that sometimes it's negligible. But the 5d definitely has a special look to its images. Very dreamy, rich and focus has been spot on for me.

I was also very worried about going from a camera with a ISO expandable to like 12800 down to a camera with an ISO of 1600 expandable to 3200 LOL!

No fear, the 5d has blown me away with how clean images are at 3200 which is MAX for the 5d.

But with a fast lens, I never have issues with low light.

Here is an example of a 1st bday I shot last weekend. This was my 5dc and my 28-90. So not a fast lens, probably 4.0 and Im sure the ISO was at least 1600..

IMAGE: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3843/15059472516_23267d322b_z.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/oWKJ​vS  (external link) 1st Birthday! (external link) by rjr.photography (external link), on Flickr

(I had to pull it off of Facebook, so the quality isn't superb)

Canon EOS 5D EOS 550D / EOS Rebel T2i / EOS Kiss X4 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II EF 28-90mm f/4-5.6 III USM EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS | Yongnuo YN560 | Canon Speedlite 420 EX

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,871 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5765
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Aug 30, 2014 08:09 |  #54

The 5Dc doesn't resolve any better, really, what you are seeing is the difference in the AA filter on the front of the sensor. Also, if you zoom in on both, you will also see that the 550D expects more from glass, and the 50 1.8 doesn't resolve enough detail for such a dense sensor. If you resize the 550D down to the size of the 5Dc, and compare, what do you see?

Put a good quality lens on the 550D that can resolve to that sensor's needs, and it will pull details very nicely.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rolfe ­ D. ­ Wolfe
Senior Member
Avatar
484 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2011
Location: NJ
     
Aug 30, 2014 08:34 |  #55

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17126036 (external link)
The 5Dc doesn't resolve any better, really, what you are seeing is the difference in the AA filter on the front of the sensor. Also, if you zoom in on both, you will also see that the 550D expects more from glass, and the 50 1.8 doesn't resolve enough detail for such a dense sensor. If you resize the 550D down to the size of the 5Dc, and compare, what do you see?

Put a good quality lens on the 550D that can resolve to that sensor's needs, and it will pull details very nicely.

That's why I said it is negligible most of the time.

I have been following the 550d thread for almost a year now.

There are some amazing images, especially MACRO work, in that thread.

When it comes down to detail, and 100 % crops, the 550d can hang as far as pulling details.

The dynamic range though, I think is where it loses.

I can get images in one shot, needed almost no PP with the 5dc that to get the same image on the 550d, would need a few minutes in LR.

I think when it comes to tonal range and dynamic range, the 5d has them beat.

It is the reason why so many photogs still use their 5dc daily when they also have a M II and III. etc.

It still produces great images at a fraction of the cost of newer tech.

Not trying to say it is end all be all.

It just def an upgrade to a APS-C and thats coming from someone who has both.

We didn't even talk about dust/weather sealing yet.

I am just talking about my experiences with both formats.


Canon EOS 5D EOS 550D / EOS Rebel T2i / EOS Kiss X4 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II EF 28-90mm f/4-5.6 III USM EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS | Yongnuo YN560 | Canon Speedlite 420 EX

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Rolfe ­ D. ­ Wolfe
Senior Member
Avatar
484 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2011
Location: NJ
     
Aug 30, 2014 08:39 as a reply to  @ Rolfe D. Wolfe's post |  #56

Oh and it should be noted, that I am NOT a pixel peeper.

I take images for what they are, images. I made a healthy decision a long time ago that pixel peeping was a dark scary road.

When blown up and hung up, images are still viewed from a distance, so as long as you are not trying to print a 35Kb jpeg and make a 20x30 print, you will NEVER really notice pixelation in real life unless you go LOOKING for it.

It's just not worth it since every camera today can handle semi large prints without breaking a sweat as long as your exposure is good.


Canon EOS 5D EOS 550D / EOS Rebel T2i / EOS Kiss X4 | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II EF 28-90mm f/4-5.6 III USM EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS | Yongnuo YN560 | Canon Speedlite 420 EX

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,026 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6109
Joined Sep 2007
     
Aug 30, 2014 08:56 |  #57

Rolfe D. Wolfe wrote in post #17126095 (external link)
Oh and it should be noted, that I am NOT a pixel peeper.

I take images for what they are, images. I made a healthy decision a long time ago that pixel peeping was a dark scary road.

When blown up and hung up, images are still viewed from a distance, so as long as you are not trying to print a 35Kb jpeg and make a 20x30 print, you will NEVER really notice pixelation in real life unless you go LOOKING for it.

It's just not worth it since every camera today can handle semi large prints without breaking a sweat as long as your exposure is good.

it really depends on your print. If you're doing a matte canvas style, it may not matter much, but a high def style glossy print, people really do note the detail. If you hang it up over the fireplace, then sure people may not walk up to it, but in the hallway, you bet I'm aiming for incredible amounts of detail.

A good piece of work is timeless, and I would really like the piece to have the highest quality possible. Now if you're just doing snapshots, it may not matter, but some folks may develop goals in photography, and it would be nice to have nice tools for the job.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,731 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2545
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Aug 30, 2014 09:25 |  #58

Something you have not considered:

  • Your T3i/1100D is one of the lightest/most compact bodies offered by Canon in a convenstional dSLR, yet the 1DsII is one of the heaviest/largest bodies offered by Canon...are you really prepared for a gigantic leap of that nature?
    Look at how large even the intermediate prosumer/pro body is, compared to the film SLRs of the 1970s...the 1DsII is even more monstrous!

IMAGE: http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i63/wiltonw/Equipment/Bodysize-1-8491_zpsdad1bce9.jpg
Think twice about size & weight. A 5Dc/5DII/6D might be the better choice for you, in FF. And if sticking to APS-C is the right thing, the 70D/7D.

Archibald wrote:
Back in film days, there was no question that larger formats were MUCH better than smaller. Resolution was proportional to film area. Bigger was better.

Nowadays with digital, resolution of the top-of-the-line 1DX is the SAME as the SL1 (smallest and cheapest except for maybe the T3). Things have changed big time.

But an inescapable characteristic of the larger format of FF is that one has the 'enlarge' the captured image by 0.62x less, to make the same size final print. And because the optical resolution of the lens is absolutely a factor, the FF image is seen to be sharper at the same pixel resolution, and it can have more total detail!


  1. photozone.de tests lenses for resolution with 15Mpixel camera bodies. With 15MP FF camera the 70-200 f/2.8 II lens achieves 3590 line-pairs-per-picture-height, the 15MP APS-C achieves 2530 with the same lens...So the 20x30" print from both cameras has 42% greater detail from the FF camera with the same lens!
  2. Then factor in the 1.6x greater magnification of the APS-C image than the FF image, to make the same print size. The FF image with the above lens nets 179 line-pairs per inch of 20x30" print, and the APS-C image with the same lens nets 79 line-pairs per inch of 20x30" print!


Finally, lest folks think that sensor resolution makes that much of a difference, an 8Mpixel APS-C achieves about 2000 line-pairs-per-picture-height with an 70-200mm f/2.8 I, while a 15Mpixel APS-C achieves only 25% better resolution with the superior 70-200mm f/2.8 II lens and 1.4x the pixel count in one direction.

You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
8,890 posts
Gallery: 403 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 18767
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Aug 30, 2014 11:08 |  #59

Wilt wrote in post #17126141 (external link)
But an inescapable characteristic of the larger format of FF is that one has the 'enlarge' the captured image by 0.62x less, to make the same size final print. And because the optical resolution of the lens is absolutely a factor, the FF image is seen to be sharper at the same pixel resolution, and it can have more total detail!


  1. photozone.de tests lenses for resolution with 15Mpixel camera bodies. With 15MP FF camera the 70-200 f/2.8 II lens achieves 3590 line-pairs-per-picture-height, the 15MP APS-C achieves 2530 with the same lens...So the 20x30" print from both cameras has 42% greater detail from the FF camera with the same lens!
  2. Then factor in the 1.6x greater magnification of the APS-C image than the FF image, to make the same print size. The FF image with the above lens nets 179 line-pairs per inch of 20x30" print, and the APS-C image with the same lens nets 79 line-pairs per inch of 20x30" print!

Thanks for the analysis. Useful info.

I follow your steps but then at the end I have a problem with the "79 line-pairs per inch". Since the APS-C image has 2530 line-pairs-per-picture-height, and it is blown up to 20 inches (high), then the result IMO should be 2530/20 = 126 line pairs per inch.

So the FF gets 179 lp/inch, vs 126 for APS-C.

The conclusion is that the FF camera with a FF lens outperforms an APS-C camera with a FF lens.

All this is still puzzling, though, because we know that tiny sensors like in the Canon IXUS 155 (6.17 x 4.55 mm which is only 3.2% the area of FF) with its native lens produce pictures with fantastic detail.


Sony RX10 IV, Canon 7D2, Canon 77D, assorted Canon lenses
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,731 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2545
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
     
Aug 30, 2014 11:39 |  #60

Archibald wrote in post #17126252 (external link)
Thanks for the analysis. Useful info.

I follow your steps but then at the end I have a problem with the "79 line-pairs per inch". Since the APS-C image has 2530 line-pairs-per-picture-height, and it is blown up to 20 inches (high), then the result IMO should be 2530/20 = 126 line pairs per inch.

So the FF gets 179 lp/inch, vs 126 for APS-C.


  1. The APS-C sensor is at most 15mm tall; the FF sensor is 24mm tall.
  2. So to fill a 20"x 30" print, one has to magnify the APS-C sensor by 33.9x, while the FF image is magnified by 22.2x
  3. 3590/22.2= 179 line pairs/inch FF, 2530/33.9= 126 line pairs/inch APS-C
My prior numbers were too hastily derived, but your numbers and my new numbers match and are correct...Thx

Archibald wrote:
All this is still puzzling, though, because we know that tiny sensors like in the Canon IXUS 155 (6.17 x 4.55 mm which is only 3.2% the area of FF) with its native lens produce pictures with fantastic detail.

Not puzzling at all, when one understands the fundamental optical law that the smaller the image circle of a lens, the higher the line-count per millimeter delivered to the film/sensor. For example microfilm lenses have always been able to resolve very tiny detail on super fine grain microfilm. In theory, a lens designed for APS-C only coverage ought to be able to resolve the same number of lines-pairs-per-picture-height as the FF lens, so that pixel count alone becomes the determining factor. But in dSLRs the FF lens is a dual purpose lens and the APS-C lens is generally more of a 'less expensive lens for amateurs' so the total resolution goal of the lens is lowered in the goal of lower cost to produce and sell.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

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

9,860 views & 3 likes for this thread
The path of the 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 Tommyg86
955 guests, 331 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.