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 General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera 
Thread started 11 Jun 2015 (Thursday) 11:29
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Legitimately Torn Between APS-C and Full Frame Options

 
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,639 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2503
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 4 years ago by Wilt.
     
Jun 27, 2015 23:12 |  #151

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17612584 (external link)
Wilt, a follow-up, if you please. I reshot my outside/inside frame just now. Lighting is a bit different, as the other was shot yesterday. But...

I am a bit amazed. I compared my Evaluative shots (using different AF points) to metering using SPOT and recomposing. Spot wins, quite handily. As in the post I made above (and Wilts example shows), the Evaluative trick still left me 2/3 to 1 stop underexposed on the 'inside' shot, and about 1/2 over exposed on the 'outside' portion of the frame. By spot metering the inside, using *, then taking the shot, I got a much better exposure than I did with Evaluative. Ditto Spot metering and * for the outside.

I have to rethink this metering business. And now I need a camera where I can put Spot-metering on the AF point of my choice. :)

George, congratulations on the journey into the achievement of photographic nirhvana!
The solution to the lack of AF zone = Metering zone capability, in anything but the 1D body, is to do your metering in Manual mode, so reframing changes nothing regarding exposure settings.


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)
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,822 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5830
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jun 28, 2015 01:53 |  #152

that's why canon makes you pay big bucks for the 1Dx, however, with enough experience, you should be able to figure out this metering business. Point AF will do a mini spot, but not like the real thing, which is 100% no guesswork.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - 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 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Jun 2014
     
Jun 28, 2015 03:35 |  #153
bannedPermanent ban

Wilt wrote in post #17612871 (external link)
George, congratulations on the journey into the achievement of photographic nirhvana!
The solution to the lack of AF zone = Metering zone capability, in anything but the 1D body, is to do your metering in Manual mode, so reframing changes nothing regarding exposure settings.

Should I start a new thread to continue this? We seem to be way OT.


WARNING: I often dispense advice in fields I know little about!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lupo-Lobo
Goldmember
Avatar
1,103 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 419
Joined Nov 2013
Location: Texas
     
Jun 28, 2015 03:39 as a reply to  @ GeoKras1989's post |  #154

Interested ... will follow.


Lupo

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Jun 2014
     
Jun 28, 2015 04:05 |  #155
bannedPermanent ban

I have started a new thread wrt SPOT metering: https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1433153


WARNING: I often dispense advice in fields I know little about!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bradfordguy
Senior Member
941 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Bradford, Ontario
     
Jun 28, 2015 17:28 |  #156

The thing about photographing children and then children in sports later on is it is impossible to always predict what will happen next. The best IQ on the market won't help much if you are OOF. If you end up with kids in any sport then you will want reach and effective AF. Also the crop factor will mean you wont be shopping for very expensive longer lenses. Next thing to ask yourself and be honest about is how large will you be printing? For most people 8x10 is about the limit. In fact nowadays less and less people even print images. If 70% of your output gets emailed and never printed then the IQ may not be as critical as the internet likes to preach. I wentt from a 1DsII to a 7d and actually found my keeper rate increased due more useful lenses and great AF. Not sure I could live with the limited AF effectiveness of a 6D? And never discount what that "machine gun 10fps" can surprise you with.


G10, 7D gripped, 17-55 2.8 IS , 70-200L 2.8 IS MKII, EF 85 1.8, 105 2.8 EX Sigma Macro, 1.4 TC , 580 EXII, 430 EX, ST-E2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,639 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2503
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 4 years ago by Wilt. (2 edits in all)
     
Jun 28, 2015 18:37 |  #157

Bradfordguy wrote in post #17613701 (external link)
In fact nowadays less and less people even print images. If 70% of your output gets emailed and never printed then the IQ may not be as critical as the internet likes to preach. I wentt from a 1DsII to a 7d and actually found my keeper rate increased due more useful lenses and great AF. Not sure I could live with the limited AF effectiveness of a 6D? And never discount what that "machine gun 10fps" can surprise you with.

Yeah, if most images are shared via email, and they are viewed on monitors having no more than 2560 x 1080 pixels on a 34" dual HDMI (and only the bleeding edge folks own 4k monitors on their home computer) we can get along just great with 10MPixel Canon 40D's to use (or equivalent sensors with lower noise at high ISO).

Having shot family events and weddings of family friends, everyone seems fine getting 2k pixel images on CD to look at, and never even asking for full res 10 MPixel Canon 40D images, much less asking for 22 Mpixel FF images!


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
rebelsimon
Goldmember
Avatar
1,136 posts
Likes: 1987
Joined Nov 2013
Location: Whitby, ON
     
Jun 28, 2015 19:25 |  #158

Last night I was surrounded by full frame cameras, and then there's me with my crappy 70D. ISO 1600, no noise reduction. I routinely print at 24x36" with good sharpness. I know that FF is better, but I don't think you'll see it often. Those that say they can pick out a FF image from a crop at 4x6" prints are probably full of it.

IMAGE: https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/321/19225656072_7b9c9e94b0_b.jpg

Toronto area photographer http://www.SimonMellic​kPhotography.com (external link)
Cameras:5Diii (x2), 70D
Lenses:Rokinon 14mm f2.8, Voightlander 20mm f3.5, Canon 24-70 f2.8ii, Tamron 35mm f1.8 VC, Canon 50mm STM, Tamron 90mm 2.8 VC, Canon 135mm f2
Lights: AD600, AD200 (x2), V850 (x4)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Jun 2014
     
Jun 29, 2015 00:55 as a reply to  @ rebelsimon's post |  #159
bannedPermanent ban

RebelSimon, I couldn't agree more. ISO is not much of a differentiator among modern cameras until you get into the 6400 range. At 6400 with my 60D, I have to get exposure right, ETTL w/o blowing highlights, process heavily and individually. I can shoot the 6D JPG at 6400, if I am sure of the WB. Below 3200, there isn't enough difference to make a fuss about.


WARNING: I often dispense advice in fields I know little about!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jkdjedi
Senior Member
Avatar
341 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Jun 2013
Location: California
     
Jun 29, 2015 15:23 |  #160

rebelsimon wrote in post #17613804 (external link)
Last night I was surrounded by full frame cameras, and then there's me with my crappy 70D. ISO 1600, no noise reduction. I routinely print at 24x36" with good sharpness. I know that FF is better, but I don't think you'll see it often. Those that say they can pick out a FF image from a crop at 4x6" prints are probably full of it.
QUOTED IMAGE

This is incredible.. Insane! Nice job.


http://www.fernandezim​ages.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
werds
"Yes, Sire. You'll shut your trap!"
Avatar
613 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 64
Joined Mar 2014
Location: Delaware
Post edited over 4 years ago by werds.
     
Jun 29, 2015 16:09 |  #161

rebelsimon wrote in post #17613804 (external link)
Last night I was surrounded by full frame cameras, and then there's me with my crappy 70D. ISO 1600, no noise reduction. I routinely print at 24x36" with good sharpness. I know that FF is better, but I don't think you'll see it often. Those that say they can pick out a FF image from a crop at 4x6" prints are probably full of it.
QUOTED IMAGE

See that's the thing, the 70D is not crappy and is pretty amazing - with the right lighting and situation, But I also owned one and I know first hand that once it became dark it struggled, ISO past 6400 is sketchy and not as maleable. That said in good light or proper lighting I know that many shots are hard to distinguish from full frame. But my full frame can see in much lower light and the files up to 12800 are good BEFORE processing. And that is me comparing to what I used to get out of my 70D (granted I have slowly been improving my post processing over time).

The 70D and the 7Dii are amazing cameras, but for each advantage they have over equivalent full frames (and yes they do have advantages) full frame has situations were it is the more logical choice. I moved to Full frame after realizing I wanted those benefits more and would never bash crop sensors, but I think it comes down to preference and need.

For most people a recent crop sensor while provide most or all of what one wants with some great IQ that is on par or in the same ballpark as most full frames, but in some or most low light situations or post processing the full frame cameras provide advantages that you have to decide if the price premium is worth the usage and actual need.

PS - great shot!


Gear: Nikon D750, Nikon D7200, Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS, Sigma 50-150 2.8 OS HSM EX , Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR1, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Tamron 28-300mm Di VC PZD, Tamron 16-300mm VC PZD, Tamron 150-600 VC, Nikon AF-S 50mm 1.8, Nikon SB-900
POTN Seller Feedback (and other)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rebelsimon
Goldmember
Avatar
1,136 posts
Likes: 1987
Joined Nov 2013
Location: Whitby, ON
Post edited over 4 years ago by rebelsimon.
     
Jun 29, 2015 16:28 |  #162

I won't disagree with you, I don't like shooting mine past 3200. But in this situation, I would have to be at ISO 4000 (instead of 1600) to obtain the same shutter speed and DOF that I needed with a full frame (I had my 18-35 f1.8 stopped down to 2.8). If you're shooting often enough past 1600-3200, FF is definitely your better option. If you shoot wide open consistently and wish you could open up more, FF is definitely your better option. In the OP's situation, I think he'd be better served with a flash, but to each his own.


Toronto area photographer http://www.SimonMellic​kPhotography.com (external link)
Cameras:5Diii (x2), 70D
Lenses:Rokinon 14mm f2.8, Voightlander 20mm f3.5, Canon 24-70 f2.8ii, Tamron 35mm f1.8 VC, Canon 50mm STM, Tamron 90mm 2.8 VC, Canon 135mm f2
Lights: AD600, AD200 (x2), V850 (x4)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
41,639 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2503
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited over 4 years ago by Wilt. (3 edits in all)
     
Jun 29, 2015 16:30 |  #163

werds wrote in post #17614768 (external link)
The 70D and the 7Dii are amazing cameras, but for each advantage they have over equivalent full frames (and yes they do have advantages) full frame has situations were it is the more logical choice. I moved to Full frame after realizing I wanted those benefits more and would never bash crop sensors, but I think it comes down to preference and need.

For most people a recent crop sensor while provide most or all of what one wants with some great IQ that is on par or in the same ballpark as most full frames, but in some or most low light situations or post processing the full frame cameras provide advantages that you have to decide if the price premium is worth the usage and actual need.

PS - great shot!

And then you run into comparative results of images at very high magnification and see where one of the most recent APS-C cameras outperforms one of the most recent FF cameras in terms of freedom from bands of noise, proving that generalizations (about FF better than APS-C noise) always seem to have their exceptions...

https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=17545932


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
werds
"Yes, Sire. You'll shut your trap!"
Avatar
613 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 64
Joined Mar 2014
Location: Delaware
     
Jun 29, 2015 16:31 |  #164

rebelsimon wrote in post #17614787 (external link)
I won't disagree with you, I don't like shooting mine past 3200. But in this situation, I would have to be at ISO 4000 to obtain the same shutter speed and DOF that I needed with a full frame (I had my 18-35 f1.8 stopped down to 2.8). If you're shooting often enough past 1600-3200, FF is definitely your better option. If you shoot wide open consistently and wish you could open up more, FF is definitely your better option. In the OP's situation, I think he'd be better served with a flash, but to each his own.

Agree as well - flash is awesome when used right and I loved the 18-35 1.8 when I had it...


Gear: Nikon D750, Nikon D7200, Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS, Sigma 50-150 2.8 OS HSM EX , Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR1, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Tamron 28-300mm Di VC PZD, Tamron 16-300mm VC PZD, Tamron 150-600 VC, Nikon AF-S 50mm 1.8, Nikon SB-900
POTN Seller Feedback (and other)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
werds
"Yes, Sire. You'll shut your trap!"
Avatar
613 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 64
Joined Mar 2014
Location: Delaware
     
Jun 29, 2015 16:34 |  #165

Wilt wrote in post #17614789 (external link)
And then you run into comparative results of images at very high magnification and see where one of the most recent APS-C cameras outperforms one of the most recent FF cameras in terms of freedom from bands of noise, proving that generalizations (about FF better than APS-C noise) always seem to have their exceptions...

https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=17545932

Reason I qualified it with a some or most and not the definitive all situations lol ;)


Gear: Nikon D750, Nikon D7200, Sigma 17-50 2.8 OS, Sigma 50-150 2.8 OS HSM EX , Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR1, Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Tamron 28-300mm Di VC PZD, Tamron 16-300mm VC PZD, Tamron 150-600 VC, Nikon AF-S 50mm 1.8, Nikon SB-900
POTN Seller Feedback (and other)

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

20,675 views & 20 likes for this thread
Legitimately Torn Between APS-C and Full Frame Options
FORUMS General Gear Talk Camera Vs. Camera 
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 xDeeKayx
986 guests, 264 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.