crop to FF (hobbyist)

This question is only for hobbyists though, doesn't applies to pros whose livelihood depends on photographs.

So.. What was the biggest factor for you to justify the cost difference? And at what point, you decided to move to FF?
I know once move to FF, I won't regret. It's just that 5Dii is sooooo nice but sooooo expensive. But OMG.. the images are just mind blowing.
I can't shoot everyday and I can't seem to find a sufficient reason...
Maybe I should just get a 5D..

Thanks!

gtg844f wrote in post #12964328
This question is only for hobbyists though, doesn't applies to pros whose livelihood depends on photographs.

So.. What was the biggest factor for you to justify the cost difference? And at what point, you decided to move to FF?
I know once move to FF, I won't regret. It's just that 5Dii is sooooo nice but sooooo expensive. But OMG.. the images are just mind blowing.
I can't shoot everyday and I can't seem to find a sufficient reason...
Maybe I should just get a 5D..

Thanks!

Well I went FF for 3 reasons:
- Having been a 35mm film photog for years, I just felt more at home with lens focal lengths. I guess I never learned my 1.6 times tables well enough!
- I find raws from my 5dii much more flexible with post processing - cropping, lifting dark area etc.
- The IQ and noise handling is better - not by a million miles, but better.
- I had the money to buy the 5dii and I find it rewarding to own and use it.

I think this last point is the main thing. Life is for living - follow your desires - so long as there is food on your family's plate and a roof over their head!

gtg844f wrote in post #12964328
This question is only for hobbyists though, doesn't applies to pros whose livelihood depends on photographs.

So.. What was the biggest factor for you to justify the cost difference? And at what point, you decided to move to FF?
I know once move to FF, I won't regret. It's just that 5Dii is sooooo nice but sooooo expensive. But OMG.. the images are just mind blowing.
I can't shoot everyday and I can't seem to find a sufficient reason...
Maybe I should just get a 5D..

Thanks!

I have both 5D and 60D. I'd say the IQ difference is minimum. Up to ISO800, 5D is a little bit better, while at ISO 3200 60D edges 5D just a little.

The biggest difference IMO is DOF. f/2.8 on FF is a sweet spot for me, thin enough to isolate backgroun in most cases, and big enough for subject (typically one person). On crop I'd need prime lense f/1.4 ~ f/1.8 to achieve similar result.

As a result of that, I've been selling my primes, which I used most of time on crop, now I find that I don't need them as often as before.

gtg844f wrote in post #12964328
So.. What was the biggest factor for you to justify the cost difference? And at what point, you decided to move to FF?

Biggest factor ? "I wants it, I is buying it". I don't worry about justifying it.

I switched from my older Canon FD film gear to a modern EF digital outfit in about 2004 (20D with three lenses) then added a 5D to the stable a year later and suddenly had all the DoF control I had been missing with the cropper come back. Just looking through the viewfinder, it was like I was back using 35mm film again, it looked great.

I don't ever want to have to 'justify' spending money on my hobbies. Hobbies are about having fun, not balancing books or saving money. I have bought sooo many things that can't be justified logically, but are fun to own, and that is what life is about.

I justify wanting and going to get a full frame by saving up for it. It is just a hobby so I won't allow myself to go into debt for it. I patiently squirrel away a little every month knowing that after the mkiii comes out I'll still have months of saving I can do before its readily in stock and the bloated markup comes down some.

Photography is a continuum...unless you have purchase the absolute best, there is always 'something better' to buy. The SIZE of the format always improves upon IQ...in the days of film, the next larger format was something to lust for; digital is no different, it is merely so much less affordable for the larger digital format (compared to buying the next larger format film camera!)

In short, you have to decide when your budget permits more expense, and decide when you wallet needs a rest and the current stuff is simply 'good enough for what I want from it'. APS-C digital is plenty darn good enough for most, just as 135 format SLR was plenty darn good enough of a film camera. Some folks can afford the next larger stuff, some cannot. Some have spouses to justify the expense to, others can freely spend whatever whim strikes them.

Having shot 2-1/4 square and 35mm for years I missed the larger viewfinder when using a crop camera but, since I do not use credit cards and cannot fork out >US $2,500 for a full frame, I opted for the 7D instead.

I've still been able to make sales even thought I know the larger sensor would provide better image quality.

Perhaps one day I will upgrade but the APS-C sensor is paying the bills so far.

At one point about four years ago I was shooting a 30D and I really liked the images from the 5D (and the gearheads here at POTN went on and on about how ISO1600 on the 5D was as good or better than ISO 800 on the 30D).

So I bought a 5D with the 24-105L kit lens. And the gearheads were right. The 5D is noticeably better than the 30D and I've been really happy with the camera ever since.

I did also get a new crop camera (1D Mark IV) for some specific features, and that camera is even better at some things than my old 5D, so I keep and use both.

I started this as a hobby, wanting to get pictures of my two little sons, now are teenagers. (Blows my mind.) I started with a 10D and a 28-105. I won an auction for the film EOS 3 camera, and that ruined me. FF and film was amazing. I was not sure digital would go the distance. As the technology is catching up, and maybe even as good, I decided I missed FF and went with the 5D when it came out. I don't earn any money, I shoot pro bono, but the cost was something I was willing to go with. I actually saved up and bought everything one lens or camera body at a time. Really wasn't a one time thing. You will find that FF is great! and you can't live without it, like me, but you can also do really well with the 1.6 cropped body. My 7D is almost as loved as my 5D2. It just depends on what you shoot. As for justification for the cost, don't do it if you have to feed your family. If you can save a little here and there, ask for gift cards for birthdays, etc., you can get there within a reasonable amount of time. And the 5DC is still amazing. Used, should be around $1,000 now.

gtg844f wrote in post #12964328
This question is only for hobbyists though, doesn't applies to pros whose livelihood depends on photographs.

So.. What was the biggest factor for you to justify the cost difference? And at what point, you decided to move to FF?
I know once move to FF, I won't regret. It's just that 5Dii is sooooo nice but sooooo expensive. But OMG.. the images are just mind blowing.
I can't shoot everyday and I can't seem to find a sufficient reason...
Maybe I should just get a 5D..

Thanks!

there ya go. Many of us hobbyist simply want better equipment maybe to mask our inabilities; makes our images look (to us) "professional". Its cool to see a pic ,that otherwise would just be a snapshot, that pops because we can control DOF better with FF and fast primes.

AWhy FF is expensive if 5d is 1K$?
It makes FF very affordable with cheap UWA lenses and nifty-fifty produces nice and sharp pictures at f1.8

I'm a hobbyist and most of my picture taking is centered around landscapes/cityscapes and street photography. I just always found myself wanting wider pictures. Made the leap and have no regrets.

I moved the thread to EOS Cameras. Good call.

I'm a hobbyist and bought the 400D as an upgrade from the high-end P&S i had.

I had an opportunity to buy a second camera when the 5Dc was being discontinued and I had a choice between a 40D or a 5Dc. So it was really about bells and whistles vs an older line with not many bells and whistles but a great IQ and users who raved about it.

My area of interest is landscapes and cityscapes and things that don't move much so fast AF was not an issue for me.

When you add this all up - it made sense for me to buy the 5Dc as a second camera.

Thanks everyone for your inputs.
Well, unlike many of you here who started from film, I missed the golden days and my first body was the xsi 450d.
My dad's hobby used to be photography, so xsi was a gift from him 2 and a half years ago. He wanted me to learn which was a great gift and a legacy for sure
So, I started purchasing a few lenses. And until now, I didn't know what it was like to take pictures with FF bodies. On one side, I was afraid that I might like it too much. And on the other side, I was doubting how it couold be possibly so much better than my xsi??
And when I did try it recently.. I realized, this is a whole different world. I was shocked.. literally..
Yes it was a 5Dii and I shouldn't compare it to 450d. But it made me dizzy when I saw the pictures from 5Dii.

Still I promised myself, I wouldn't move to 5Dii until I get married in a few years. Then I will have enough excuses to spend another $2k on the body to take pictures of kids.

Yes. 450 is more than sufficient for general use and for hobbyists like me. Yet I wanted to know how everyone committed to move to FF. I just happen to see a lot of hobbyists here are using FF cameras.. (more 5Ds than 1Ds though).
Anyways, thanks for sharing your stories. And for those of who started with film cameras. I am like a new generation whose first exposure to photography was with crop bodies so I didn't have to miss the golden days. But how the heck did you wait until Digital cameras get this good? I know the pictures of me that my dad took over 20 years ago look still damn good. And I am really thankful for that
Anyways Thanks everyone! happy shooting!