Why go full frame?

rhys216 wrote in post #13178314
It's as per your sig, but where does your 1.6x chip fit into the scale... Point & Shoot?

Ah, that's a interesting perspective.... Point and shoot.... thinking...... maybe? It's probably on the scale of point and shoot compared to Medium format. I've never used a medium format camera, so my answer would be ignorant.

What do you think? Point and Shoot?

^^^
The size of your sensor isn't everything, it's how you use it that counts!

rhys216 wrote in post #13178336
^^^
The size of your sensor isn't everything, it's how you use it that counts!

lol - You know that does sound, dangerously, like someone who maybe trying to compensate for something.....

Oh well, I'll try to stay on the facts for future posts.. you talked me into it.

davidc502 wrote in post #13178249
It looks like my opinions hit a little close to home, by the way you've reacted. It's okay.. hell, most people are in debt. Not like it's a sin or anything.

Not close to home, just a pet peeve when people base arguments on opinion. It's just that I am annoyed by you in these threads.

And I am not sure if you are insinuating anything, but I carry zero debt.

And now that you know you annoy me, I expect you to work hard at it, so go for it if you please.

^^^
You probably just talked him out of it again...

davidc502 wrote in post #13178353
Oh well, I'll try to stay on the facts for future posts.. you talked me into it.

gorby wrote in post #13178061
If someone blows 2.5K on a camera without knowing what they're buying, they deserve it if they end up being unhappy with it.

On the other hand, if it makes them happy, so be it.

Don't forget the $2500 for the new 70-200 lens and the $750 for the Gitzo tripod. Bottom line, shoot with whatever system makes you happy, be it full frame, crop or p&s. Life's to short to continually worry about what the other guy is shooting with. People who care too much about what everyone else thinks are just insecure with themselves.

Higgs Boson wrote in post #13178608
Not close to home, just a pet peeve when people base arguments on opinion. It's just that I am annoyed by you in these threads.

And I am not sure if you are insinuating anything, but I carry zero debt.

And now that you know you annoy me, I expect you to work hard at it, so go for it if you please.

Yes, I gave the below opinion and had 3 people go off on me. How would you feel if you expressed an opionon, and have people gang up on you. Who knows, you may take it lying down, but I'm going to fight, to the end.

But lets get real, photography is based on opinion. The end result (the photograph) is ultimately judged by opinion. And in my opinion a lot of the stuff being touted in threads, like this one, is conjecture, and that annoys me.

Lets stop splitting hairs and go out and do what we enjoy doing, and that's taking photographs.

Regards,

David

davidc502 wrote in post #13178041
^^

This is exactly my point as well. Can't tell ya how many 5D's I've seen on Ebay with low shutter counts from folks who have a lot of money tied up in a camera. Fortunately the 5D series holds their value pretty well. On another tangent, almost every day I see a new post about FF vs Crop or will X lens do okay on a Crop or should I upgrade to FF. It's got to the point where if its not FF then it's CRAP. At this point in my photography I feel I know enough to tell the basic differences between the two formats. But what about all the people who just bought or are getting ready to buy? Those folks don't know the underlying differences, and they are reading this stuff we see here on POTN every day. I just feel they are getting a very slanted view. Maybe Canon doesn't mind, after all, they make more money on the 5D then on the Rebel series. I'm sure Canon would love to sell a 5Dmk2 to everyone, but 2+ Grand USD is a lot of money to most folks.

My 2¢

David

rhys216 wrote in post #13178627
^^^
You probably just talked him out of it again...

Actually I was good and didn't go off or anything... The threads already blown anyway. lol

My apologies to the OP.

Higgs Boson wrote in post #13178073
It's not anyone's job except the buyer to decide if they have enough money.

If everyone says full frame is better, maybe that's because there is scientific/empirical evidence for that..... People have to make choices for "next best" every day due to lack of funds. If you want to convince yourself that "next best" is actually best and anything more is overkill to justify your own personal decisions and abilities, that's fine, but that is opinion and is not motivated or based in proof, only feeling and should not be considered as anything but personal anectdote by potential buyers.

Well said. I am sure if the 5d2 was $1000, we'd see a different discussion here. Since it is priced out of the reach of many, we continually see justifications by the crop crowd claiming their system is just as good, where in reality it is good enough for it's price.

Hogloff wrote in post #13178692
Well said. I am sure if the 5d2 was $1000, we'd see a different discussion here. Since it is priced out of the reach of many, we continually see justifications by the crop crowd claiming their system is just as good, where in reality it is good enough for it's price.

Of course you have to factor in prices, it's a major component that everything is judged on. If everything was free then no doubt we'd all have a 1DIV, 5DII, 7D, and a H4D to complete the collection and Rebels wouldn't even exist.

davidc502 wrote in post #13178329
Ah, that's a interesting perspective.... Point and shoot.... thinking...... maybe? It's probably on the scale of point and shoot compared to Medium format. I've never used a medium format camera, so my answer would be ignorant.

What do you think? Point and Shoot?

Have you used a 5d2 or all your opinions on it also ignorant?

The Ran wrote in post #13178710
Of course you have to factor in prices, it's a major component that everything is judged on. If everything was free then no doubt we'd all have a 1DIV, 5DII, 7D, and a H4D to complete the collection and Rebels wouldn't even exist.

Well, yes and no. The question asked was why go full frame. My answer would be:

- sharper photos when printed large
- much better images when shot under low light conditions
- brighter, easier to use viewfinder
- much less post processing time
- better tone gradations
- better choice of wide angle lens
- better focus using manual lens

If the question was what camera is best bang for the buck...then I would consider cost, but that was not the question.

Hogloff wrote in post #13178764
Well, yes and no. The question asked was why go full frame. My answer would be:

- sharper photos when printed large
- much better images when shot under low light conditions
- brighter, easier to use viewfinder
- much less post processing time
- better tone gradations
- better choice of wide angle lens
- better focus using manual lens

If the question was what camera is best bang for the buck...then I would consider cost, but that was not the question.

I get what you're saying, but does it not also make sense to mention the disadvantages, a major one being cost? Otherwise we may as well recommend the aforementioned H4D.

The Ran wrote in post #13178776
I get what you're saying, but does it not also make sense to mention the disadvantages, a major one being cost? Otherwise we may as well recommend the aforementioned H4D.

Nope. Cost is a personal thing. I can afford good quality equipment, and I get good quality equipment...whereas a student just might be cash strapped. Has nothing to do with the advantages of full frame cameras.

Higgs Boson wrote in post #13178073
It's not anyone's job except the buyer to decide if they have enough money.

If everyone says full frame is better, maybe that's because there is scientific/empirical evidence for that.....

The characteristic differences between full frame and crop are well known. That's not the problem.

The problem is that many who encourage the buyer to go full frame do so by saying things like "full frame image quality blows crop image quality out of the water!" and other nonsense like that.

But the fact of the matter is:

1. Full frame has about a stop shallower depth of field for a given aperture, distance to subject, and angle of view.
   
2. Full frame gives you about a stop better high ISO performance as long as you're willing to use a shallower depth of field to get it.
   
3. Full frame gives you sharper images out of the camera in some (perhaps many) conditions -- this depends greatly on the lens being used on each camera. The sensor, primarily through its resolution, places a hard upper bound on the amount of detail that can be recorded. The rest depends on the lens.
   
4. Full frame will give you creamier tones at low ISO, probably by about a stop (I don't know if anyone has actually tested this, but the physics of it all suggests that this will be the amount of difference).

If "best" were always considered independent of cost and independent of the needs of the individual, and you full frame advocates who claim to want maximum image quality really meant what you say, then you wouldn't be shooting full frame, you'd be shooting medium format or large format. You'd be shooting with cameras that cost, at a minimum, $50K.

"Best" always has to account for the individual's situation. If you want to eliminate that and ask which camera gives you the "best" image quality, then that quite obviously has to go to large format. There can be no disagreement on that.

I dare say that none of you guys who spout the advantages of full frame because it has the "best" image quality are shooting large format. Why not? Simple: because it does not suit your actual needs. Which is to say: image quality is not really the thing you care about most. It is merely one of many attributes that you care about, not the least of which is cost (for if cost really weren't a consideration then you'd be willing to plunk $100K down on a medium format system for your landscapes and such, right?).


Now that we've dispensed with that, we can get back to the real discussion, which is: at what point do the advantages of full frame outweigh the disadvantages? Make no mistake, full frame, most especially as implemented by Canon in the 5D series, does have disadvantages relative to their crop offerings. All of those things have to be carefully considered when making a gear change if one is to acquire a setup that optimally meets his needs.