FF back to crop. Anyone made this journey?

I had thought that once I went full frame that I would get rid of a crop body all together. My background is 35mm film and I've never really come to appreciate crop bodies. However, since having my FF, I've decided that I like having a crop around as well. I love the full frame, but I do really appreciate the cropped field of view on some occasions.

I went from APS-C to 35mm digital, and would have absolutely no issues going back to APS-C, if needed. Like the previous poster, my experience had been with 35mm film, so APS-C was different.

I made that journey once when I sold most of my gear back in 2009. I went from a 5D to a G10? Realized the error of my ways rather quickly and then bought a 7D. After editing 5D files I didn't like the 7D files at all...Although I did really like the camera. I asked myself what the hell I was thinking and then ended up buying everything again...with a couple improvements...I do use my 40D sometimes and find no fault with the finished images, in fact I often cant tell the difference between the 40D and the MKIII.

Kronie wrote in post #16713765
I made that journey once when I sold most of my gear back in 2009. I went from a 5D to a G10? Realized the error of my ways rather quickly and then bought a 7D. After editing 5D files I didn't like the 7D files at all...Although I did really like the camera. I asked myself what the hell I was thinking and then ended up buying everything again...with a couple improvements...I do use my 40D sometimes and find no fault with the finished images, in fact I often cant tell the difference between the 40D and the MKIII.

Resize the 7D by nearly 50% to match the 40D, and you would have been happy with the 7D. The 7D is a decent improvement over the 40D, both in resolution and ISO.

Thanks to all for the interesting comments. I see so many commets about people being pleased with FF that I thought there might be other points of view that had not been expressed. So thanks to all - keep 'em coming.

I especially enjoyed the comparison of the 10-22 with FF UWAs. It has always seemed to me that, if I had a FF camera, I would use it with something like a 24-105 but the wide and long ends would be fro the crop camera.

DC Fan wrote in post #16713233
A handful of photographers remain who started with "full frame" cameras that used 35mm film. The only DSLR's available from Canon at first were so called crop cameras such as the D30.

When the D30 was new it was a revelation for what was considered near-film performance.

The time that has passed has emphasized that the most important element in a camera's performance is the photographer's ability and experience, not the size of the imaging surface.

Well I'm one of those old film guys but my primary film camera was a Pentax 67. I also used a 4x5. I was never happy with 35mm and primarily used it for long lenses that were impractical with my 6x7.

So viewing FF as 6x7 film and crop as 35mm is easy but...

1. My cropper matches (or exceeds) what my 6x7 could do in many (but not all) ways.

2. And, as I have learned in other areas, digital ain't film. What applied to film does not always translate directly to digital. There does not appear to be a direct relationship between sensor size (alone) and IQ.

rgs wrote in post #16713801
...
I especially enjoyed the comparison of the 10-22 with FF UWAs. It has always seemed to me that, if I had a FF camera, I would use it with something like a 24-105 but the wide and long ends would be fro the crop camera.


...
2. And, as I have learned in other areas, digital ain't film. What applied to film does not always translate directly to digital. There does not appear to be a direct relationship between sensor size (alone) and IQ.

That's my situation. UWA and tele range on the 60D:

8 mm w. 60D:

IMAGE LINK: http://s37.photobucket​.com …9172_zpsce67930​b.jpg.html

IMAGE LINK: http://s37.photobucket​.com …0690_zps69c4d55​2.jpg.html

TeamSpeed wrote in post #16713768
Resize the 7D by nearly 50% to match the 40D, and you would have been happy with the 7D. The 7D is a decent improvement over the 40D, both in resolution and ISO.

Absolutely. I rarely use the 40D though. At the time I would rather have had a $300 backup than a $1,500 one that sits around 99% of the time. If I need two cameras its two MKIII's, which are basically full frame 7D's.

I started with a 1.6 crop, after a few years got the itch to try out FF so I picked up a 5Dc. I used it, and it indeed had that "magical" image thing going for it, but hard as I tried I never really did enjoy it as much as I do my crops. I sold my 5Dc and picked up a 70D to pair with my 60D and there is no looking back. I am not saying I wouldn't consider a newer FF at some point, but my crops are my preferences.

I bought a used 7d last summer hoping I would like it for bird photography. I didn't and quickly resold it at no loss.

I prefer my camera to have the largest possible sensor I can afford. Using the 7d validated that preference. Unfortunately, a 36mm sensor is the biggest one I can afford, so no medium format for me.

Have one of each and always will (7D & 1DX)

David Arbogast wrote in post #16714262
I bought a used 7d last summer hoping I would like it for bird photography. I didn't and quickly resold it at no loss.

I prefer my camera to have the largest possible sensor I can afford. Using the 7d validated that preference. Unfortunately, a 36mm sensor is the biggest one I can afford, so no medium format for me.

Are you saying that you prefer your 5D for bird photography? I would think that if you are focal length limited, you'd fare better with a crop sensor.

frugivore wrote in post #16714692
Are you saying that you prefer your 5D for bird photography? I would think that if you are focal length limited, you'd fare better with a crop sensor.

I preferred the image quality result using extenders with the 5D III + 500mm f/4 to compensate for crop factor. For instance same subject and same setting: 5d iii + 500mm + 2x vs 7d + 500mm + 1.4x, I preferred the 5d iii image. However, AF gets more limited on the 5d iii in that scenario as the 500mm + 2x is an f/8 lens assembly.

I only speak in terms of personal preference, I respect differing opinions.

OP, there are some people who wish they could afford medium format....count me in on that.

ff is great for wide angle and shallow dof. I think my 6D sensor is way quieter than any crop I have used.

Just a suggestion, if you question wether to go ff and don't you will always keep asking yourself if you should have. Try renting a 5d mk iii or 6D for a week and see how you like it.

Oh, and be sure to shoot LOTS of pictures during that week!

Eos-M is as far as I will go due to the unique size. Mostly used by my wife or 4 year old. For incidental dual camera usage, I have a 5Dc ready to go.

Charlie wrote in post #16715207
Eos-M is as far as I will go due to the unique size. Mostly used by my wife or 4 year old. For incidental dual camera usage, I have a 5Dc ready to go.

Well my EOS M is going as I've just ordered the Ricoh GR