If you have Full Frame, did you still keep your Crop Body?

I have just purchased a 6D with 24 - 105f4L and 70 - 200f4L and this is my first FF DSLR.
However, I am keeping my old Sony A700 for various reasons. It is still a decent camera with various "Beercan" and other lenses, I am used to it, it gives extra length because of the crop sensor, and finally I would get hardly any money for what is a great camera in very good condition.

I always keep a crop in my bag. Maybe you should buy a nice used Canon crop so you can share lenses? Just a thought. Enjoy the 6D. Amazing camera.

At the moment this is as much as I can afford, but in the future if things pick up, then I may think about selling all the Sony kit and buying a 7D (secondhand).

I still keep my XSi and use it sporadically, sometimes as a backup body. But once the XSi buys the farm, I'd be replacing it with a full frame. I don't see any advantages in crop sensors, really.

Recently picked up the 6D + 24-105 kit for a nice price. Will be selling my old 7d, and my small kit is am Olympus pen with a couple prime lenses now. I've found m4/3 with small prime lenses had advantages over aps-c with zoom lenses: essentially better quality due to 1.7 comparing favorably to 2.8 on the crop body (roughly equal to 2.2). And let's face it, a 7D isn't any smaller than a FF camera, whereas the pen is tiny in comparison.

Alveric wrote in post #17477546
I still keep my XSi and use it sporadically, sometimes as a backup body. But once the XSi buys the farm, I'd be replacing it with a full frame. I don't see any advantages in crop sensors, really.

You can run into a significant exchange of usablity for the price. By "usability," I mean the design of controls, features, and functions. A 7D has a greater level of usability than the 6D and on par with the 5D. With the 6D, you're going up in sensor size, but down in usability.

As I've often said, in photography everything is a matter of TANSTAAFL.

RDKirk wrote in post #17482270
You can run into a significant exchange of usablity for the price. By "usability," I mean the design of controls, features, and functions. A 7D has a greater level of usability than the 6D and on par with the 5D. With the 6D, you're going up in sensor size, but down in usability.

As I've often said, in photography everything is a matter of TANSTAAFL.

Not good with acronyms here.

I wouldn't consider a 6D: its flash sync speed is way too low. I did consider buying a 7D when the 7D MkII came out, but I spent the money on lighting instead, and frankly, as I said, I don't see any advantages in cropped sensors for the kind of work that I do. And yes, once I started using the 5D MkII I find it difficult not to have the wheel to control the aperture; likewise the 'joystick' for the focus points.

TANSTAAFL: There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Every benefit has its trade-off, and that is especially true in photography.

http://en.wikipedia.or​g …uch_thing_as_a_​free_lunch

RDKirk wrote in post #17482305
TANSTAAFL: There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Every benefit has its trade-off, and that is especially true in photography.

http://en.wikipedia.or​g …uch_thing_as_a_​free_lunch

Oh yeah. That's why I always strive to buy the best I can afford.

Alveric wrote in post #17482280
Not good with acronyms here.

I wouldn't consider a 6D: its flash sync speed is way too low.

LOL !

ever heard of HSS ?

I haven't made the jump to full frame yet but when I do I will keep around a crop body for the added reach you get from them. When I bought my 70D I was tempted to get a 6D but didn't want to lose the extra reach and didn't figure the 6D AF system would work well for shooting the kids sports. With my 70-200 I often go all the way to 200mm for pictures and wish I had a little more, if I went to a full frame only I'd need a lot more. I am thinking of getting a 70-300L or a 100-400L but even then I would still keep the 70D or get a newer crop at that point.

watt100 wrote in post #17484429
LOL !

ever heard of HSS ?

HSS is a kludge. First of all, it does not stop action; the flash exposure is as long as the ambient, so where you might get a flash of 1/10,000s with 1/180 SS, you will get a flash of 1/200s with 1/200 SS, complete with the jello effect, and a total flash period of longer than 1/200 seconds, just like the ambient exposure. Also, it tends to illuminate the frame unevenly, and HSS is extremely inefficient, with most of the light never illuminating the subject while the sensor is exposed; this increases recycle time. Of course, the guide number also plummets with increasing shutter speed.

HSS is nice to have, but it is not a "LOL!"-like substitute for normal sync flash.

watt100 wrote in post #17484429
LOL !

ever heard of HSS ?

Doesn't work with studio strobes, nor can you use a lightmeter with it.

jhartley wrote in post #17484524
I haven't made the jump to full frame yet but when I do I will keep around a crop body for the added reach you get from them. When I bought my 70D I was tempted to get a 6D but didn't want to lose the extra reach and didn't figure the 6D AF system would work well for shooting the kids sports. With my 70-200 I often go all the way to 200mm for pictures and wish I had a little more, if I went to a full frame only I'd need a lot more. I am thinking of getting a 70-300L or a 100-400L but even then I would still keep the 70D or get a newer crop at that point.

The "reach" of crop cameras is a myth. "Reach" itself is a myth. No lens or TC or crop factor gets you any closer to your subject. What they can do is magnify optically, and put the subject over more pixels with smaller pixels, but that is not a property of crop cameras; just a coincidental correlation of cameras of the current generation. How much so-called reach do you think that my 3.1MP Canon EOS D30 has? Standing from the same subject distance with the same lens, how do you think it would compare with a FF EOS 5Ds, for capturing subject detail? Hint: the 5Ds puts 6.35x as many pixels on the subject for every one pixel the D30 puts on the subject.

All that the "1.6x crop" means is that the crop camera sensor only covers 39% of the focal plane area of the FF camera, and throws away the rest of the lens circle's light as heat in the camera chamber.

Yes, there is a benefit to current crop cameras as far as detail is concerned in focal-length-limited situations, but it has nothing to do with the crop factor, and everything to do with the higher pixel density.

Roxie,

I did kind of the opposite....I had a full frame, then I added a crop body. The crop body became my primary body, receiving about 80% of my overall camera usage. This was because of the much greater pixel density (a.k.a. "reach") that the 1.6 crop sensor provided. I did keep the full frame.

Then, about a year and a half ago, I added another crop body, the 1D4. This is now my primary body, even though the pixel density isn't quite as great as the 50D. But it still has pretty decent density (a bit better than the 5D2), and has noise performance much, much greater than that of the 50D.

Although crop bodies are most often better for what I shoot and how I shoot it, I do keep the full frame around for those situations when it may be useful as a backup, or to loan to a friend who doesn't have a DSLR.