Full Frame Lenses

calicokat wrote in post #2033642
Just don't get EF-S and your good

Must mean I'm not good, what with being in the same boat as the OP and having a couple EF-S lenses.

FF is more demanding and more suited to L lenses. Definitely stay away from EF-S and consumer grade zooms if you're thinking FF in the future.

morehtml wrote in post #2034908
FF is more demanding and more suited to L lenses.

Would you mind explaining how FF is more demanding. I don't get it, is it tougher to get good pictures. Don't get me wrong, as mentioned I too would like to add a 5D in the near future.

While there is no doubt that L lenses are superior to almost anything else available you do not need to buy the best to get some great images. Some people do not have unlimited budgets.

In my opinion Jim, statements like that a result of two things. Firstly, people are used to shooting with crop cameras, which focus all of their pixels into the centre area of the lens, thereby minimizing any issues that the lens might have at the extreme borders (CA, distortion, softness). Secondly, in this grand digital age, people are more apt to view their photos at 100% resolution on their computer monitor, increasing the likelihood that they will notice small "defects" in their photos. As I mentioned above, this is akin to making a 40x60 inch print from your camera... something that few of us will actually do.

That's not to say that one should just throw any old lens onto a 5D before calling it a day... in my opinion it's too nice of a camera to stick junk in front of it. However, you certainly do not need all 'L' lenses to make it work either.

BearLeeAlive wrote in post #2034954
Would you mind explaining how FF is more demanding. I don't get it, is it tougher to get good pictures. Don't get me wrong, as mentioned I too would like to add a 5D in the near future.

While there is no doubt that L lenses are superior to almost anything else available you do not need to buy the best to get some great images. Some people do not have unlimited budgets.

Jim, I agree with you. The glass is very important, and in fact is probably more important that the difference between the 20D and 5D. I only have one "L" lens, but want more in the future. I do have a couple of Tamrons that I think are excellent lenses. In fact when I bought the 17-35 I was ready to pay the extra $150 for the 17-40L, but all the reviews I read showed very little if any difference in the results.

BearLeeAlive wrote in post #2034954
Would you mind explaining how FF is more demanding. I don't get it, is it tougher to get good pictures. Don't get me wrong, as mentioned I too would like to add a 5D in the near future.

While there is no doubt that L lenses are superior to almost anything else available you do not need to buy the best to get some great images. Some people do not have unlimited budgets.

The edges are usually the weak point of all lenses, but a crop camera cuts it off so you don't see the problems as much. On a full frame you will find many shortcomings that were not previously viewable. Also a 5d takes a very large image and even the best L lens cannot outresolve it corner to corner

Right, that point was mentioned and would be critical. I guess all the great shots with th 5D have either been cropped or are with a good lens that handles the edge detail better. Are all but Canon L lenses prone to this problem on FF. It seems some of the better photographers on these forums have had good shots with Sigma and Canon non-L lenses too.

But like I said, for me I plan to keep the 20D to compliment the 5D so all these other lenses will still perform great for me.

Even the L's are prone to this problem especially Wide Angles.. I have yet to find a canon Wide Angle that is even close to being sharp edge to edge on the 5d. You won't notice it much on images downsized for this site, but full size images it is really evident. If your images will only be for the web, then it isn't very noticable, but if you are printeing them larger than 8X10's you will notice it.

RichardtheSane wrote in post #2034416
Ah, but they could - sort of
Examining slides with a high mag loupe over a lightbox is the film equivalent of pixel peeping...

I'd be willing to bet that Ansel Adams, Edward Weston, etc would be considered pixel peepers today. Most of the large format fine photography was done with Kodachrome 25 (color) or Panatomic X (B&W). Both of which had a speed of about 25 ASA (PanX may have been 32). The extremely fine grain of these films made possible some of the most famous photographs in the world. In order to focus the enlarger for printing you had to use a grain magnifier and focus on the film's grain, not the image.

I saw an 8'x10' (yes I do mean feet, not inches) transparency enlarged from a 35mm Kodachrome slide taken with a Leica M6 that was sharp as a tack. Somebody, had to peep that one!

JNunn wrote in post #2037472
... I saw an 8'x10' (yes I do mean feet, not inches) transparency enlarged from a 35mm Kodachrome slide taken with a Leica M6 that was sharp as a tack. Somebody, had to peep that one!

Tack sharp from a viewing distance measured in feet, or inches?

morehtml wrote in post #2034908
FF is more demanding and more suited to L lenses. Definitely stay away from EF-S and consumer grade zooms if you're thinking FF in the future.

What are you calling Consumer Grade.

Would the Tamrons in my gear list be considered such?

incendy wrote in post #2035427
Even the L's are prone to this problem especially Wide Angles.. I have yet to find a canon Wide Angle that is even close to being sharp edge to edge on the 5d. You won't notice it much on images downsized for this site, but full size images it is really evident. If your images will only be for the web, then it isn't very noticable, but if you are printeing them larger than 8X10's you will notice it.

I have looked at a lot of shots taken with the 5D (most are on this site and you said would not notice in this size), and I don't notice it at all. Guess I am confused as to why the 5D with all its extra MP's and a good lens, would produce a lessor photo than what I can get with my 20D.

I really want a 5D (or similar) some day, but this talk is concerning me.

canon shooter,
Don't worry about putting Consumer Grade lenses on a 5D (as long as they fit, so no EF-s or older Sigma's).

Click here to see a shot at f/8 300mm focal length with my Cheapest (Consumer Grade) Canon 75-300 and my most Expensive (about 10x the cost) 100-400L

When everyone was using film the lens made the biggest if not the only difference (besides the film used, development and photo talent) but with the DSLR's I can see differences between cameras (different models) with the same lens.

The only negative I see with a ff is most lenses wide open have softer corners (close down a stop or two depending on lens and its not there). This also existed in the film days but most shoot with negative film which would crop it out when exposing the paper. These can be corrected many ways ex. you could crop out a 3504x2336px (or bigger) from your FF 4368x2912px photo. You could use software to fix it, or you can leave it in the photo.

Tom W wrote in post #2030551
Probably never printed them at larger than 8X10 inches.

Corners of the image are usually well outside of your DOF and can "appear" soft to the uneducated picture taker.