Reading mode: Light Dark

Why FF?

Go to last post
gullevek said:
I fully agree that a normal amateur shooter rarely needs a FF
sensor, but if you compare the detail from a 5D to the current 30D,
then you can see that there is a huge difference in detail.
Click to expand...
That as to do with the fact that the 30D has a 8.2MP sensor whereas the 5D has a 12.7 one. It's more a resolution issue than a format one.

The 10MP Nikon D200, for instance, is about the same format as the 30D. Still, one can (barely) see the benefit from the small MP increase:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos30d/page26.asp

PK
--
“Loose praise may feed my ego but constructive criticism advances my skills”
************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/photokhan
(Pbase Supporter)
 
He's not even changing FOV.

If I read it right, he was stating that by using 50mm on FF, 30mm on 1.6x and 90mm on his mamiya, he would get a different perspective. As you said, perspective does not change. Not as long as he doesn't move, even if using a 1200mm lens or a 10mm lens on the SAME camera, or any other camera. It is independent of focal length. Only dependent on position.

There is no such thing as a "30mm perspective", "50mm perspective" or "90mm perspective", on any camera. The FOV and/or DOF would change, but that's about it (besides more detail/less grain).
afterburn said:
This is not correct. The perspective does not change, just the FOV
due to the crop.
--
Gijs from The Netherlands
Canon 30D ~ EF-S 17-55/f2.8 IS ~ User Error.
http://www.crashdot.com
Click to expand...
 
that there is FF for those who want it or need it
and
x1.6 sensors for those who want them or need them

?
 
The perception that a smaller sensor will have a larger DOF is misguided. You can stop down your lens on FF to a 1.6x smaller aperture and up your ISO by 1.6 stops, and get the same DOF and about the same level of detail/noise, for the final picture (which means the FF picture will be enlarged less, so less noise will be visible). Many people object to this just because they see about the same noise on 100% images of both the 5D and 20D, but, again: FINAL image.

On the other hand, if you wanna achieve the DOF of a 50/1.2 lens (or the same detail/noise level) of a FF camera on a 1.6x camera, you'd need a 31mm f/0.75 lens, and lower your ISO by 1.6x stops.
spt_gb said:
Next there are some optical design properties to worry about. The
shortest distance between the back of a lens and the sensor with
the Canon EF mount is 42mm. To make lenses with a wider angle than
42mm causes design problems. The further you get from this focal
length the harder it is to properly correct a lens, the result of
which is slower lenses that are more prone to CA and distortion.

So, you cry, I get 1.6 times longer telephoto with my APS sensor!
No you don't. Any advantage you get is down to the difference in
sensor pitch. Comparing a 400D to a 5D (the current biggest
variation) you get only 40% more reach. At the same time you get
lower contrast and lenses which aren't pin sharp show up their
flaws more. The rumoured 1Ds mk III is recconned to have the same
pixel pitch as the current 20/30D so the telephoto advantage of the
400D works out at about 11%, not a big deal.

The only advantage APS-C has over 35mm is that it's cheaper to
make. Canon understand this and have already anounced that in the
future all but entry level DSLRs will be 35mm.
Henry Porter said:
After having heard your arguments for the FF, I must honestly say
that I am more convinced than ever that I'm staying with my 1.6x
system.
Thank you !

--
The only thing we know for sure about Henry Porter is that his
name wasn't Henry Porter ( Bob Dylan, Brownsville girl)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
since when has canon called FF medium format?

lower noise, shallower dof at the same fstop, more versatile lenses (a 24-105 becomes the ultimate walkaround) so less lens changes, faster wide angle

i cant wait to be able to afford FF. i am not a wildlife or sports shooter.

of course not everybody needs it or would benefit from it. however, after using the 30d for 6 months, i feel i can benefit from upgrading when i can afford it.

FF here i come (a bigreason i am sticking with canon)
--
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.simplyathos.com
http://idiotekniques.deviantart.com/gallery/
 
Amen.
Sajal Sthapit said:
but for a non-professional like me it is hard to justify the cost.
Furthermore getting it would be just for the sake of getting it. I
could use the money to get more lenses for my 10D.
--
Sajal Sthapit
'A photograph is worth a thousand misleading words.'
http://www.sthapit.com

Click to expand...
 
Henry Porter said:
What are the true advantages of FF?
Click to expand...
At the same f-stop, a FF sensor receives 2.56x more light than a 1.6 crop sensor. With all that extra light, you can either produce much more detail, much more sensitivity, or, as with the 5D, a little of each.
Henry Porter said:
WA is of course one factor but WA lenses are
cheap compared to the long tele.
Click to expand...
Wide angle is not a reason for full-frame. Speed is. There is no equivalent to the 24/1.4L or 35/1.4L on 1.6 crop cameras.
Henry Porter said:
And remember that on a 1.6x camera
we only use the BEST part of the lenses, the center.
Click to expand...
Yes, but we use it much more intensely. For the same final image sharpness, a lens on 1.6 crop must be 1.6 times sharper than a lens for full-frame.
Henry Porter said:
Of all the
comparisons I have seen I find it difficult to see any difference
in IQ between the 5D and the 20/30D.
Click to expand...
That's sad. I have both and, at the same level of detail, the 5D is at least 1 1/3 stops lower in noise. ISO 3200 on the 5D produces slightly better images than ISO 1600 on the 20D.
Henry Porter said:
Bigger pixels on the sensor
should mean higher S/N ratio. But it s signifiant for most amateurs?
Click to expand...
1 1/3 stops. Is an f2.8 lens a significant difference to an f4.5 lens?
Henry Porter said:
And by the way, why stop at 24x36, why not bigger format? (who
startet calling medium-format FF? Canon?)
Click to expand...
Because of the popularity of the 35mm format, the major manufacturers have made enormous investments in design and fabrication of large lens lineups for that format. Since that investment is already sunk, we might as well make the best use of it. You can't find anything even close to comparable to this in medium format:


Henry Porter said:
Bottom line: I think I'll stick to the 1.6X bodies.
Click to expand...
Presently, the 1.6 crop bodies have a 25% resolving power advantage to the 5D at a given focal length. If you are focal-length-limited, that's a nice advantage. The 1DsII closes this gap, for the most part and it can autofocus at f8 instead of f5.6. So it's the true "reach champion" in the Canon lineup. The other advantage to the 1.6 crop bodies is that they are smaller and cheaper.
Henry Porter said:
( I don't know the reason for this rant, maybe I just have to
convince myself ) :)
Click to expand...
That's sad. Instead of convincing yourself, you should try to learn the advantages and disadvantages of each format and make more informed decisions. If you are not focal length limited, then there is no advantage to the smaller sensors with their smaller pixels except cost. If you are focal-length-limited, then the driving factor for you is pixel density, not sensor size.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
Henry Porter said:
After having heard your arguments for the FF, I must honestly say
that I am more convinced than ever that I'm staying with my 1.6x
system.
Thank you !
Click to expand...
Do we really care? No!
 
......Heck,........think about it......what difference would there be in your pictures between a 5.0 cropping format and a point and shoot digital camera..?

The images would appear just as noisy, the depth of field would be vast, and everything in the picture would be in focus regardless if you focused on your 8 ft away subject, and shot it wide open, and things 100ft away would be just as sharp as their nose..?

Just think of the possibilities.... one could shoot sports with those light weight wide angle lenses and ba able to cover the game more efficiantly... Of course, the guy catching the ball would be just as sharp as the guy drinking the beer in the stands..

Just think,...you could bring with you an 85mm f1.8, and a 50mm f1.4, and a 16-35 L, and cover a game without breaking your back,... or without spending a whole lot of money on lenses!

;-)

JP

--
http://www.onemodelplace.com/johnpaul
Myspace = jpphotographer

 
If you think you might like a FF camera rent or borrow a 5D for a weekend. When I tried a 5D my 20D was gone the next week. Why?

Much larger, brighter viewfinder.
Better IQ, especially at lower light levels

My lenses worked better. The seem to give sharper clearer pictures, especially at low light.
Better AF than the 20 D.
Better flash pictures. Less FEC was required.

jerry

--
jerryk.smugmug.com
 
Why not just use a camera with a 1/1.8" sensor like the new Canon G7? Or why not use 4/3's?

The answers are going to be similar for comparing APS-C to 135. Some different though, the SLR specific things. Lower noise for the same sensitivity compared to smaller sensors, better advantage of wide angle lenses, brighter and larger viewfinder, better bayer interpolation results for macro photography and portraits, just to name a few.

Not that APS-C is bad, but there's nothing wrong with better. I'm going to stick with APS-C cameras until I can get something with a 135 size sensor for under $2000, but I have been purchasing only lenses that have a 135 image circle (no Di, DC, EF-S, etc..) so that I can upgrade when it becomes more affordable.

For some the motivation is different, but for me it's wide angle photography, low noise at high sensitivity, and the brighter viewfinder. I like low light and night photography, and wide angle photography so something 135 sized would be a dream camera for me.
--
http://usedtoit03.deviantart.com/gallery/photography/?view=1&order=9&limit=24
 
..is merely a marketing ploy to get people to buy the cheap digital lenses. How often does your subject and DOF cover the entire lens or is at the edges of your frame? Hardly ever, right? So why all the whining about "bad" full frame lenses? I've never had one complaint about frame edges from my 5D shots.

Once I used my Sigma 12-24 on my EOS-3 I knew I would end up with a FF dSLR and Canon answered my prayers just 5 months later with the release of the 5D.

Like others have said, try a 5D for a week or a weekend and see what it does for you. :) And Canon did not invent medium format name, lol.l
 
Ian Worthington said:
ljfinger said:
Henry Porter said:
What are the true advantages of FF?
Click to expand...
At the same f-stop, a FF sensor receives 2.56x more light than a
1.6 crop sensor. With all that extra light, you can either produce
much more detail, much more sensitivity, or, as with the 5D, a
little of each.
Click to expand...
Haven't heard that before. Where does that figure come from please?
Click to expand...
Pretty basic. It comes from 1.6x1.6, or the area of a 35mm frame compared to APS-C.
 
I made the jump from MF Canon to AF Canon in 1997. The expense and hassle of selling 4 bodies and a dozen lenses and rebuilding my lens kit over the next several years was much greater than the effects of switching from film to digital. I don't understand how people casually announce that they are going to switch from Nikon to Canon or from Canon to Nikon.

One thing that I did differently after that transition was to buy the best available lenses, even if it took longer to scrape together the money, rather than buying cheaper but mediocre lenses that I could afford immediately. It's a decision that I don't regret at all. For years, I was putting $1000+ lenses on a used $250 film body.
Ian Worthington said:
I don't :( My film camera is an F1, and Canon changed the mount so
I have to start again.

If they show any signs of doing away with EFS during this year's
Photokina I shall get upset. Again. :)

i
...
http://picasaweb.google.com/iWorthington
Click to expand...
--
Bob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top