Reading mode: Light Dark

Am I the only one who doesnt care about FF?

Go to last post
hi cindy,

whibal card, raw, LR2.3, canon profiles

works great!

MAC
SisQue said:
fwiw - The 40d was shot during the same wedding by a second shooter
with the 70-200 2.8 IS attached. Without looking at apertures and
ISOs for each shot (although in general the 40d images were ISO 800
and the 5dmII shots ISO 1600), I can say the 5dmII images in general
were noticeably less noisy. Now, that being said, the 40d images
tended to come into post slightly underexposed in comparison, and
that alone could account for the difference. I would not call this
a scientific comparison by any means - same event, but different
lenses, different photographers, different settings.

One point I'll put in the 40d's favor was it handled the white
balance in the reception room better, and oddly, I've noticed in the
past the 20d and 30d handled the whitebalance better than the 40d in
extremely tricky (translate horrid) lighting. Maybe Canon is
devolving in white balance ;). But that is a whole other discussion
and probably has nothing to do with sensor size.

I like both cameras and really, the most important elements are
what's attached to the camera (the glass) and who is standing behind
it. I think both FORMATS are capable tools and minutia in
performance fades in comparison to other factors, particularly for
smaller print sizes.

Cheers, Cindy (a female btw ;)
strawman_John said:
He wrote.
SisQue said:
Of course resolution enters into the equation, not just a larger sensor
Click to expand...
carlk said:
Also I agree with your observation the IQ advantage of full frame for
large prints came more from MP than sensor size, other than the fact
that a large sensor allows more pixels without ill effect.
Click to expand...
Now you managed to pump a lot into what was not said and ignored.
SisQue said:
I used to think the ff wedding people were making much ado about nothing, > but it really is a pleasure to have my 24-70 behave like it was designed to do. > Far fewer lens changes and fantastic low light image quality that really is > noticeably better (although at the small print sizes of wedding albums, I don't > think the improved image quality is of particular importance here).
Click to expand...
It explains your arguments.
Click to expand...
--
******************************************
http://www.pbase.com/cindyd
Click to expand...
 
Yeah I shoot RAW with LR 2.3 and so white balance isn't a huge issue. I'm lazy about the custom white balance, but do it sometimes. It wasn't that I couldn't deal with it, more of an observation that there seemed to be real differences between the models on how they handled the same light.

Cheers! Cindy
MAC said:
hi cindy,

whibal card, raw, LR2.3, canon profiles

works great!

MAC
Click to expand...
--
******************************************
http://www.pbase.com/cindyd
 
You own a 22/2.8L II.

That's a HUGE difference.

Personally, I can't see owning that lens and NOT owning a FF body able to take advantage of the sole atribute is was designed for.

But that's just me.

Brendan
=====
I am the last sane person on earth.
 
--
Fred
 
I have a 40D and love it. I bought a 5D MK II when they first came out, and haven't used the 40D since. I'm still keeping the 40D as a backup, but it has definitely been outclassed.
 
Well, from a camera system perspective, one big disadvantage of 4/3 is that you're stuck with that one format. With Canon, Nikon, and Sony systems, you have the option of FF or APS formats. In fact, many photographers shoot with both FF and APS cameras. For example, I shoot with Canon APS and FF bodies, with easy interchangeability of lenses, flashes, and accessories between them. On the other hand, if you buy into Olympus's 4/3 camera system, you're basically stuck with that one format. Olympus does not offer a FF option, a FF sibling to their crop camera.

The other major disadvantage with 4/3 (at least for me) is that the 2x sensor means that every lens is half the focal length of what you would otherwise use on a FF sensor. That has serious ramifications on DOF. With 4/3, you're always going to have a lot more DOF, which means less background blur, less subject isolation. That's great if you like lots of DOF, but not so great when you want less DOF. The wonderful thing about FF is that it's easier to isolate your subjects from distracting backgrounds using shallow DOF. On a FF camera, if you're using a 50mm lens, on a 4/3 camera you would be using a 25mm lens (thanks to 4/3rd's 2x multiplier). A 25mm lens delivers a lot more DOF than a 50mm lens.
 
I find myself going to the Canon 5D and my 4/3's cameras and leaving the crop cameras at home much of the time. I see it totally as a depth of field thing. With my 4/3's and nearly endless depth of field, I can enjoy good focus depth for my product shots and lack of out of focus areas in my regular shots where I want extensive coverage. With my 5D I get the huge advantage of great out of focus backgrounds and enjoy good focus isolation for the subject. I think crop cameras are a decent compromise, but don't do what the other do nearly as well as they do, while they cover the range of crop cameras very satisfactorily.
--
Dave Lewis
 
I'm not surprised but I think the reason is more because of new technology/feature vs. old than ff vs. crop. The situation can be a little different if the two cameras you own are 5D and 50D.
Scales USA said:
I have a 40D and love it. I bought a 5D MK II when they first came
out, and haven't used the 40D since. I'm still keeping the 40D as a
backup, but it has definitely been outclassed.
--
Click to expand...
 
I had a 30 & a 40D. I could have bought a 50D but thought that I had more to gain adding a 5D. I am not sorry & feel that having both crop & ff is a bonus. The 5D is basically 13 mps & ff optics. I have the af of the 40D for action & feel that most of my lenses now do double duty. Everyones needs are different but this works for me.
--
One day I'll learn how to post photos. I am 62 & technically challenged.
 
--
Fred
 
I think Panasonic is going to be felt more and more in the coming years. Their big start with micro 4/3's is a very important new format. It makes so much more sense than regular 4/3's which is always going to be overshadowed by crop cameras. I wouldn't doubt if in a few years we will see 4/3's replaced by m4/3's. Surely crop cameras are here to stay, but all the majors will have full frame cameras too, but their real impact will probably only be for those who really know their advantages, narrow depth of field, greater crop possibilities and larger print sizes in that order. From my point of view, presenting owning representative cameras of all four of the present formats, I think I would be best served by full frame and 4/3's or m4/3's leaving crop cameras to others. But crop cameras are so thoroughly established that their continued development is almost totally assured. I wouldn't think you would see any lesser emphasis on crop cameras in the next ten years, but m4/3's and full frame will be well established too.

I think full frame is a fascination for the most part with little real usability beyond crop cameras but for a few folks who are advanced enough in their photographic needs to realize just what FF can do for them. On the other end, endless depth of field afforded by 4/3's is probably considerably more usable for most of us and the quality we are currently seeing with it will soon prove too much for the majority of us to ignore. Anyone who has experienced the G1, will tell you, it truly is the next step in photography. It is everything a point and shoot camera could ever hope to be and offers the versatility and nearly the image quality of crop cameras. Just watch Panasonic fly with m4/3. They have the resources to really make it work and it surely will.
--
Dave Lewis
 
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