-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
I thought I will never buy a full frame camera.
- Thread starter carlk
- Start date
-
- Tags
- canon eos 5d canon eos 7d
Exactly. And not only that, the 36mp sensor will make it necessary to have very good technique to get good images, it will be less forgiving. Cheaper and lower rez cameras are much easier to use and don't need the top-of-the-line glass that the D800 will excel with.
Higher resolution cameras do not need better lens or technique. In fact, they need lesser lenses and even technique to get the same images.
joema1
Leading Member
According to Canon, a full-frame sensor costs about 20 times more to manufacture than a crop sensor. The larger sensor requires larger and heavier lenses. This in turn makes the camera/lens system a better fit for pros or serious amateurs willing to pay for them and lug them around. They also want excellent performance and durability which requires more power, bigger batteries, magnesium frame, etc. This further spirals the price up, which greatly lowers the unit sales, which further increases the price.
It's actually amazing Nikon or Canon can make a full-frame DSLR for under $3000. With the current state of technology they could not make one for $600, yet you can get a brand-new crop sensor DSLR for that.
Full frame cameras may be at greater risk from crop sensor cameras than vice-versa. A Nikon D7000's in-spec ISO is 6400 with boost to 25,600, exactly the same as a D800. The D7000 is obviously not as capable, but it only costs about 43% as much, and it's 1 & 1/2 years old. It will be very interesting to see the D400 and 7D MKII specs.
Unit sales don't vary linearly with price. Unit sales increase greatly at lower prices and diminish rapidly at higher prices. For these reasons it's very unlikely that crop sensor cameras will go away anytime soon.
A 480mm f/2.8 lens would still have same size front element on EF mount (which is same mount for ef-s too) and will not save any size
What you are really talking about is a 300mm f/2.8 with smaller imaging circle. Same lens that you put on today but sans the extra glass. Even that is unlikely if we have to maintain the same focal length and f stop.
I doubt we will see it. We are more likely to see this fulfilled via some future mirrorless mount
--
PicPocket
http://photography.ashish-pragya.com
mirrorless are not about small sensor. In fact, to the contrary, FF is a desire on mirrorless. Mirorrless gain size advantage due to the closer mount. A smaller sensor would help, but that is now why we went mirrorless in the first place. There were plenty of p&s to do that
--
PicPocket
http://photography.ashish-pragya.com
It does not. You probably mean EF-S 300/2.8.
No, it will have 1.6x larger one.
Yes.
BTW, Carl knows my opinion.
Unless he finds a way to pay 40% for the 300/2.8, he is wasting it on crop by getting 40% of what this lens can do.it is an important lens for sports shooters who make money on pro bodies with hi iso...makes me want a 1dx before a 300 for those 2 better hi iso stops than cheaper prosumer bodies is a predictionIt does not. You probably mean EF-S 300/2.8.
No, it will have 1.6x larger one.
Yes.
BTW, Carl knows my opinion.
tko
Forum Pro
What people don't realize that the the 800 can function as a FF or crop camera. Doesn't it have a higher pixel density than the 7d?
Yes, the 7d is a little faster, but that's about the only advantage, or am I missing something?
Oh yeah, I'm a happy 7d owner, but starting to wonder.
Yes, the 7d is a little faster, but that's about the only advantage, or am I missing something?
Oh yeah, I'm a happy 7d owner, but starting to wonder.
Smaller, lighter and cheaper cameras and lenses. Crop format has come a long way too you know; good crop cameras today deliver better results when it comes to things like IQ at high iso values than FX did a few years ago.
The way I see it the constant improvements of sensor technology will actually make FX less interesting for a lot of people. Not everyone likes to carry around 3-4kg of gear when you can get the same reach with a few comprimises (like not quite as shallow DOF) for half the cost - and half the weight.
Daniel Clune
Senior Member
In 1.5 crop D800 is 14 meg. Now canon is 1.6 crop so a little smaller than 1.5 but I think the pixel size is still smaller in the 7D for more effective reach. But 14 isnt bad at 1.5.
http://www.pbase.com/dc9mm
--
http://www.pbase.com/dc9mm
First of all, it's D800/D800E, not 800D that would be Canon future Rebel model 
Secondary D800 with 14-24/2.8G is for landscape while 300L/2.8 IS is mainly for sports that are very different. 36mp D800 will not help you in wildlife to get extra reach by cropping. I am not a believer of cropping that cannot substitute for extra effective reach thru longer focus distance and crop factor.
And last, you don't have to get Nikon D800. You can wait anther few days when Canon announces 5DX or can get 5D2 in bargain price. You don't need 36mp if you don't print/view in super large size. 21 or 22mp should be sufficient for most photog.
I know you have argued vigorously for a long while on the value of FF. But so many can assure you once you try, you will find FF WOW factor. You just need to give a try.
Good luck.
--
http://qianp2k.zenfolio.com/
Secondary D800 with 14-24/2.8G is for landscape while 300L/2.8 IS is mainly for sports that are very different. 36mp D800 will not help you in wildlife to get extra reach by cropping. I am not a believer of cropping that cannot substitute for extra effective reach thru longer focus distance and crop factor.
And last, you don't have to get Nikon D800. You can wait anther few days when Canon announces 5DX or can get 5D2 in bargain price. You don't need 36mp if you don't print/view in super large size. 21 or 22mp should be sufficient for most photog.
I know you have argued vigorously for a long while on the value of FF. But so many can assure you once you try, you will find FF WOW factor. You just need to give a try.
Good luck.
--
http://qianp2k.zenfolio.com/
gavin
Veteran Member
Get the lens since you have a camera already and the 800D means you have to sell everything at a loss and buy new stuff. I used to think I don't want FF until I bought one.
--
What camera do I have? I rather you look at my photos http://www.flickr.com/photos/gavinz
--
What camera do I have? I rather you look at my photos http://www.flickr.com/photos/gavinz
Don't kid youself about the wow factor it's not there.
I was talking about the proposed 480mm lens (with smaller imaging circle) in comparison with what an existing EF-480mm lens.
--
PicPocket
http://photography.ashish-pragya.com
Ershotz -
Well-known member
I to am going for the D800, and wonder about the 14-24 on the canon, what adapter works best? I will just keep both any experience with the 35 mm from nikon?
--
ershotz
Well for example for birding and wildlife crop give an advantage
Both in af points spreaded larger I the viewfinder
And when focal limited
With same mp a crop gives more reach ( or gives a bigger subject in the picture when printed, which is what it matters)
Plus ff sensor are way more expensive to produce than crop
Which means manufacturers have bigger margin selling to amateur that won't spend a lot a crop than a ff camera
So, crop will stay for a while
Both in af points spreaded larger I the viewfinder
And when focal limited
With same mp a crop gives more reach ( or gives a bigger subject in the picture when printed, which is what it matters)
Plus ff sensor are way more expensive to produce than crop
Which means manufacturers have bigger margin selling to amateur that won't spend a lot a crop than a ff camera
So, crop will stay for a while
A
Apewithacamera
Guest
Yes I didn't make any sense with my post. A 300mm has a fov of a 480mm. If a lens was made to provide a fov equal to a 480mm with an image circle geared towards a 1.6 crop size, wouldn't the lens be naturally smaller in physical size even with an f2.8 aperture?
Currently a photographer using a 1.6 crop camera who wants a fov = to 480mm has to use a 300mm lens. That lens image circle covers a FF sensor. A 1.6 crop camera cuts away a lot of that image circle wasting a lot of glass. Users of 1.6 crop cameras don't have dedicated super telephoto lenses. They are paying for a lot of unnecessary glass IMO are they not?
I'm trying to make sense of it myself
Currently a photographer using a 1.6 crop camera who wants a fov = to 480mm has to use a 300mm lens. That lens image circle covers a FF sensor. A 1.6 crop camera cuts away a lot of that image circle wasting a lot of glass. Users of 1.6 crop cameras don't have dedicated super telephoto lenses. They are paying for a lot of unnecessary glass IMO are they not?
I'm trying to make sense of it myself
Wow factor or not
With ff you can take pix that w crop u can't with same field of view and bokeh
Take a picture at 24 mm f 1.4 ff, u can't have the same pix w crop
Simple
Now probably this aspect in your photography is not important otherwise you would have already switched to ff
Btw I use both 5d2 and 7d
With ff you can take pix that w crop u can't with same field of view and bokeh
Take a picture at 24 mm f 1.4 ff, u can't have the same pix w crop
Simple
Now probably this aspect in your photography is not important otherwise you would have already switched to ff
Btw I use both 5d2 and 7d
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum