I thought I will never buy a full frame camera.

Thanks

If Canon only made 1.6 crop cameras would the current design of Canon's super telephoto lenses be radically different?
EF mount lenses will mount on both EF and EF-S mount cameras. Better to make one that works on both than 2 different mounts for each lens.
The FF EF lens has an image circle that is overkill in size on the crop camera. This is wasteful use of glass is it not? Also the amount of glass not being used adds to the weight considerably doesn't it?
Yes but if you were making lenses, you would want to make one lens that works on both style cameras for a higher price if people liked your lenses and would buy them, right? You can't always think like a absolute-low-price consumer. ;) That is what has gotten us into this economic mess. People need to pay a fair price for products from a local store not sending their money to companies in other states because that removes money from your city's economy, i.e. your neighbors business get less customers.
 
Maybe I'm confusing people IDK and I apologize if I am.

The image circle of the FF 300mm f2.8 is cropped down to a fov of a 480mm lens.

If I could take out a knife and cut off the glass not being used to form that image I'd be left with a much lighter lens no?
 
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.
Don't kid youself about the wow factor it's not there.
Agreed. That's why he has to use 3200 and 6400 iso samples to see a difference. For landscape, iso 100, it's not there.

I've already proven that you can't see a difference between a 12mp FF body and a 12mp APS-C for landscape.

Qianp2k is juts an ignorant newb.
 
I think the longest lens in the EF-S line is a zoom lens that hits 250mm with an angle of view approx. 6 degrees. That is approx 2 degrees less AoV than a FF 300mm lens. Just imagine Canon making a EF-S 400mm f5.6 that is nearly twice the FL of the 250mm zoom lens. With such a dedicated lens made to efficiently cover a 1.6 crop sensor I would suspect that this EF-S lens would be more compact than its FF 400mm f5.6 counterpart.
But then it wouldn't be a 400mm lens or f5.6 - those are effectively dimensions, you could get a reflex mirror lens but then you don't have variable aperture or auto focus but you do (generally) get more CA and donut bokeh.
I could put a 7D onto my EF 600mm f4 lens and the 7D will crop more into the fov of the lens but if that was my only camera, there would be a very excessive amount of glass not being used.
Correct, but if you shorten it it's not 600mm anymore and if you reduce the diameter of the front element then it's not f4...

Generally telephoto lenses will have a larger image circle anyway, I expect that even FF cameras are only using a relatively small part of the image circle on a lens like that.
--
James
http://photos.jamestux.com
http://photos.flickr.com/jamestux
http://blog.jamestux.com
 
I know they have different fov and dof (not bokeh) but those can be mostly taken care of by lens selection. What left that could not be taken care of are not important enough for me to buy a new camera for. Not until the 36MP sensor at least.
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
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.
Don't kid youself about the wow factor it's not there.
 
My original thinking as I stated in op still looks the best for me.

"I'm almost certain my next camera will be a general purpose compact camera like G1X or NEX that I can take anywhere and offers more than satisfactory IQ for landscape and travel photography while I keep the 7D for wildlife and occasional event shooting. "

This thread kind of making me to rethink the big picture.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=40555726

I still like 36MP but it doesn't hurt that much to wait a little longer for that.

Thanks everyone for your great opinions. Now I only need to start to save for the 300/2.8
 
I know they have different fov and dof (not bokeh) but those can be mostly taken care of by lens selection.
Not really, you'd have more lens choice in FF than crop such as 14L, 16-35L/2.8, 24-70L, 15mm/2.8 fisheye, 17L TS-E, 24L TS-E II that are in designed focus distance without crop factor.
What left that could not be taken care of are not important enough for me to buy a new camera for. Not until the 36MP sensor at least.
Again not really. Not every pixel is the same among cameras and crop factors even at base ISO. FF is natural sharper, richer in color tonality and entire photo look more popup than APS-C as APS-C does over M43, M43 over P&S...

I happen having two photo taking in the same scene at the same time (60D clock was not setup correctly). 5D color pops up right out of RAW while 60D one is bit of dull and flat and I have to give extra sharpness and saturation but still doesn't match to 5D level.

The Hoover Dam at Nevada/Arizona border.
5D+24-105L





60D+Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS




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
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.
Don't kid youself about the wow factor it's not there.
--
http://qianp2k.zenfolio.com/
 
You don't miss any chance to start a ff vs. aps-c war do you? Are you missing something in your life?

Go f ight yourself.
 
Then why you start this thread, thought you are considering FF? Again if you don't try you will never know. I am just telling truth that you chose to ignore and fight for so long while many of us who actually own and use experienced.

If you don't see or think Canon FF advantages over crop in landscape and portrait, then you will waste 36mp Nikon D800 as well.
You don't miss any chance to start a ff vs. aps-c war do you? Are you missing something in your life?

Go f ight yourself.
--
http://qianp2k.zenfolio.com/
 
If you know me you should know what I've been saying that full frame sensor offers little advantage for what I do and bodies like 5D/5DII are not very desirable to say the least.
snip
This have all changed with the 800D. I can't imagine anything will be even remotely close to what this camera plus 14-24 can offer. It's almost like, and even better in many ways than, having a MF very cheaply.
Of course FF trolls will treat this as FF vs. crop when it's really a new, 36 MP sensor design vs. older, roughly 20 MP sensor designs. When (not if) there are 36 MP crop sensors they will probably show little difference against the D800 at low to mid ISO, like we see now with 16-21 MP sensors. But that's a ways off. The D800 is the first FF body in a while to really take advantage of the extra real estate, and in doing so it opens a gap with existing crop and FF bodies. 5D fanboys will no doubt try to pat D800 owners on the back and act like they are in the same club, but the truth is they simply cannot achieve the same fine detail or print sizes.

The D800 samples are excellent. If Canon doesn't have an answer for the D800 soon I might be adding Nikon to my kit as well. I'm interested in the best IQ...including fine detail...at low to mid ISO without breaking the bank. A 22 MP 5D3 isn't going to give me better prints than a 21 MP 5D2 or an 18 MP 7D. There's no reason for me to even look at that camera.
 
Yes I answered this to Peter13 my reason is for the high resolution sensor on a good body rather than for just a (any) full frame camera. It's certainly not for the "wow factor" that does not exist but some zealots are still trying to sell.
 
I happen having two photo taking in the same scene at the same time (60D clock was not setup correctly). 5D color pops up right out of RAW while 60D one is bit of dull and flat and I have to give extra sharpness and saturation but still doesn't match to 5D level.

The Hoover Dam at Nevada/Arizona border.
5D+24-105L





60D+Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS



Don't blame the camera. And don't underexpose your shots.



 
The crop mode is 15mpix though - that's still a pretty impressive imaging device and with more of the frame being covered by the 51 AF points...
One good thing about 800D is it will eventually break whatever is left of the full frame "wow" IQ myth. The same sensor will produce EXACTLY the same IQ in the two modes except for 15MP vs. 36MP resolution.
 
60D's 63-zone metering is very accurate. It's not underexposed. Sure you can increase contrast to make HDR look (that is not my taste) but we can clearly see 5D one holds more finer details and natural sharper just checking rocks at both near sides or remote mountains.
I happen having two photo taking in the same scene at the same time (60D clock was not setup correctly). 5D color pops up right out of RAW while 60D one is bit of dull and flat and I have to give extra sharpness and saturation but still doesn't match to 5D level.

The Hoover Dam at Nevada/Arizona border.
5D+24-105L





60D+Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS



Don't blame the camera. And don't underexpose your shots.



--
http://qianp2k.zenfolio.com/
 
Of course FF trolls will treat this as FF vs. crop when it's really a new, 36 MP sensor design vs. older, roughly 20 MP sensor designs. When (not if) there are 36 MP crop sensors they will probably show little difference against the D800 at low to mid ISO, like we see now with 16-21 MP sensors.
This could not be further from the truth. Make them 500mp FF and 500mp APS-C sensors. The only thing left then is the enlargement factor. FF will be 1.6 (1.5) times better in terms of resolution, with the same or similar lenses, as simple as that. When you increase the mp count, the FF/crop gap (ratio) widens, and gets closer to the crop factor.

You never understood the importance of the enlargement factor, and you never will.
 
One good thing about 800D is it will eventually break whatever is left of the full frame "wow" IQ myth. The same sensor will produce EXACTLY the same IQ in the two modes except for 15MP vs. 36MP resolution.
Carl, you can't be serious. Since when better resolution and lower noise are not factors for IQ?
 
The crop mode is 15mpix though - that's still a pretty impressive imaging device and with more of the frame being covered by the 51 AF points...
One good thing about 800D is it will eventually break whatever is left of the full frame "wow" IQ myth. The same sensor will produce EXACTLY the same IQ in the two modes except for 15MP vs. 36MP resolution.
Except 36mp D800 makes photos look bigger, why you don't believe 16mp D4 or 22mp 5DX (assume spec is accurate and we even don't know its IQ but certainly will be better than 21mp 5D2) cannot do such two models' shots except smaller size. Do you really need 36mp size for viewing and printing? Don't forget 5D2 is used to generate the first US President official portrait in digital format. I don't see how D800 can do dramatically better except larger size.

I seriously doubt you will see much WOW factors from 36mp D800 if you don't see 5D2 advantages over 7D/60D. Instead I guess you will complain on its huge file size, a bit of softness (as it'd require faster shutter on such size to view at 100% level) and outsolves your glass unless you use the best Nikon lenses that are very expensive. Not every Nikon D800/D800E sample is impressive.

--
http://qianp2k.zenfolio.com/
 
60D's 63-zone metering is very accurate. It's not underexposed.
LOL! Ever hear of a histogram? That's the first thing I looked at on both, and the 60D was underexposed.

While we're on the topic of histograms, just setting the black and white points on either image dramatically improves them. The 60D gains more because, again, it was underexposed and is flat out of the camera. But both need a levels adjustment.
but we can clearly see 5D one holds more finer details and natural sharper just checking rocks at both near sides or remote mountains.
Checking...nope...no clear sharpness or detail advantage either way. So much for FF wow...
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top