Is Full-Frame simply an expensive phase for many photographers?

Started Mar 24, 2012 | Discussions thread
Dylthedog Contributing Member • Posts: 753
Re: Not for me

phototrope wrote:

For old film users like myself, full-frame is a return to how photography should be, and anything else is a dissatisfying phase in trying to find a digital alternative.

I agree entirely, but there is an alternate return to film - Mirrorless.

For a start, having lenses 'work as they should' with focal lengths that make sense is a bonus of full frame. But the gear is huge and a massive departure from my old, entirely manual, film cameras.

However, I can put my Olympus PEN next to my old Olympus OM film camera and guess what, they are a similar size. I can still change lenses and while I can't achieve FF DOF I can still isolate subjects and if anything, the lenses are smaller and lighter, despite having auto-focus. I can put 2 primes, the kit zoom and a flash in a bag the same size as my 5D2 with the 100mm macro.

Light and compact is what I remember of Film (what FF used to be called) so I have one system for that, and another that matches it optically. The latter is just fatter

 Dylthedog's gear list:Dylthedog's gear list
Sony RX1R II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Olympus OM-D E-M10 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +13 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow