Is Full frame still the most versatile?

Started Mar 31, 2013 | Discussions thread
Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 40,675
Not by a long shot.

zenpmd wrote:

Yes, they are big cameras...

And that point alone makes FF far from "the most versatile" for the vast majority.

...but with the constant apeture pro zoom lens they are (probably) the only lenses you will ever need.

The DOF equivalent on, say, the new Tamron 2.8 24-70 will never happen on m4/3, since it would require an aperture of 1.4 throughout the zoom range, thats never going to happen!

And what if you have no interest in the DOF the f/2.8 gives you on FF (f/1.4 on mFT)?

I suppose its just a shame there is no a 2.8 constant zoom lens that extends to around 85mm on FF that allows for good portraits. 70 is too short.

Not sure why it's a shame.  Is there anyone shooting portraits that thinks, "Damn!  If only I could zoom from wider than 70mm to 85mm at f/2.8"?  Maybe a few.  I'm thinking most are content with the 70-200 / 2.8s for that purpose, or, more to the point, the 85mm primes.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Biggs23
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
MOD Biggs23
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow