To go full frame or not?

Started Apr 8, 2013 | Discussions thread
Jefenator Senior Member • Posts: 2,841
Re: FF in a period of rapid change.

Sometimes I do yearn for that "full frame look". Particularly for certain candid shots where a 35/2 just doesn't isolate the subject as much as I'd like.

But the closer you get, the less full-frame matters IME. Ditto telephoto. At 1:8 (about where I shoot many of my vases for the online store) on APS-C I have shallow focus capacity to spare. I shoot at f/5.6 or f/8 and still get plenty of nice BOKEH and isolation. If I shot wide open that close, most of the time the depth would be WAY too thin. I actually see a lot of NEX-shot images where frankly I wish the photographer had stopped down more.

But back up 15 feet and it's another story. If it were my aim to do a gallery exhibition of medium distance shots with nice, blurred-out foregrounds & backgrounds, I would definitely pursue a FF (or larger) solution.

medium format capture - 80mm "normal" lens on 6x6cm film

Seems like FF has become what medium format used to be: the domain of pros and hardcore enthusiasts. The resolving power of APS-C usually blows FF-size film captures completely out of the water IME.

Interestingly, FF DSLRs have blown up to a size point that is often larger than many medium format film cameras. (I'm still waiting for the FF digital body that is roughly the size of an old lever-advance 35mm SLR...)

 Jefenator's gear list:Jefenator's gear list
Sony Alpha a7 Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro Sony Alpha NEX-7 +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow