To go full frame or not?

Started Apr 8, 2013 | Discussions thread
tn1krr Senior Member • Posts: 1,236
Re: To go full frame or not?

eilivk wrote:

captura wrote:

eilivk wrote:

captura wrote:

eilivk wrote:

Have read again and again (and ag...), you don't need FF if you don't need wall sized prints. No need for that. But with FF you can crop more in PP? Going from compact to G3 and NX with 20 and 30mm, doing small prints was the chance to crop more. So I would guess the same goes for moving up to FF. Without a lot of heavy lenses. RX1 is very tempting.

For years struggled with low light, tripod did not help much for compacts, better with mirrorless. Often finding abandoned houses and factories. In museums you can't use flash and seldom tripod. Maybe you can get the same detail and quality of colour in low light with Nikon A, the best Fujis, OM-D as RX1, but I really doubt it. See what I see of images in Cybershot forum.

A lot COULD be happening with FF, Nex 9 seems to be most likely. Very interesting, but the cost of lenses... RX2 with EVF for the same price would be nice. Or larger with a non interchangeable zoom lens? Know quite a few people not going into "all those lenses". A lot could be happening this year or the next - and a lot of images could be lost before that.

To FF or to APS-C, that is the question. Common sense should dictate that the best (and efficacious) solution is to employ the best lens you can afford. And that nearly equal results can be gained with an APS-C system. Maybe one of those uber-bodacious Nikon planar-II lenses.

Could afford a $1500 30mm or something like that if that is necessary. But Nikon cameras got no EVF (that I need). NX or Nex maybe? But would these lenses be as good as the one in RX1? And isn't a fixed lens the best solution for maximum quality? Especially with a FF sensor? NX and Nex nearly equal to RX1? In difficult conditions? Not entirely convinced.

From a different discussion (yesterday...maybe it was Sergei) those particular lenses (Nikon planar-II) are about the highest performing lenses which will work with the Metabones Speedbooster to adapt to the NEX e-mount system. For example, if you were to choose the 85mm model, that would give you an approximately 65mm 35-equivalence of the most totally superior quality imaginable...far far better than a 24mm Zeiss or a 10-18. Mind you, very expensive. But why bother with the Zeiss when you can have this.

Thanks! But can't find any Nikon Planar II 85mm when I search the net. But a Nikon 85mm 1.4 for $1500. With a Metabones Speedbuster and a Nex 6, would it not be larger and almost the same price as RX1? But of course with EVF and you can change lenses. And 65mm 35-equivalence could be fine for landscapes but not for street photos, so two lenses.

I think captura may be at least partially talking about my post regarding Zeiss Makro Planar's. (subscription required) did quite nice test on Speedbooster and Zeiss Makro Planar 50 was truly shining when combined with the Speedbooster; there were 8 different 50 mm lenses tested with Speedbooster and the Makro Planar did pretty clean sweep there; quote was "there is no rela competition to Makro Planar 50. I also think that there is not much more future proof lens than Zeiss lenses with Zf.2 (Nikon) mount, as they can be used with both Canon (with adapter) and Nikon FF DSLR, Nex (with or without Speedbooster) and quite like they will be adaptable to future FF Nex too. The Zeiss lenses have aperture rings on the lens so they are quite convenient to adapt without electronic adapter; pretty much only the exif will be lost  The Makro Planar's (both 50 and 100) have also been tested to be able to serve sensors beyond D800 so they are relevant even in the 50+ megapixel future.

Stacking multiple adapters (like Nikon to Canon EF and Speedbooster) is not without problems so it is propably safer on the shorter, not superheavy lenses and longer/heavier the lens is the more pressure there is to the multiple contact surfaces between adapters.

That said, I just placed an order for Makro Planar 50 ZE  ( Zeiss ZE = Canon EF mount) I gives me full Exif with Speedbooster, there is lower risk of adapter stacking related issues and it is still supereasy to resell if needed due to very highly used focal length. If I have time I maybe try to do a "Nex 50 mm FF equivalent" shootout as I have the SEL35, 16-50 (supposed good at around 30-35 mm), and an Olympus OM G.Zuiko 1.4 (can be used in Speedbooster) and will have the Makro Planar 50. Would be interesting to compare different 50 mm equivalent price points and what the Speedbooster really brings to table compared to native lenses.

 tn1krr's gear list:tn1krr's gear list
Sony Alpha a7R III Carl Zeiss Apo Sonnar T* 2/135 Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow