Is a FF camera worth it for these reasons? Locked

Started May 21, 2014 | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
qianp2k Forum Pro • Posts: 10,350
Re: Is a FF camera worth it for these reasons?

Great Bustard wrote:

That has been discussed separately. 70D is only sightly faster in burst rate. Better AF system but 6D is better in center AF accuracy, consistency and low-light sensitivity.

Others, however:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53723553

I have a 6D. And I would trade that one low-light point for the system of the 70D that may not be able to focus in almost total darkness, but is far better in every way with even half-way decent light.

Depends on what you shoot. For landscape, studio and portrait, 6D AF is sufficient and is not inferior than 70D in those areas but only likely has higher AF accuracy and consistency. For sports and moving subject tracking, 70D AF is lots better in burst speed and tracking. I was talking other aspects of AF.

By the way:

SL1: 4.6" x 3.6" x 2.7" at 370g

A7: 5.0" x 3.7" x 1.9" at 416g.

I see, but height, width and body weight are very close between two, but A7/R is much thinner. We are talking a FF camera vs a crop camera.  That's the main difference in size I experienced that A7R compared to 5D3 is much easier to lug around even with the same bulky 24-70L II attached as a much smaller "brick" (camera body) against my chest, hip, stomach when I carried them respectively while attached lens extends outward that bothered me much less.

Still, why aren't you comparing to mirrorless FF to mirrorless APS-C?

Sure. I just want to show a FF also could be small as in A7/R case.

In terms of DOF, yes, and you have to pay for it, in terms of size, weight, and cost. That said, if you are trying to match the DOF/noise performance of FF with crop, then you're better off, in terms of size, weight, and cost, with just going FF.

Let's not forget low and base ISOs. Most just emphasize high ISO as this is the only area FF has advantage. Not true. FF has advantages crossing entire ISO range including at base ISO. FF with respective lenses has less noises in shadow (pretty obvious if we view 6D and 70D photos at full size), better color tonality and noticeably sharper with comparable lenses. All these are well discussed, debated and confirmed by creditable test sites such as DXO. In short FF has significant advantage in IQ with comparable lenses. Every EF lens performs (much) better on FF than on APS-C.  If FF only had advantage in high ISO then it would much less appealing to professionals as they usually shoot at base ISO for landscape on tripod or in well-lit studio for portrait. Why those pros and enthusiasts like you and me would buy expensive and bulky FF cameras?

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
MOD Mako2011
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow