Tell me if I have this right, FF verses non-FF

Started Jun 4, 2014 | Discussions thread
All forumsForumParentFirstPrevious
JustEric Junior Member • Posts: 37
Tell me if I have this right, FF verses non-FF

I’m looking at getting into Digital Photography and have posted some questions regarding potential DSLR cameras and lens I might consider. My first question regarded buying an old Canon 5D or a newer 60D or 70D for about the same price. That created a heated debate. From the responses I came to the following conclusions. Please let me know if I’m on the wrong path.

FF cameras have better Image Quality than non-FF Cameras as long as you don’t have to crop the pictures. If you have to crop a picture the non-FF Camera will provide better IQ due to having more pixels in the center of the image to begin with. Wildlife photographers tend to use non-FF cameras since they cannot fill the frame consistently. On the other hand, if you have control of your picture setup, you can fill the frame and get better pictures from a FF Camera. Lens quality has a lot to do with the IQ but for the sake of argument the statement above only refers to the type of frame.

This leads me to believe that FF cameras are great for studio work, portraits, landscapes and weddings. The FF camera is better at anything that will let you set the picture up. On the other hand, non-FF cameras are better for action photographs where you can’t control the framing or can’t fill the frame.

The FF cameras are not as demanding on a lens as non-FF cameras. The FF camera lenses are bigger, heavier. I haven’t looked but I suspect the FF lenses are more expensive but the non-FF lenses probably have to better (and more expensive) to get the same quality. Not sure if FF or non-FF lenses cost more.

You can get better performance per dollar from a fixed length lens than a zoom lens. Many times the zoom lenses are not as clear at their max zoom range so the actual effective zoom not the same as the max zoom.

I am interested in taking all types of photographs. I have no interest in making money as a photographer or doing weddings. I think much of my effort will be spent taking sports photos both in and out doors. I would also like to be able to take set up shots where I can control everything in the picture.

Sounds like the right answer is to get 2 cameras. FF for setup shots and a non-FF camera for action shots.  Boohoo.

I have broadened my camera selection and am now considering the following used frames:
Canon 5D (old one before MK models) @ aprox $600
Cannon 7D @ approx $750
Cannon 60D @ approx $600
Cannon 70D @ approx $1000 (new)
Nikon D300 @ approx $500

Since the lenses will eventually exceed the price of the frame, I should consider the cost of lenses between the Canon and the Nikon cameras. Right now, I’m leaning towards the Cannon 7D or Nikon D300 as the best value for their cost. They have low pixel numbers but from everything I have seen and heard, they are not limited by their Mega Pixel numbers. I could be wrong?

Please feel free to comment!


Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 60D Canon EOS 70D Canon EOS 7D Nikon D300
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
All forumsForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow