Reading mode: Light Dark

I feel better now.....

Go to last post
mailman88

mailman88

Veteran Member
Messages
6,299
Reaction score
1,467
Location
Miami, US
.....when I visit Canon EOS-1D / 5D / 6D or Nikon FX SLR to view forum pics. To view some full frame pics and compare what I see in our forum. I'm in shock...nearly 98% of what I see there, we can match here. I can live without the 2%. Rarely I'll spot a portrait done that we can't match. I'm expecting to see better detail and range with these full frame cams, but I don't see it.

Cropped DSLR's can steal the thunder from the full framers on any given day.

Do it and view yourself....you'll notice, either the owner is over matched by his gear or its overkill.

My 7D looks better and better. Not trying to start a forum fight, just look for yourself and you'll see too.
 
Last edited:
...Is full frame cameras needed to a pro....NO. I've seen and viewed pics from a pro, using Sony's a6000 shooting portraits and sports.

Yes forum, camera technology is catching up with the full framers at half the cost or more.
 
Last edited:
mailman88 said:
...Is full frame cameras needed to a pro....NO. I've seen and viewed pics from a pro, using Sony's a6000 shooting portraits and sports.

Yes forum, camera technology is catching up with the full framers at half the cost or more.
Click to expand...
Being a pro has nothing to do with the format of the camera - everything to do with the experience and skills of the photographer.
 
....that's my point. But if you read into some of our full frame forum viewer comments, tells a different story.

In the early years of DSLR's, the pro's used the 10D and 20D. But you'll get denial and disdain if you bring up that fact.
 
Yes, this is good. But if one has spare money, and new machine will give us more lattituda and less hard work with processing, or you don´t have to take that light setup with you, you can go outside and shoot more often. That way it can make valid difference, even if the image itself is not that better. It is only tip of the spear... That way I will always be happy with better cam, and I´m pretty certain that the camera itself will not help me make better that single image. It´s the same as better car, better food or whatever. One day you realize that you could do what you want ANYWAY, but it´s comfortable to do that with right tool....
 
crashpc said:
Yes, this is good. But if one has spare money, and new machine will give us more lattituda and less hard work with processing, or you don´t have to take that light setup with you, you can go outside and shoot more often. That way it can make valid difference, even if the image itself is not that better. It is only tip of the spear... That way I will always be happy with better cam, and I´m pretty certain that the camera itself will not help me make better that single image. It´s the same as better car, better food or whatever. One day you realize that you could do what you want ANYWAY, but it´s comfortable to do that with right tool....
Click to expand...
Very well said. You can't look at a pile of images on the web from many different photographers and draw a valid conclusion like the OP has done. If you want to get a true comparison, the rent a 5D3 with good lens for a few days and take some shots with both cameras, particularly under difficult conditions, such as very low light. Then do your best with PP and compare the results. You may find that crop comes close, but it will take a lot of work to get there.

To the OP: There's a darn good reason why many VERY experienced phtographers swear by FF and if you think you'll figure that out by scanning a few images on the web, you're kidding youself. Like all good technology, it has its place. It's about the right tool for the job.
 
Last edited:
I´ll add up that it seems that next sensor models will be as good as for example sensor of 5D II, which is FF. So for certain purposes, it can be more than enaugh. I´m happy to live in this time...
 
It depends on circumstances shooting as the medium (and size) on which your photos are viewed.

To be honest I don't need FF since I am still learning to get the best out me and my aps-c gear.

Currently my focus is to develop a style and see what gear suits me. By doing so I care less about gear now and more about pictures.
 
Jerry-astro said:
crashpc said:
Yes, this is good. But if one has spare money, and new machine will give us more lattituda and less hard work with processing, or you don´t have to take that light setup with you, you can go outside and shoot more often. That way it can make valid difference, even if the image itself is not that better. It is only tip of the spear... That way I will always be happy with better cam, and I´m pretty certain that the camera itself will not help me make better that single image. It´s the same as better car, better food or whatever. One day you realize that you could do what you want ANYWAY, but it´s comfortable to do that with right tool....
Click to expand...
Very well said. You can't look at a pile of images on the web from many different photographers and draw a valid conclusion like the OP has done. If you want to get a true comparison, the rent a 5D3 with good lens for a few days and take some shots with both cameras, particularly under difficult conditions, such as very low light.
Click to expand...
I think that last part is where the recommendation falls apart. I'd suggest taking pictures in the types of settings you'll normally use the camera/lens for. It makes no sense to take pictures of a black cat in a closet at 3am when the power is out if you shoot in a studio with unlimited off-camera lighting, right? Doesn't it make sense to use it as you intend to use it every day and see if it does what you want it to? Obviously, if you enjoy taking pictures of black cats in the above situation, then do that and see how it goes! That's just my thoughts anyway...
Jerry-astro said:
Then do your best with PP and compare the results. You may find that crop comes close, but it will take a lot of work to get there.

To the OP: There's a darn good reason why many VERY experienced phtographers swear by FF and if you think you'll figure that out by scanning a few images on the web, you're kidding youself. Like all good technology, it has its place. It's about the right tool for the job.
Click to expand...
 
Jerry-astro said:
crashpc said:
Yes, this is good. But if one has spare money, and new machine will give us more lattituda and less hard work with processing, or you don´t have to take that light setup with you, you can go outside and shoot more often. That way it can make valid difference, even if the image itself is not that better. It is only tip of the spear... That way I will always be happy with better cam, and I´m pretty certain that the camera itself will not help me make better that single image. It´s the same as better car, better food or whatever. One day you realize that you could do what you want ANYWAY, but it´s comfortable to do that with right tool....
Click to expand...
Very well said. You can't look at a pile of images on the web from many different photographers and draw a valid conclusion like the OP has done. If you want to get a true comparison, the rent a 5D3 with good lens for a few days and take some shots with both cameras, particularly under difficult conditions, such as very low light. Then do your best with PP and compare the results. You may find that crop comes close, but it will take a lot of work to get there.

To the OP: There's a darn good reason why many VERY experienced phtographers swear by FF and if you think you'll figure that out by scanning a few images on the web, you're kidding youself. Like all good technology, it has its place. It's about the right tool for the job.
Click to expand...
What has occurred is not so much that crop cameras have become as good as full frame cameras. But, that crop cameras have become good enough for most situations.

Full frame cameras will always have about a one stop advantage over a crop camera due to the greater total light captured due to their larger sensor surface area.

However, we've gone from a time where fast color film was ISO 400, to where even crop cameras can capture clean images at much higher ISOs than that.

So, m4/3 will always have an advantage over a 1 inch sensor, APS-C will always have an advantage over m4/3, and full frame will always have an advantage over APS-C. What changes is at what point is each sensor size becomes good enough for what it is being used for.
 
Limburger said:
It depends on circumstances shooting as the medium (and size) on which your photos are viewed.

To be honest I don't need FF since I am still learning to get the best out me and my aps-c gear.

Currently my focus is to develop a style and see what gear suits me. By doing so I care less about gear now and more about pictures.
Click to expand...
 
skanter said:
Limburger said:
It depends on circumstances shooting as the medium (and size) on which your photos are viewed.

To be honest I don't need FF since I am still learning to get the best out me and my aps-c gear.

Currently my focus is to develop a style and see what gear suits me. By doing so I care less about gear now and more about pictures.

--
Cheers Mike
Click to expand...
Well said, Mike. Time would be better spent developing a photographic "voice" and style than obsessing about gear. The camera doesn't really matter that much - it's who is behind it that counts.

--
Sam K., NYC
"The fact is that relatively few photographers ever master their medium. Instead they allow the medium to master them and go on an endless squirrel cage chase from new lens ...to new gadget, never staying with one piece of equipment long enough to learn its full capacities, becoming lost in a maze of technical information that is of little or no use since they don't know what to do with it."
--Edward Weston
Click to expand...
Thanks Sam,

These gear debates are of all time.

When Leica made the 35mm it was considered inferiour to what was prevalent in the day.

Guys like Capa and Bresson used those Leicas because they worked for them. We even talk about FF because of Leica and Capa and Bresson :)

Your first post in this thread made me think of the birth of 35mm and I agree it's the photographer that matters.

Never heard anybody complaining about Capas D-Day picture when the soldier is getting out of the water. "Capa, there is motion blur in the shot!"

Like a good musician can make a bad instrument sing a good photographer can take a decent picture with "inferiour" gear.

Ever listened to Seasick Steve? He builds his guitars from hubcaps etc. but man can he play :)

Hope you like it

Another one

--
Cheers Mike
 
Last edited:
When I view sample pics from full frame forums, I'm not impressed. It must be user error, because they're not getting the results from this high priced gear. Average at best, only a few have mastered it. Its the same here....my 7D is soft, it must be the camera
 
mailman88 said:
When I view sample pics from full frame forums, I'm not impressed. It must be user error, because they're not getting the results from this high priced gear. Average at best, only a few have mastered it. Its the same here....my 7D is soft, it must be the camera
Click to expand...
The 7D can be soft so you sharpen in PP or in camera.

I agree many FF shots are mediocre at best, check the Leica forum, shots of homeless people...yadayada pathetic.
 
mailman88 said:
When I view sample pics from full frame forums, I'm not impressed. It must be user error, because they're not getting the results from this high priced gear. Average at best, only a few have mastered it. Its the same here....my 7D is soft, it must be the camera
Click to expand...
Again, results have less to do with the camera and everything to do with the photographer. This applies to technical details as well as creative aspects of photography. Do you think that because someone buys a FF camera he will automatically be a good photographer?
 
Limburger said:
skanter said:
Limburger said:
It depends on circumstances shooting as the medium (and size) on which your photos are viewed.

To be honest I don't need FF since I am still learning to get the best out me and my aps-c gear.

Currently my focus is to develop a style and see what gear suits me. By doing so I care less about gear now and more about pictures.

--
Cheers Mike
Click to expand...
Well said, Mike. Time would be better spent developing a photographic "voice" and style than obsessing about gear. The camera doesn't really matter that much - it's who is behind it that counts.

--
Sam K., NYC
"The fact is that relatively few photographers ever master their medium. Instead they allow the medium to master them and go on an endless squirrel cage chase from new lens ...to new gadget, never staying with one piece of equipment long enough to learn its full capacities, becoming lost in a maze of technical information that is of little or no use since they don't know what to do with it."
--Edward Weston
Click to expand...
Thanks Sam,

These gear debates are of all time.

When Leica made the 35mm it was considered inferiour to what was prevalent in the day.

Guys like Capa and Bresson used those Leicas because they worked for them. We even talk about FF because of Leica and Capa and Bresson :)

Your first post in this thread made me think of the birth of 35mm and I agree it's the photographer that matters.

Never heard anybody complaining about Capas D-Day picture when the soldier is getting out of the water. "Capa, there is motion blur in the shot!"

Like a good musician can make a bad instrument sing a good photographer can take a decent picture with "inferiour" gear.

Ever listened to Seasick Steve? He builds his guitars from hubcaps etc. but man can he play :)

Hope you like it

Another one

--
Cheers Mike
Click to expand...
Some respected member of this forum just contacted me via PM saying Capa was not shooting Leica but Contax.

If so I appoligize for my misinformation.

Nobody died because of this I hope ;)

Thanks Syv for telling me.

--
Cheers Mike
 
Last edited:
Limburger said:
Limburger said:
skanter said:
Limburger said:
It depends on circumstances shooting as the medium (and size) on which your photos are viewed.

To be honest I don't need FF since I am still learning to get the best out me and my aps-c gear.

Currently my focus is to develop a style and see what gear suits me. By doing so I care less about gear now and more about pictures.

--
Cheers Mike
Click to expand...
Well said, Mike. Time would be better spent developing a photographic "voice" and style than obsessing about gear. The camera doesn't really matter that much - it's who is behind it that counts.

--
Sam K., NYC
"The fact is that relatively few photographers ever master their medium. Instead they allow the medium to master them and go on an endless squirrel cage chase from new lens ...to new gadget, never staying with one piece of equipment long enough to learn its full capacities, becoming lost in a maze of technical information that is of little or no use since they don't know what to do with it."
--Edward Weston
Click to expand...
Thanks Sam,

These gear debates are of all time.

When Leica made the 35mm it was considered inferiour to what was prevalent in the day.

Guys like Capa and Bresson used those Leicas because they worked for them. We even talk about FF because of Leica and Capa and Bresson :)

Your first post in this thread made me think of the birth of 35mm and I agree it's the photographer that matters.

Never heard anybody complaining about Capas D-Day picture when the soldier is getting out of the water. "Capa, there is motion blur in the shot!"

Like a good musician can make a bad instrument sing a good photographer can take a decent picture with "inferiour" gear.

Ever listened to Seasick Steve? He builds his guitars from hubcaps etc. but man can he play :)

Hope you like it

Another one

--
Cheers Mike
Click to expand...
Some respected member of this forum just contacted me via PM saying Capa was not shooting Leica but Contax.

If so I appoligize for my misinformation.

Nobody died because of this I hope ;)

Thanks Syv for telling me.

--
Cheers Mike
Click to expand...
Looked it up and yes Capa was shooting Contax not Leica as I posted earlier.

My bad and thanks Syv for letting me know.

--
Cheers Mike
 
Last edited:
mailman88 said:
.....when I visit Canon EOS-1D / 5D / 6D or Nikon FX SLR to view forum pics. To view some full frame pics and compare what I see in our forum. I'm in shock...nearly 98% of what I see there, we can match here. I can live without the 2%. Rarely I'll spot a portrait done that we can't match. I'm expecting to see better detail and range with these full frame cams, but I don't see it.

Cropped DSLR's can steal the thunder from the full framers on any given day.

Do it and view yourself....you'll notice, either the owner is over matched by his gear or its overkill.

My 7D looks better and better. Not trying to start a forum fight, just look for yourself and you'll see too.
Click to expand...
Excellent results can be obtained with your 7D or even your 30D....I still take my 20D out for poor weather conditions, etc, and get great pictures.

But I take a lot of portraits of people and grand kids. I am a slightly advanced amateur, and wanted to see if FF would help those shots. I bought a used 5D and my portraits are better, compared to the same shots with my 50D. Is is a big difference? not huge, but enough that I do not feel I am fooling myself.

Enjoy your crop cameras. I have decided to use the best tool for each situation...5D for portraits, 50D for birding and nature, 20D to take anywhere and everywhere, at least until the old thing finally gives up the last click, as it is currently over 150K.

Enjoy your cameras.

whvick
 
whvick said:
mailman88 said:
.....when I visit Canon EOS-1D / 5D / 6D or Nikon FX SLR to view forum pics. To view some full frame pics and compare what I see in our forum. I'm in shock...nearly 98% of what I see there, we can match here. I can live without the 2%. Rarely I'll spot a portrait done that we can't match. I'm expecting to see better detail and range with these full frame cams, but I don't see it.

Cropped DSLR's can steal the thunder from the full framers on any given day.

Do it and view yourself....you'll notice, either the owner is over matched by his gear or its overkill.

My 7D looks better and better. Not trying to start a forum fight, just look for yourself and you'll see too.
Click to expand...
Excellent results can be obtained with your 7D or even your 30D....I still take my 20D out for poor weather conditions, etc, and get great pictures.

But I take a lot of portraits of people and grand kids. I am a slightly advanced amateur, and wanted to see if FF would help those shots. I bought a used 5D and my portraits are better, compared to the same shots with my 50D. Is is a big difference? not huge, but enough that I do not feel I am fooling myself.

Enjoy your crop cameras. I have decided to use the best tool for each situation...5D for portraits, 50D for birding and nature, 20D to take anywhere and everywhere, at least until the old thing finally gives up the last click, as it is currently over 150K.

Enjoy your cameras.

whvick
Click to expand...
I agree.

The FF cameras just seem to have that X factor going for them.

davev.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top