First full frame advise?

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
blue_skies
blue_skies Forum Pro • Posts: 11,871
Re: First full frame advise?

DarbinCo wrote:

blue_skies wrote:

DarbinCo wrote:

Background.
The last full frame camera I owned was a Minolta 35mm film camera way back in the early 90's. I was out of it for a long time then purchased a 4/3rds Oly E-510 not even knowing what 4/3rds was. I simply liked how the camera handled and the lens options were good at the time. I shot it off and on for many years. I upgraded to the EM1 about 5 years ago after a trip to Yellowstone where I found the images I came home with didnt exactly meet my standards. This kinda revived my ambitions in photography. I have since upgraded MK-II about 2 years ago now. I currently have the 12-40, 40-150 and 300 pro lenses. My two interests are landscape and wildlife.

(Daytime) landscape and wildlife?

Yes, but wouldnt mind doing more sunrise and sunsets. I love a good sunset if I can get in the right location.

I found sunrise and sunsets to improve dramatically when going from APS-C to FF.

I also like to use shallower DOF on FF - for better DR, colors, etc. For infinity focus on (dark) landscapes the loss of DOF is not an issue.

Keep what you have - the size (and cost) of longer FL lenses for FF will not pay off in image quality per se.

Overall, I am happy with it but I do feel the landscape side of my hobby may benefit from a full frame set up.

If resolution is your thing, then by all means, the A7R II is a great camera.

I am not one that needs the latest and greatest, budget wont swing that anyways. Ive seen the Sony A7R II has dropped in price enough to make it appealing, my thought was to spend a bit less on the body and more on the glass. I would probably pick up a zoom to start and then a prime and keep it at that for the landscape use.

Is the A7RII going to take my landscapes to a new level?

In resolution - sure.

In sharpness - not so sure.

In overall image (color, DR) - probably similar (daytime curves)

Am I going in the right direction here or should I consider something else. Keep in mind that my current Olympus will continue to be my go to wildlife/general use camera (nothing too awful serious) so there no need to enter that into the equation. I dont feel a need to spend that kinda cash to replace what I'm currently using. I dont sell images, I just like to hang a few on the wall.

Thanks

Darb

4/3rds and FF are two vastly different formats. Where they overlap (same exposure), the 4/3rds will give you deeper DOF. If you stop down the FF to match the DOF, the DR/exposure will be more or less similar (equivalent exposure).

For (daytime) landscape, 4/3rds has sufficient DR to yield decent images.

FF can give you better DR in shadows (at cost of DOF), less noise if shoot at dusk or dawn (blue hour), wider wide angle (you are at 24mm effectively), and higher resolution if you print large.

That said, the A7R II is still a 'benchmark' camera, even today, especially for landscapes.

Will it be a complete new experience? No, not with your experience.

Will you take it into different directions? With a few more lenses, you very well may.

If your budget allows, consider lens options. Then consider whether or not the purchase is worthwhile. For (daytime) landscapes only it may, but not as dramatic as it would in other applications (e.g. a fast lens).

Thats the struggle right now, will it be worth while. My next step is to rent one for a week and see how I like it. Or.. maybe like mentioned above, I invest in some filters and see if they can change what I get out of the Oly.

Yeah, renting and hands on experience is best.

Wide-angle shots, shallow DOF portraits, and low light scenery are imho most improved when going to FF. I also have had a few ops where the added resolution helped.

'Sunny sixteen' daytime shots have sufficient sharpness and DR in the smaller sensor formats just the same.

If you are tripod based currently, FF can remove the requirement for a tripod, something else to consider.

The gear will be larger and heavier - you most likely will want to carry only one or two lenses in the field.

If you compare results, don't pixel peep - process both side-by-side images, and view them at your normal full-frame viewing setup. It will allow for a more fair comparison.

Wildlife - you'd want a long lens and a A9/A7R IV imho, which is mo' money.

I would still run the Olympus for wildlife. It does a pretty good job even with my skills! LOL

Yeah, 300mm on m43 ~= 600mm on FF, which most of us don't even have.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony a6000 Sony a5100 Sony a7 II Sony a7R II +37 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow