Upgrading to a full frame?

[garytao]

I have had the D5100 for over 6 years, and i think i am ready for an upgrade. Since I did not own a lot of lens with my d5100, I think that I am in a good spot to make the leap into a full frame. My current budgets allows me to purchase a brand new D850 (around 1500 usd in HK), along with a Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG OS HSM｜Art (as i am not a big fan into getting second hand product). I mainly do landscape and travel photography. So my question is should i get a full frame, if so is d810 a good option and other possible lens option.

Appreciating all the support i will get,

Thanks.

 

[golfhov]

I have had the D5100 for over 6 years, and i think i am ready for an upgrade. Since I did not own a lot of lens with my d5100, I think that I am in a good spot to make the leap into a full frame.

The real simple question is do YOU want full frame?

My current budgets allows me to purchase a brand new D810 (around 1500 usd in HK),

fixed^

along with a Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG OS HSM｜Art (as i am not a big fan into getting second hand product). I mainly do landscape and travel photography. So my question is should i get a full frame, if so is d810 a good option and other possible lens option.

yes. the d810 is a good option. If you want a fast stabilized zoom lens then the Sigma Art is probably your best bet in your budget

That setup is a big jump up in weight from your listed gear. You could cut weight with a Sony a7rii BUT the 24-70 2.8 will break your budget and weighs more than the body.

Loading…

camerasize.com

There are other lenses available and there are other bodies and systems BUt then we get into the whole slippery slope of WHAT compromises you may be willing to accept. That is your call not ours

Appreciating all the support i will get,

Thanks.

your welcome. good luck in whatever you decide

 

[John Sheehy]

...

Yes, and that goes to my original point that a move to full frame needs to be justified by exactly the type of analysis you have done above.

For most amatuers, it isn't going to be justified.

...

There are a number of practical differences between full frame a crop factor bodies. Perhaps surprisingly, image quality is not really one of them.

Yes, there are extreme cases where one format will have the edge over another, but for the vast majority of images, you are going to get visually the same looking image from either a crop body or a full frame.

Well, that depends on personal needs. People should not make decisions based on what most people do in most photos. There are lots of people in these forums who assume that what they do is normal, and other concerns can be left ignored.

For a person who wants maximum SNR for the same FOV, knowing and accepting that this requires shallower DOF to accomplish (when not at base ISO), FF is a good choice, if they will get the lenses needed to accomplish this, or already have them. It also allows wider angles with available lens sets, as lenses for crop cameras do not scale to wide angles and fish-eyes as well.

For a person who already has the longest lens they are willing to buy or carry, and is still focal-length-limited, then a larger sensor is not going to help; only higher pixel density will, and that usually comes only with smaller sensors, especially if you want a high framerate.

For Macro or other uses where yous top down into the diffraction-limited ranges, then FF is also hollow, except that some FF cameras have pixel counts not available in APS or m43.

 

[tedolf]

...

Yes, and that goes to my original point that a move to full frame needs to be justified by exactly the type of analysis you have done above.

For most amatuers, it isn't going to be justified.

...

There are a number of practical differences between full frame a crop factor bodies. Perhaps surprisingly, image quality is not really one of them.

Yes, there are extreme cases where one format will have the edge over another, but for the vast majority of images, you are going to get visually the same looking image from either a crop body or a full frame.

Well, that depends on personal needs. People should not make decisions based on what most people do in most photos. There are lots of people in these forums who assume that what they do is normal, and other concerns can be left ignored.

For a person who wants maximum SNR for the same FOV, knowing and accepting that this requires shallower DOF to accomplish (when not at base ISO), FF is a good choice,

Thas is a tiny, tiny subset of amateur photographers.

if they will get the lenses needed to accomplish this, or already have them. It also allows wider angles with available lens sets, as lenses for crop cameras do not scale to wide angles and fish-eyes as well.

For a person who already has the longest lens they are willing to buy or carry, and is still focal-length-limited, then a larger sensor is not going to help; only higher pixel density will, and that usually comes only with smaller sensors, especially if you want a high framerate.

For Macro or other uses where yous top down into the diffraction-limited ranges, then FF is also hollow, except that some FF cameras have pixel counts not available in APS or m43.

Tedolph

 

[tedolf]

Yes you are entitled to your opinion in my opinion.

I respect your opinion.

TEdolph

 

[p0ppyman]

Yes you are entitled to your opinion in my opinion.

I respect your opinion.

TEdolph

Thanks! We have set a fine example for others to emulate!