Full Frame.. I like..

[Gunjack]

I usually shoot with prime lens. The biggest headache I faced when going to Full Frame is to find a good and affordable standard zoom lens like you can get so easily find with DX format. The 24-70mm F2.8 is way out of my reach, coz I am not a pro and I dun usually take events. In the end I got a 2nd hand tokina 28-80mm F2.8, way more wallet friendly and meets my expectations for AF speed and sharpness.

 

[tropiccana]

if can upgrade to FF, y not...jus that, FF body and FF lens burn very fast on your pocket...lol

 

[MrKami]

if can upgrade to FF, y not...jus that, FF body and FF lens burn very fast on your pocket...lol

LOL True very fast pok kai..!

 

[krishna91]

if you aren't pro and you like travelling light, DX is far better. I think nikon d90/d300s coupled with an 18-200 is great in that sense..but know of no pro who uses a mid range zoom like the 24-70. pros who use zoom lenses normally carry a UWA E.G 16-35, then a 50mm f/1.4, and a 70-200 for travel work.

midrange zooms are heavy, expensive, and pretty much useless compared to the 50mm primes. I mean if you walk back a few steps you can cover a larger area and if you move forward a few steps you can go close like 70mm. And you can get double the light from the 50mm primes thanks to f/1.4

 

[catchlights]

can also start with a FF body together with 50mm f1.8......... slowly built up your arsenal

 

[Gunjack]

midrange zooms are heavy, expensive, and pretty much useless compared to the 50mm primes. I mean if you walk back a few steps you can cover a larger area and if you move forward a few steps you can go close like 70mm. And you can get double the light from the 50mm primes thanks to f/1.4

I disagree, coz you still have perspective change with a midrange zoom, as in how you want your background to appear in size in relationship to your subject. And also trying to take a big group in a crowded wedding dinner with a 50mm prime is gonna give you lots of problems, coz you dun have space to "walk back a few steps".

 

[wildsoyabean]

unless im super rich -> e.g total asset 3million plus, or i earn money through the things i shoot. i will never consider fx.

 

[DiGdUb]

when you go to d700/d3, iso won't be one of your limiting factors when shooting anymore.

 

[Big Kahuna]

All the above are not the real reasons....to all the DX users....think about it....if you stay with Nikon...where else can you go after D300, D300s or D2x etc??? :think:

It got to be D700 or D3/D3s....that is the best Nikon had at the moment and you have no more excuse for lousy photos :lovegrin:

 

[Gunjack]

At the end of the day, to me its not really about upgrading, but knowing what is important to you and what you want in a camera format. When I was using 35mm film and I switched to crop factor dslr, I had a rude shock when the shallow depth of field I used to achieve even with a 50mm at F2.8 was sorely missed due to the increased distance to the subject. Use a lower f-stop then F2.8 and the lens performance drops. The dimmer and smaller viewfinder was also a not a joy to use. Full frame dslr solved those problems I faced and also had the added bonus of great iso performance coz i usually shoot in natural light. Thats why in the end its finding the right camera for your requirements. And the ability to manually calibrate lens on the full frame camera is one of the very important factors for me, coz even 3rd party lens that I used to think wasnt very sharp turned out to be very sharp indeed once calibrated manually on the camera. That adds value to all the lens you have immensely, coz now all the lens you have can be as sharp as it was suppose to be. I think Nikon should have this very important function on more of its camera body to save trips to the service center and wondering whether is the camera body or lens that is front/back focussing.

 

[lsisaxon]

hohoho ;p

How's it's IQ? Does it flare like practically all Sigma's do? :sweat:

12mm on FX.. what more can you expect? It's one of a kind. ;p Haven't shot into the light sources so I can't tell much about the flare but light fall off is quite obvious.

Here's a shot.

Compare with Nikkor Fisheye 16mm.

 

[lsisaxon]

...
...And the ability to manually calibrate lens on the full frame camera is one of the very important factors for me, coz even 3rd party lens that I used to think wasnt very sharp turned out to be very sharp indeed once calibrated manually on the camera. That adds value to all the lens you have immensely, coz now all the lens you have can be as sharp as it was suppose to be. I think Nikon should have this very important function on more of its camera body to save trips to the service center and wondering whether is the camera body or lens that is front/back focussing.

Eh... AF Finetune is available on the D300 as well.. ;p

 

[Numnumball]

FF definitely, No regrets with me making the plunge and the investment in my equipment,
Those pics u took with FX is absolutely breath taking and totally priceless.. Never look back ever since.

 

[aspenx]

Shallower DOF on FX if maintaining same output size of subject on DX.

Good or bad, up to you.

 

[Daedalus Trent]

12mm on FX.. what more can you expect? It's one of a kind. ;p Haven't shot into the light sources so I can't tell much about the flare but light fall off is quite obvious.

Here's a shot.

The fallout's really really bad :cry:

But i suppose that can be corrected via pp-ing?

 

[xintothezonex]

93 have said yes to full frame..

Looks like most would really like to change to full frame.
I should have change the poll to : 1) Yes - but no money, 2) No - even have money
Hee!

 

[aspenx]

93 have said yes to full frame..

Looks like most would really like to change to full frame.
I should have change the poll to : 1) Yes - but no money, 2) No - even have money
Hee!

Then, change already how?

 

[thenomad]

All the above are not the real reasons....to all the DX users....think about it....if you stay with Nikon...where else can you go after D300, D300s or D2x etc??? :think:

It got to be D700 or D3/D3s....that is the best Nikon had at the moment and you have no more excuse for lousy photos :lovegrin:

you don't always have to go somewhere, there's no need to keep up with the best of equipment all the time. UNLESS, you are a professional or have tons of money

D100 users can wait for D200/D300, and subsequently newer DX models will be released

seriously, low ISO shots between DX and FX are hardly noticable

no lah, where got lousy photos? :bsmilie:

 

[giantcanopy]

The fallout's really really bad :cry:

But i suppose that can be corrected via pp-ing?

Ya i agree the fall out can be a little horrid :bsmilie:

It can be PPed but i usually shoot the 12-24 at f11 and beyond, and the vignetting becomes imperceptible

Ryan

 

[Gunjack]

you don't always have to go somewhere, there's no need to keep up with the best of equipment all the time. UNLESS, you are a professional or have tons of money

D100 users can wait for D200/D300, and subsequently newer DX models will be released

seriously, low ISO shots between DX and FX are hardly noticable

no lah, where got lousy photos? :bsmilie:

I am not a professional, and I dun have tons of money. In fact I am rather short of cash most of the time! But I knew what I wanted and I sold everything I had in DX format that I had then and I never looked back. Its the full frame format that I like, so newer crop factor dslr may be released but I wont be interested in them because of the crop factor which I dislike for my style of photography.