i love landscapes by interest,
yet to hv a pic using wide angle that i like.
all my keepers i got them using teles in the range of 100-200mm.
Going to FF is a dream to every photographer or Not?
- Thread starter Tahugoreng
- Start date
- Status
i love landscapes by interest,
yet to hv a pic using wide angle that i like.
all my keepers i got them using teles in the range of 100-200mm.
so u not only gain from better pics,
but better physical shape too.
another plus for FF!
considering going medium format?
wondering, if forum like this were available when leica introduced the 135 format,
would the photographers then waste their time asking others about going back to the
bigger format?
I guess capturing the best image irregardless of what camera ur using is the dream of a photographer
i believe u mean regardless
iirc, both sigma n nikon hv a fisheye for aps-c.
I have a number of landscape shots that can only be taken with ultrawide angle lenses cos I want to get the perspective and framing right.
So far, my 10-22 and 17-55 f/2.8 IS have served me well and there has been no urgency to move up the ladder. As others have pointed out, there is always an inevitable increase in weight with format size and I am rather reluctant to forgo comfort in my hikes for wider lenses. However, the shallower depth of field associated with FF may appeal to portrait shooters... just not for me. :bsmilie:
PrimePhotog
Deregistered
FF is not a dream to me.It just means that I have to can use longer lenses for WA and that I don't really need wide apertures.If you really need a camera for ultimate sharpness for landscape, go shoot 4x6.Don't even bother with digital unless you can afford a digital MF camera.
Nope, not for me.... while FF has a brighter viewfinder, higher end bodies and higher prices; I like crop factor for the extra reach and higher pixel density at the same focal length (if you know what I am saying... 
). I'd rather use the money for better lens and accessories.
AFAIK, crop bodies will get better (to entice new buyers) and will always be priced cheaper because of the existence of FF. Since the major companies sell more crop bodies then FF bodies, it makes perfect economic sense for them to continue with this range of cameras. Same reason why PNS are the bread and butter of these companies.
Of course, if I am roughing it out and shoot a lot, a pro FF body has higher specs to withstand the higher MTBF rate of its shutter and other mechanical components. Weather seals are also good for tough environments like desert or humid rain forests. SO yes, FF will exist. And so will crop factor DSLR. Choice is up to us buyers and there will always be a reason for using one format or another.
). I'd rather use the money for better lens and accessories.AFAIK, crop bodies will get better (to entice new buyers) and will always be priced cheaper because of the existence of FF. Since the major companies sell more crop bodies then FF bodies, it makes perfect economic sense for them to continue with this range of cameras. Same reason why PNS are the bread and butter of these companies.
Of course, if I am roughing it out and shoot a lot, a pro FF body has higher specs to withstand the higher MTBF rate of its shutter and other mechanical components. Weather seals are also good for tough environments like desert or humid rain forests. SO yes, FF will exist. And so will crop factor DSLR. Choice is up to us buyers and there will always be a reason for using one format or another.
Tokyoexpress
New Member
i dont think its necessary to go FF. Personally i just feel its just an ego... FF also got to depends on what model you are getting. Always choose 1ds mark II or 1ds mark III
If getting old FF, New crop frame will be much better interms of IQ, Speed, Technology, LCD and more...
As for the big sensor, The difference is not huge also... Most dslrs have noise at the higest ISOs setting which make a comparision very mild difference.
For Eg, 5D is pro uncle camera already, but if you compare to new semi-pro 50D, its totally losing out. Same as those older FF camera.
If i wanna get another FF, I will prob get a 1ds mark III, and the least is IDs mark II. I wouldnt even consider any other FF older than 1ds mark II.
Dust problem is a real pain, obsolete parts & technology is another problem, not to mention also the high cost for average income pple... Ds II, Ds III appro $3k-$8K
If getting old FF, New crop frame will be much better interms of IQ, Speed, Technology, LCD and more...
As for the big sensor, The difference is not huge also... Most dslrs have noise at the higest ISOs setting which make a comparision very mild difference.
For Eg, 5D is pro uncle camera already, but if you compare to new semi-pro 50D, its totally losing out. Same as those older FF camera.
If i wanna get another FF, I will prob get a 1ds mark III, and the least is IDs mark II. I wouldnt even consider any other FF older than 1ds mark II.
Dust problem is a real pain, obsolete parts & technology is another problem, not to mention also the high cost for average income pple... Ds II, Ds III appro $3k-$8K
Not anyone can buy the 1Ds MK II or III due to cost and weight.
Cartman2000
Senior Member
Not true, 5D can still edge the 50D out in some areas, and is an extremely capable budget alternative to the 1Ds
1-2 stops better noise control on the 5d2 is mild difference over 50D?
Untrue. The 5D is still a very capable camera. (Yes, the original 5D that some people consider old technology). There is no need to always consider a 1Ds body.'
Save us the crap if you've not actually used the 5D. Pro uncle camera? I think not.
Last edited:
What a load of bollocks. As usual, crapping without thinking, or experience. Sadly, thats the path this forum is taking nowadays...
Agree. Too many pple just stating even without trying out practically. They just sit in front of their computers all day.
nottipiglet
New Member
Technically, if they made the APS-C sensor better... which they will, since it is constantly evolving... there is no need to go FF.
Alex chong
Member
There wouldn't be crop sensor in DSLR if it isn't because of the high cost of manufacturing the sensor itself. If it was cheap, at least all sensors on DSLR will be full frame just like in the old days and there wouldn't be any lenses specifically for crop camera. Even point and shot were projecting image on a full 35mm film.
So I don't get the argument about FF or crop DSLR. If you can afford it, go for it, if not get the crop. All down to whether you can afford it or want to buy it or not. Nothing to do with ego here and certainly not a dream to own one. Otherwise it wouldn't end. Maybe its a dream to own a digital medium format camera?
So I don't get the argument about FF or crop DSLR. If you can afford it, go for it, if not get the crop. All down to whether you can afford it or want to buy it or not. Nothing to do with ego here and certainly not a dream to own one. Otherwise it wouldn't end. Maybe its a dream to own a digital medium format camera?
As far as signal to noise is concerned, both the 5D and 5D2 are about 1 stop better than the 50D at ALL ISOs at the pixel level. At the image level, the 5D2 is 1.3 stops better than the 50D at ALL ISOs, and the 5D is about 0.7 stop better than the 50D.
I'll say this is pretty significant.
When it comes to dynamic range, the difference between the various cameras is little at the pixel level. But at the image level, the best dynamic range from the 5D2, 50D and 5D are respectively 11.86, 11.4 and 11.13 stops.
i understand what you're saying, but the differences in crop and full-frame cameras are a factor to other people.
i have a 5D and a 40D, and it is on purpose. i like the FF for portraits and landscape, and general everyday sort of pictures. a 35/2 on a 5D is a killer combo for me.
the 40D is primarily for underwater photography. the physics of dealing with water and air interfaces (i don't even pretend to understand 10% of it) makes it easier to get sharp corners on a cropped frame. plus macro shots on a cropped sensor gives an illusion of a bigger subject.
so you see, it's not all about the money.
care to share why you're learning more with your 5D2 compared to your 350D? as far as i know, the basic principles of photography are the same on a $350 camera and a $3500 one. i'm interested in hearing your perspective.
Alex chong
Member
The fact that its an expensive camera and you would want to fully utilise it. No point keeping it in a camera bag or dry box after such a heavy investment. And plus this forum really helps.
- Status
Similar threads
