A myth of growing from APS-C to Fullframe or Dealing with anachronisms

[lol]

One thing I find quite amusing about the call for "smaller" mirrorless is that it goes against the arguments of those who said entry level DSLRs were too small to hold comfortably. Now some people are saying they want even smaller? And in a twist, many are buying the optional grip for the E-M5 to make it better to hold... Ok, It isn't necessarily the same people saying or doing all of these, but it does clearly indicate there's a spread in needs out there and mirrorless isn't the one camera to rule them all.

 

[Rocky]

One thing I find quite amusing about the call for "smaller" mirrorless is that it goes against the arguments of those who said entry level DSLRs were too small to hold comfortably. Now some people are saying they want even smaller? And in a twist, many are buying the optional grip for the E-M5 to make it better to hold... Ok, It isn't necessarily the same people saying or doing all of these, but it does clearly indicate there's a spread in needs out there and mirrorless isn't the one camera to rule them all.

Well said! I am a person with average size hand. I found that the Rebel is too small for my hand. So I ended up with a 20D then a 40D. The Nex 7 not that smaller with the zoom lens. Granted that the body is slimmer. but the total volume is not that much smaller than a rebel with the zoom lens. The focusing speed is much slower than the rebel, lifeview with the back screen is not that useful out door and the EVF will set you back about the price of a lens. Thre eronomic is nothing to write home with either. So if I have to choose between the Rebel and the mirrorless, I will take the Rebel anytime. It will take a lot of improvenment for the mirrorless to be able to replace the APS-C DSLR. In my humble opinion, it may never happen.

 

[briansquibb]

I have large hands and I struggle with 'small' cameras such as the 5DII and the 7D

 

[Marsu42]

We'll have to see about that when Canon replaces the 17-55 and 10-22 with newer versions. Which EF-S lenses would benefit from weather sealing? Maybe the 17-55 and 10-22 and that's probably it and that's because they already command such a high price to start with anyway.

I'd like to have a sealed 15-85 and 10-22 if staying on aps-c. But I don't see a replacement in the near future, actually I don't see it at all - these lenses perform well, have up to date IS and are imho are positioned exactly where Canon wants them to be - as a stepping-stone between kit end L lenses.

 

[HarryWintergreen]

I also started with the 40d and still love this camera. I never was fully satisfied with the wide and ultra wide zooms from the third party side. The 70-200 f4 is was perfect and I really loved the extra reach. The 85 1.2 IQ was terrific but to me it was too close as a portrait lens. What finally made me go for FF was the ts 24. I have never regretted this step. And even the 70-200 now is more "real". So, I am now an enthusiastic FF user. But I don't like the conception of a world without crop cameras because it widens the picture of slr cameras, and in the end it's an additional option.

 

[elflord]

Some perspecitve from a full frame and m43 user...

With the high quality mirrorless cameras like Olympus E-M5, the rumored Panasonic GH3 and more and more good lenses supporting that system, it seems to me that APS-C system is becoming an anachronism.
Really, for half the weight and close price, one can build similar or better system with m43.

It depends -- better for what ? beginning SLR users by them because they are cheap. Micro 4/3 lenses still sell at a premium because new products are generally more expensive than older products. At the higher end, most APS-C users choose the small format for extra reach, so they are using large tele lenses. Most of these users want good autofocus (e.g. sports, BIF). Because there is a limited range of native tele lenses for m43 (olympus and panasonic each have a slow zoom that goes up to 300mm).

For a general purpose small camera though, they are quite good.

In all those years no single really high quality APS-C lens, which would approach to L-glass (apart from maybe the 17-50mm f2.8 by Nikon).

As was already pointed out, you only need special APS-C only lenses at the wide end. Canon have the 17-55mm, and the 10-22mm. Third party manufacturers also make comparable lenses, so there are several good choices.

Most importantly I don't see any SYSTEM in APS-C especially by Canon!

Pentax were APS-C only.

If it's a system, then where is the EF-S 50-150mm f2.8, which should correspond to 70-200mm in FF?

The corresponding APS-C lens is the 70-200mm. I don't believe many APS-C users of this lens complain about the missing 45-70mm range.

Sigma is the only helper here ), where are the primes, like EF-S 15mm, EF-S 22mm, EF-S 35mm 1.8, EF-S 50mm 1.8 etc?

Sigma and Nikon both make primes around the 30mm mark. It only makes sense at the wide end.

The idea of APS-C was nice - to make amateurs enter into interchangeable lenses world. Now, this role is better fullfilled by m43.
APS-C format was a good dollar-machine, but I believe not anymore.

All of the APS-C systems are more mature than micro 4/3 (which is the most mature/complete of the new mirrorless systems). This means you get better glass for your dollars. It also means there are more lenses available. For example, how many f/2.8 zooms can you buy today for a mirrorless system ? m43 are just getting to it. Same with long telephotos. Most mirrorless cameras still have contrast detect AF which in its later iterations works well for some things and not as well for others. For example, they aren't better than the 7D for sports shooting just yet.

There's no doubt that Pana and Oly have some good products but APS-C isn't dead yet.

 

[Marsu42]

I have large hands and I struggle with 'small' cameras such as the 5DII and the 7D

In the good ol' times, I had a exchangeable "large grip" on my legacy eos rt & 620 that was perfect. Basically, it was just a larger piece of plastic. But I guess Canon figured out that it doesn't make sense to design bodies that take different 30$ grips, if you can make them pay 3000$ to get a larger body they maybe wouldn't have needed in the first place :-o

 

[pj1974]

Hi All

I own both a 7D and a 350D, and don't plan on moving to FF at this stage. The balance between size, cost, functionality and having the pixel density on my telezoom end makes me enjoy using crop sensored cameras a lot.

Having said that, sure there are some times that I would like a FF - particularly for more depth of field control.... but even that will be minimised when I hope to Canon will produce, and then I'll buy a great new Canon 50-60mm prime (eg f1.8 to f2 with true USM and superior IQ wide open).

I see that I might possibly never go to FF (so long as there are always APS-C sensored bodies and EF-S lenses around) - ie to replace my current bodies / lenses when they might 'die'.

From a size perspective, the 7D is ideal for me. I upgraded from the Canon 350D (which I've had since 2005) to the Canon 7D about 2 and a half years ago. I haven't looked back since. The 7D's superior handling, AF and image quality were welcome to me. I got used to the 7D's sound very quickly. In particular the 7D's view finder and screen have been great practical benefits, as well as the higher ISO possibilities.

The 7D is just the camera I want / need. Sure, I hope any 7DmkII will have improved IQ and perhaps a few additional features. I'm very happy with the 7D's AF and fps - though any improvement on either of these would be ok (so long as the price rise isn't too substantial just because of that). Whenever I go back to the 350D, it takes me a bit of getting used to (eg a few minutes of using) - but then I am ok with it. But the 7D feels more natural to me now.

My lenses include a Sigma 10-20mm EX, Canon 15-85mm, Canon 100mm macro and Canon 70-300mmL. The image quality from all of these lenses is very very good - from 10mm to 300mm (in 35mm equivalent: 16mm to 480mm) is well covered. So I find these all work so well on crop sensored cameras, particularly corner to corner of the frame.

From a camera size perspective, I have used a 1D series, and find it uncomfortably heavy / big. I'm a fit - yet fairly small build guy, but having that additional weight of a 1D does take it's toll. I can use my 7D with 70-300mmL for hours walking, etc, but a bigger camera and lens combination (eg 1D with 100-400mmL) is much more tiring.

I have small to medium size hands, but my fingers are relatively long for the size / shape of my hand. Many people talk about 'small hands' or 'large hands' - but I think it's to do with many aspects, eg length of palm, length of fingers, 'stubby vs thick' fingers, etc. The 7D has both a taller and a 'beefier' grip for all my fingers to curl around. Having said that, I managed to use a 350D for hours - there was some discomfort, but I often just ignored it. I have used a Sony Nex 7 the other day - (helping a friend of mine who needed my assistance) - and I found the whole size and system too 'fiddly'. I would rather have a good P&S for ultimate portability in that case (as I used to have a few Fuji P&S cameras before I got into DSLRs).

From a perspective of image quality, pixel peeping will at times allow people to tell whether a photo was taken with the latest / greatest FF from an entry level APS-C... however, good photographers can get awesome images from even entry level DSLRs, as they understand about light, composition, technique and post processing. I have seen many many good photos across all levels of cameras, including P&S, though it's true that cameras with larger sensors have discernable benefits - particularly in noise, sharpness-per pixel level and functionality (eg fast focus, low-light, etc).

Some of the photos I took several years ago with my Fuji 3MP P&S still 'wow' people (who are not pixel peepers), as well as many images from my 350D. As I had those cameras for my years (about a decade) living in Europe between the late 90's to late 2008 - I'm glad to have those digital images captured and saved (forever!) However I'm now most content with the 7D, and if I ever go travelling, that is what I take as my main kit - with the 350D as my backup.

Regards... hope my post is useful food for thought! 8)

Paul

 

[Marsu42]

I can use my 7D with 70-300mmL for hours walking, etc, but a bigger camera and lens combination (eg 1D with 100-400mmL) is much more tiring.

Me too with my 60d & 70-300L, it's a very good "day out" combination!

however, good photographers can get awesome images from even entry level DSLRs, as they understand about light, composition, technique and post processing.

However, if shooting outdoors you cannot control the light. And with the 18mp sensor and tele range, I'm at iso800 or even iso1600 in no time raising noise and reducing dynamic range. And it's always very frustrating to have to throw away pictures because I just cannot raise shadows (e.g. when shooting a white bird in front of dark green trees) because of pattern noise in the background. And I know how to expose correctly and use Lightroom, that's why I'd wish for an upgraded sensor.

 

[DB]

I overall agree with you. My main point is just that current situation with mirrorless cameras, especially m43 is that this system is overall much smaller and is better equipped with dedicated lenses than APS-C of both Canon and Nikon. Of course we can use any EF lens on APS-C, but the EF lenses were designed for FF and hence bulky, costy plus the crop factor considerations. Agree, the m43 needs some time to get mature, but Canon surely needs to consider making APS-C cameras and EF-S lenses smaller. And if they introduce their mirrorless with sensor size of G1X, it will certainly cannibalize APS-C sales. Will it then mean that Canon may slowly phase out the Rebel series at all? Or their mirrorless will have some artificial compromises, like Nikon 1 has? So, I'm just curious what will be the future of APS-C?

An interesting point. Panasonic will soon announce their GH3 mirror-less camera that may tempt many Rebel users away (especially those who purchased primarily for video), particularly as it can use so many different lens types (including EF)

I started with a Rebel T2i then migrated to a 7D, but have never purchased an EF-S lens, only FF EF ones, because like many of the other views extolled here, I would like to migrate next to FF, because of the bigger sensor size and improved IQ (well, the IQ is talked about so much by those with 5D2's and above).

 

[AprilForever]

When I was buying my 40D in 2008, I was thinking well, I'll first get into Canon system and then will grow into fullframe.
And because I am a pure hobbyist, I actually never had neither the money nor the excuse to pay big $ for FF camera and lenses.

In the end I've stuck with Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (non-VC), Canon 85mm f1.8, Canon 10-22mm, Rokinon fisheye and Canon 55-250mm.

From these lenses only Canon 85mm f1.8 is designed for FF, all others are for APS-C only.
And still these lenses are quite large compared micro43 lenses altough the sensor size difference is not that large.
Indeed, Canon APS-C sensor diagonal is 26.7mm, while m43 is 21.6mm, so the difference is just 5.1mm!
Obviously, size optimisation wasn't a priority task for designers of the lenses I own, as again opposed to m43 system.

With the high quality mirrorless cameras like Olympus E-M5, the rumored Panasonic GH3 and more and more good lenses supporting that system, it seems to me that APS-C system is becoming an anachronism.
Really, for half the weight and close price, one can build similar or better system with m43.

I really see not much point in APS-C cameras anymore. First, they're not a good helpers for you to grow to FF. Second, there is no strong commitment to this format even by manufacturers themselves. They just have produced the most necessary line of lenses, mostly mediocre quality, which is understandably to attract
amateurs by price. In all those years no single really high quality APS-C lens, which would approach to L-glass (apart from maybe the 17-50mm f2.8 by Nikon).

Most importantly I don't see any SYSTEM in APS-C especially by Canon! If it's a system, then where is the EF-S 50-150mm f2.8, which should correspond to 70-200mm in FF?
Sigma is the only helper here ), where are the primes, like EF-S 15mm, EF-S 22mm, EF-S 35mm 1.8, EF-S 50mm 1.8 etc?

The idea of APS-C was nice - to make amateurs enter into interchangeable lenses world. Now, this role is better fullfilled by m43.
APS-C format was a good dollar-machine, but I believe not anymore.

Will we see slow die-out of APS-C in near future? Or Canikon will be smart enough to trasnform in into more compact format, with less pain to EF-S and DX lens owners?

I whole heartedly disagree with you. Read Thom Hogan's website about equivalency (a google search with those whree keywords will produce the desired result).

 

[Random Orbits]

An interesting point. Panasonic will soon announce their GH3 mirror-less camera that may tempt many Rebel users away (especially those who purchased primarily for video), particularly as it can use so many different lens types (including EF)

I started with a Rebel T2i then migrated to a 7D, but have never purchased an EF-S lens, only FF EF ones, because like many of the other views extolled here, I would like to migrate next to FF, because of the bigger sensor size and improved IQ (well, the IQ is talked about so much by those with 5D2's and above).

If you ever decide to go FF and keep your 7D, it might make more sense to get the ultrawide for the crop sensor rather than the fullframe. Getting a 10-22 or a Sigma 8-16 is much less costly than Canon's FF 16-35 and the performance doesn't differ that much.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

When I was buying my 40D in 2008, I was thinking well, I'll first get into Canon system and then will grow into fullframe.
And because I am a pure hobbyist, I actually never had neither the money nor the excuse to pay big $ for FF camera and lenses.

In the end I've stuck with Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (non-VC), Canon 85mm f1.8, Canon 10-22mm, Rokinon fisheye and Canon 55-250mm.

From these lenses only Canon 85mm f1.8 is designed for FF, all others are for APS-C only.
And still these lenses are quite large compared micro43 lenses altough the sensor size difference is not that large.
Indeed, Canon APS-C sensor diagonal is 26.7mm, while m43 is 21.6mm, so the difference is just 5.1mm!
Obviously, size optimisation wasn't a priority task for designers of the lenses I own, as again opposed to m43 system.

With the high quality mirrorless cameras like Olympus E-M5, the rumored Panasonic GH3 and more and more good lenses supporting that system, it seems to me that APS-C system is becoming an anachronism.
Really, for half the weight and close price, one can build similar or better system with m43.

I really see not much point in APS-C cameras anymore. First, they're not a good helpers for you to grow to FF. Second, there is no strong commitment to this format even by manufacturers themselves. They just have produced the most necessary line of lenses, mostly mediocre quality, which is understandably to attract
amateurs by price. In all those years no single really high quality APS-C lens, which would approach to L-glass (apart from maybe the 17-50mm f2.8 by Nikon).

Most importantly I don't see any SYSTEM in APS-C especially by Canon! If it's a system, then where is the EF-S 50-150mm f2.8, which should correspond to 70-200mm in FF?
Sigma is the only helper here, where are the primes, like EF-S 15mm, EF-S 22mm, EF-S 35mm 1.8, EF-S 50mm 1.8 etc?

The idea of APS-C was nice - to make amateurs enter into interchangeable lenses world. Now, this role is better fullfilled by m43.
APS-C format was a good dollar-machine, but I believe not anymore.

Will we see slow die-out of APS-C in near future? Or Canikon will be smart enough to trasnform in into more compact format, with less pain to EF-S and DX lens owners?

I've never seen Canon sell the Rebels as a system to move to FF. It stands alone.

However, if a person has plans to move to FF in the near future, purchase lenses that are good for both. The 17-40mm L, 24-105mm L, 70-200mmL (f/4 or f/2.8), in fact, many EF lenses are out there, both high quality, or inexpensive. However, EF-S lenses will never work on a Canon FF. Buy them if you plan to stick with APS-C. There is nothing wrong with that, it will be around for a long time.

 

[ScottyP]

Marketshare would tend to disagree with your idea of 4/3 killing Canon and Nikon any time soon. Plus, I love all the lens reviews that harsh on a FF lens (Canon or 3p) for "vignetting" only to say that "of course, this is no corncern when mounted on a crop body".

 

[briansquibb]

Marketshare would tend to disagree with your idea of 4/3 killing Canon and Nikon any time soon. Plus, I love all the lens reviews that harsh on a FF lens (Canon or 3p) for "vignetting" only to say that "of course, this is no corncern when mounted on a crop body".

APS-C users definitely get better IQ from EF lens - try the 17-40 on both and see which body gives the best image ....

 

[ecka]

When I was buying my 40D in 2008, I was thinking well, I'll first get into Canon system and then will grow into fullframe.
And because I am a pure hobbyist, I actually never had neither the money nor the excuse to pay big $ for FF camera and lenses.

In the end I've stuck with Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (non-VC), Canon 85mm f1.8, Canon 10-22mm, Rokinon fisheye and Canon 55-250mm.

From these lenses only Canon 85mm f1.8 is designed for FF, all others are for APS-C only.
And still these lenses are quite large compared micro43 lenses altough the sensor size difference is not that large.
Indeed, Canon APS-C sensor diagonal is 26.7mm, while m43 is 21.6mm, so the difference is just 5.1mm!
Obviously, size optimisation wasn't a priority task for designers of the lenses I own, as again opposed to m43 system.

With the high quality mirrorless cameras like Olympus E-M5, the rumored Panasonic GH3 and more and more good lenses supporting that system, it seems to me that APS-C system is becoming an anachronism.
Really, for half the weight and close price, one can build similar or better system with m43.

I really see not much point in APS-C cameras anymore. First, they're not a good helpers for you to grow to FF. Second, there is no strong commitment to this format even by manufacturers themselves. They just have produced the most necessary line of lenses, mostly mediocre quality, which is understandably to attract
amateurs by price. In all those years no single really high quality APS-C lens, which would approach to L-glass (apart from maybe the 17-50mm f2.8 by Nikon).

Most importantly I don't see any SYSTEM in APS-C especially by Canon! If it's a system, then where is the EF-S 50-150mm f2.8, which should correspond to 70-200mm in FF?
Sigma is the only helper here ), where are the primes, like EF-S 15mm, EF-S 22mm, EF-S 35mm 1.8, EF-S 50mm 1.8 etc?

The idea of APS-C was nice - to make amateurs enter into interchangeable lenses world. Now, this role is better fullfilled by m43.
APS-C format was a good dollar-machine, but I believe not anymore.

Will we see slow die-out of APS-C in near future? Or Canikon will be smart enough to trasnform in into more compact format, with less pain to EF-S and DX lens owners?

To me it's like saying - "synthetic food is better". From what I've learned, if you want to grow a FF system then you should start with a FF body, and using L glass on APS-C bodies is a waste

 

[briansquibb]

To me it's like saying - "synthetic food is better". From what I've learned, if you want to grow a FF system then you should start with a FF body, and using L glass on APS-C bodies is a waste

.... does that apply to those with mixed ff and crops? .....

 

[ecka]

To me it's like saying - "synthetic food is better". From what I've learned, if you want to grow a FF system then you should start with a FF body, and using L glass on APS-C bodies is a waste

.... does that apply to those with mixed ff amd crops? .....

I guess it does not ...
... I do eat fast food sometimes