Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
okaro said:
One would like to think so, but there are a number of people out there who buy the best without knowing how to use them.....
Upvote
0
Don Haines said:
I would consider myself a serious hobbyist - and I don't understand why so many folks care if it is a DSLR or Mirrorless. And I never shoot in green box mode. I have owned both DSLRs and Mirrorless at the same time, there are advantages to both, but for the shooting I do (no action) it hasn't mattered very much which camera I have used. I am glad we have the choice, but as Mirrorless continues to make advances, it really shouldn't matter that much which type becomes more popular, in my opinion.
Upvote
0
okaro said:
FF is for anyone who wants it and can afford it. That's as absurd as saying "i7s are not for average consumers, they're for serious hobbyists and professionals". Or the same about V8s. Or fancy bicycles. Or anything else. There certainly wasn't an exam when I bought my 5D3, nor a credential check.
Upvote
0
ecka said:Don Haines said:
So, if you are not a professional driver, then you must be driving cheap, uncomfortable, boring, and $H!tty cars. Same deal, right? How about food? Are you a professional food taster? ...
Actually, I am a professional driver..... it is part of my job and my training.....
I am trained and certified to drive a Genie-lift.....
I professionally drive several work vehicles, large vehicles with racks of electronics and 55 foot antenna masts....
I am trained and certified to drive a forklift....
And like most professional drivers, I do not drive $10,000,000 F1 cars, I drive vehicles that are suited to the task at hand. Being a professional photographer does not involve always buying the best, it involves getting the best combination of tool and price for the task at hand.
FF is not for average consumers? ? ? No, it is for consumers with a bit more disposable income.
Upvote
0
Don Haines said:ecka said:Don Haines said:
So, if you are not a professional driver, then you must be driving cheap, uncomfortable, boring, and $H!tty cars. Same deal, right? How about food? Are you a professional food taster? ...
Actually, I am a professional driver..... it is part of my job and my training.....
I am trained and certified to drive a Genie-lift.....
I professionally drive several work vehicles, large vehicles with racks of electronics and 55 foot antenna masts....
I am trained and certified to drive a forklift....
And like most professional drivers, I do not drive $10,000,000 F1 cars, I drive vehicles that are suited to the task at hand. Being a professional photographer does not involve always buying the best, it involves getting the best combination of tool and price for the task at hand.
FF is not for average consumers? ? ? No, it is for consumers with a bit more disposable income.
Are you comparing FF to $10,000,000 F1 cars? Really? Well, FF is not the best... There are $50k+ cameras with much larger sensors, which are not that popular among professionals. And there's luxury stuff made for wealthy non-professional consumers too.
I wasn't talking about you specifically. But, would it change anything, if you wasn't a pro driver? Would you restrict yourself to a lesser car? (Or maybe you would buy a $10,000,000 F1? Which is what all those silly non-pros must be doing.
Right?) And I don't mean your work vehicle. You don't have to own a plane to be a pilot.FF is not an overkill for an average consumer anymore. Because on modern big UHD+ displays, crop sensor images are starting to look like $#%@ (not good enough) and you can't do anything about that. Buying expensive optics for it is madness, because FF is a much cheaper solution these days. Cheap lenses on FF produce much nicer images than on crop cameras. So, believe it or not, but in many cases, FF is the best combination of tool and price. Crop and kit lenses can still be perfectly usable, but if you feel like it is not enough anymore, then there is no reason why you should not get a FF straightaway. Seeking better quality or light gathering on crop will simply cost you more money. It's not worth it. Crop potential will never catch up with FF, because size matters. The market is getting oversaturated with crop sensors and manufacturers are being pushed to put better sensors in consumer products. Do you remember what happened with cheap P&S? Same thing. You can blame smartphones for all you want, but "everyone" has or had a cheap P&S camera and now you can get one used for peanuts or free or find some in trash cans. It doesn't really matter if they put cameras in phones, or phones in cameras. It's a superior symbiote. Why all (most) phones have cameras? - Exactly ... Maybe the next question we'll ask in 5 five years will be - "Why all ILCs have FF sensors?" - and the answer will be the same.
Upvote
0
I don't think Don is saying amateurs can't buy and use expensive gear. He's saying people often buy the best because they think that helps them take better photos, those that don't really know anything about photography that is. I know plenty of amateurs who are much better than some "pros" I know.
Upvote
0
ecka said:Don Haines said:ecka said:Don Haines said:
So, if you are not a professional driver, then you must be driving cheap, uncomfortable, boring, and $H!tty cars. Same deal, right? How about food? Are you a professional food taster? ...
Actually, I am a professional driver..... it is part of my job and my training.....
I am trained and certified to drive a Genie-lift.....
I professionally drive several work vehicles, large vehicles with racks of electronics and 55 foot antenna masts....
I am trained and certified to drive a forklift....
And like most professional drivers, I do not drive $10,000,000 F1 cars, I drive vehicles that are suited to the task at hand. Being a professional photographer does not involve always buying the best, it involves getting the best combination of tool and price for the task at hand.
FF is not for average consumers? ? ? No, it is for consumers with a bit more disposable income.
Are you comparing FF to $10,000,000 F1 cars? Really? Well, FF is not the best... There are $50k+ cameras with much larger sensors, which are not that popular among professionals. And there's luxury stuff made for wealthy non-professional consumers too.
I wasn't talking about you specifically. But, would it change anything, if you wasn't a pro driver? Would you restrict yourself to a lesser car? (Or maybe you would buy a $10,000,000 F1? Which is what all those silly non-pros must be doing.
FF is not an overkill for an average consumer anymore. Because on modern big UHD+ displays, crop sensor images are starting to look like $#%@ (not good enough) and you can't do anything about that. Buying expensive optics for it is madness, because FF is a much cheaper solution these days. Cheap lenses on FF produce much nicer images than on crop cameras. So, believe it or not, but in many cases, FF is the best combination of tool and price. Crop and kit lenses can still be perfectly usable, but if you feel like it is not enough anymore, then there is no reason why you should not get a FF straightaway. Seeking better quality or light gathering on crop will simply cost you more money. It's not worth it. Crop potential will never catch up with FF, because size matters. The market is getting oversaturated with crop sensors and manufacturers are being pushed to put better sensors in consumer products. Do you remember what happened with cheap P&S? Same thing. You can blame smartphones for all you want, but "everyone" has or had a cheap P&S camera and now you can get one used for peanuts or free or find some in trash cans. It doesn't really matter if they put cameras in phones, or phones in cameras. It's a superior symbiote. Why all (most) phones have cameras? - Exactly ... Maybe the next question we'll ask in 5 five years will be - "Why all ILCs have FF sensors?" - and the answer will be the same.
Wow, what a lot of hot air over an obviously correct statement. Perhaps the poster should have said "The target market and the typical buyer of a FF camera is a professional or serious hobbyist."
Since virtually everyone who visits this site probably falls into that category - and recent polls on the subject showed that almost everyone responding owned an FF camera, this seems to point out the truth of that statement. Especially when any check of the sales figures on Amazon any time of the year show the vast majority of cameras sold are crop. So the average consumer is buying a crop camera.
Plus, the idea that FF is far superior for everyone is a vast overstatement, in my experience. If you don't shoot in low light, you don't need FF. If you don't need narrow DOF, you don't need FF. Crop sensors are constantly getting better and have narrowed the gap in terms of noise significantly over the years. Even some pros are choosing M 4/3rds and getting professional results. Yes, most pros will probably continue to use FF cameras, but for even a serious hobbyist like myself, I have sold the FF and now use one crop and one m4/3 camera. For prints up to 8" x 12" you can't tell the difference between crop and FF in almost every case. No one knows what the future holds, but as crop sensors continue to improve, it might just be FF that goes begins to be phased out, being sold to the select few that visit CR!
Upvote
0
dak723 said:ecka said:Don Haines said:ecka said:Don Haines said:
So, if you are not a professional driver, then you must be driving cheap, uncomfortable, boring, and $H!tty cars. Same deal, right? How about food? Are you a professional food taster? ...
Actually, I am a professional driver..... it is part of my job and my training.....
I am trained and certified to drive a Genie-lift.....
I professionally drive several work vehicles, large vehicles with racks of electronics and 55 foot antenna masts....
I am trained and certified to drive a forklift....
And like most professional drivers, I do not drive $10,000,000 F1 cars, I drive vehicles that are suited to the task at hand. Being a professional photographer does not involve always buying the best, it involves getting the best combination of tool and price for the task at hand.
FF is not for average consumers? ? ? No, it is for consumers with a bit more disposable income.
Are you comparing FF to $10,000,000 F1 cars? Really? Well, FF is not the best... There are $50k+ cameras with much larger sensors, which are not that popular among professionals. And there's luxury stuff made for wealthy non-professional consumers too.
I wasn't talking about you specifically. But, would it change anything, if you wasn't a pro driver? Would you restrict yourself to a lesser car? (Or maybe you would buy a $10,000,000 F1? Which is what all those silly non-pros must be doing.
FF is not an overkill for an average consumer anymore. Because on modern big UHD+ displays, crop sensor images are starting to look like $#%@ (not good enough) and you can't do anything about that. Buying expensive optics for it is madness, because FF is a much cheaper solution these days. Cheap lenses on FF produce much nicer images than on crop cameras. So, believe it or not, but in many cases, FF is the best combination of tool and price. Crop and kit lenses can still be perfectly usable, but if you feel like it is not enough anymore, then there is no reason why you should not get a FF straightaway. Seeking better quality or light gathering on crop will simply cost you more money. It's not worth it. Crop potential will never catch up with FF, because size matters. The market is getting oversaturated with crop sensors and manufacturers are being pushed to put better sensors in consumer products. Do you remember what happened with cheap P&S? Same thing. You can blame smartphones for all you want, but "everyone" has or had a cheap P&S camera and now you can get one used for peanuts or free or find some in trash cans. It doesn't really matter if they put cameras in phones, or phones in cameras. It's a superior symbiote. Why all (most) phones have cameras? - Exactly ... Maybe the next question we'll ask in 5 five years will be - "Why all ILCs have FF sensors?" - and the answer will be the same.
Wow, what a lot of hot air over an obviously correct statement. Perhaps the poster should have said "The target market and the typical buyer of a FF camera is a professional or serious hobbyist."
Since virtually everyone who visits this site probably falls into that category - and recent polls on the subject showed that almost everyone responding owned an FF camera, this seems to point out the truth of that statement. Especially when any check of the sales figures on Amazon any time of the year show the vast majority of cameras sold are crop. So the average consumer is buying a crop camera.
Plus, the idea that FF is far superior for everyone is a vast overstatement, in my experience. If you don't shoot in low light, you don't need FF. If you don't need narrow DOF, you don't need FF. Crop sensors are constantly getting better and have narrowed the gap in terms of noise significantly over the years. Even some pros are choosing M 4/3rds and getting professional results. Yes, most pros will probably continue to use FF cameras, but for even a serious hobbyist like myself, I have sold the FF and now use one crop and one m4/3 camera. For prints up to 8" x 12" you can't tell the difference between crop and FF in almost every case. No one knows what the future holds, but as crop sensors continue to improve, it might just be FF that goes begins to be phased out, being sold to the select few that visit CR!
Wow
. You should read it in a context of the thread. Not as a reply to a single sentence.Most average consumers don't buy ILCs at all. Average photographers already have a few of those. And enthusiasts aiming for advanced, more expensive cameras, actually are considering FF and 2nd-hand FF prices just make it a no-brainer.
Mantras like - "If you don't shoot in low light, you don't need FF" - are pointless. Most people don't even need APS-C, because they don't utilize the potential of such cameras. And most of them are fine using smartphones. FF is better, regardless, much better, for many things, not just low light or narrow DoF. Perhaps you are just not capable of seeing it. If crop camera is more than enough for you, that doesn't mean it is as good as FF. It means that you are posting in a wrong forum thread.
Now, it is silly to expect each new APS-C camera to be vastly superior to the one (or two, or more) you already have, at least in terms of still image quality potential. I don't know how many cameras you need to buy to understand that, I had two, your mileage may vary. But some people never grow up.
"the vast majority of cameras sold are crop" - the majority of cameras sold are inside smatphones, and the majority of people buying them are not even smart people (not judging, just statistics). It is only logical that most "me too" camera purchases are the cheapest crop cameras.
"Crop sensors are constantly getting better" - so does FF!
"and have narrowed the gap" - no, the gap is just being dragged along, in between
."professional results" have little to do with sensor size. If a tool is good enough for the job, then it's good enough. If it's not - you are not getting paid. As a non-pro, I don't have a separate optimal camera format for every situation possible, I just need one camera to cover all of it and the APS-C is not good enough.
"you can't tell the difference between crop and FF" - and you own both APS-C and m4/3 because there is one? It is a silly argument. Nowadays, it may be hard to tell the difference between a girl and a boy
you must always check the "EXIF" to be sure. Are you saying there is no difference if you cannot see it in a snapshot? The point is not in telling the difference. The point is the potential, the quality, the price, the post-processing routine and the pleasure of using it. The difference is always there. And you can shoot bad images on FF too.Don't you know that printers and LCDs are constantly improving and growing as well? Clearly your cameras are overkill for 8"x 12", because my FF gets me 24"x 36", which is 9 times larger. I suggest you try 1"
, because you won't tell the difference anyways.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
As much as I hate to further this discussion, I have to ask.
Are people suggesting that if you take a 7DII and a 5Ds, mount them side by side on tripods, place a 200mm lens on each body, take a picture at f8 and then crop the 5ds image to exactly the same framing as the 7DII, that there will be a difference in depth of field between the two images?
I find that hard to believe. I'd like to see sample images.
Are people suggesting that if you take a 7DII and a 5Ds, mount them side by side on tripods, place a 200mm lens on each body, take a picture at f8 and then crop the 5ds image to exactly the same framing as the 7DII, that there will be a difference in depth of field between the two images?
I find that hard to believe. I'd like to see sample images.
Upvote
0
ecka said:Wow
Most average consumers don't buy ILCs at all. Average photographers already have a few of those. And enthusiasts aiming for advanced, more expensive cameras, actually are considering FF and 2nd-hand FF prices just make it a no-brainer.
Mantras like - "If you don't shoot in low light, you don't need FF" - are pointless. Most people don't even need APS-C, because they don't utilize the potential of such cameras. And most of them are fine using smartphones. FF is better, regardless, much better, for many things, not just low light or narrow DoF. Perhaps you are just not capable of seeing it. If crop camera is more than enough for you, that doesn't mean it is as good as FF. It means that you are posting in a wrong forum thread.
Now, it is silly to expect each new APS-C camera to be vastly superior to the one (or two, or more) you already have, at least in terms of still image quality potential. I don't know how many cameras you need to buy to understand that, I had two, your mileage may vary. But some people never grow up.
"the vast majority of cameras sold are crop" - the majority of cameras sold are inside smatphones, and the majority of people buying them are not even smart people (not judging, just statistics). It is only logical that most "me too" camera purchases are the cheapest crop cameras.
"Crop sensors are constantly getting better" - so does FF!
"and have narrowed the gap" - no, the gap is just being dragged along, in between
"professional results" have little to do with sensor size. If a tool is good enough for the job, then it's good enough. If it's not - you are not getting paid. As a non-pro, I don't have a separate optimal camera format for every situation possible, I just need one camera to cover all of it and the APS-C is not good enough.
"you can't tell the difference between crop and FF" - and you own both APS-C and m4/3 because there is one? It is a silly argument. Nowadays, it may be hard to tell the difference between a girl and a boy
Don't you know that printers and LCDs are constantly improving and growing as well? Clearly your cameras are overkill for 8"x 12", because my FF gets me 24"x 36", which is 9 times larger. I suggest you try 1"
You are certainly entitled to your opinion that FF is so much better than crop. The fact that you believe so, does not make is so. The fact that I believe that there is not that much difference in most shooting situations, is my opinion based on my experience. I suggest you read more photographers blogs and articles. You will find that I am not the only one who finds that crop sensors have closed the gap between crop and FF. You can agree or disagree, but there is nor reason to continually insult me or insult my photographic knowledge and experience. Unless, of course, you insult me because you really have no evidence to back up your opinions.
Here's an article by someone far more knowledgeable than I that talks about gear. In many cases - as you read the article - you will see that the camera type matters little, but the most important aspect in regards to noise and IQ is the lens used and how much light it can gather. There are numerous such articles on the net if you care to learn more about it.
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/does.gear.matter/
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:
Ditto.
Further, any camera shot from the same place and shot with the same lens then cropped to the same output will have the same dof irrespective of pixel numbers. Pixel numbers or density has zero to do with dof.
If the magnification is the same, in your scenario it is, and if the size of the aperture the comparison images are shot with are the same, in your example they are the same lens so they are, the the dof is the same.
Upvote
0
dak723 said:ecka said:Wow
Most average consumers don't buy ILCs at all. Average photographers already have a few of those. And enthusiasts aiming for advanced, more expensive cameras, actually are considering FF and 2nd-hand FF prices just make it a no-brainer.
Mantras like - "If you don't shoot in low light, you don't need FF" - are pointless. Most people don't even need APS-C, because they don't utilize the potential of such cameras. And most of them are fine using smartphones. FF is better, regardless, much better, for many things, not just low light or narrow DoF. Perhaps you are just not capable of seeing it. If crop camera is more than enough for you, that doesn't mean it is as good as FF. It means that you are posting in a wrong forum thread.
Now, it is silly to expect each new APS-C camera to be vastly superior to the one (or two, or more) you already have, at least in terms of still image quality potential. I don't know how many cameras you need to buy to understand that, I had two, your mileage may vary. But some people never grow up.
"the vast majority of cameras sold are crop" - the majority of cameras sold are inside smatphones, and the majority of people buying them are not even smart people (not judging, just statistics). It is only logical that most "me too" camera purchases are the cheapest crop cameras.
"Crop sensors are constantly getting better" - so does FF!
"and have narrowed the gap" - no, the gap is just being dragged along, in between
"professional results" have little to do with sensor size. If a tool is good enough for the job, then it's good enough. If it's not - you are not getting paid. As a non-pro, I don't have a separate optimal camera format for every situation possible, I just need one camera to cover all of it and the APS-C is not good enough.
"you can't tell the difference between crop and FF" - and you own both APS-C and m4/3 because there is one? It is a silly argument. Nowadays, it may be hard to tell the difference between a girl and a boy
Don't you know that printers and LCDs are constantly improving and growing as well? Clearly your cameras are overkill for 8"x 12", because my FF gets me 24"x 36", which is 9 times larger. I suggest you try 1"
You are certainly entitled to your opinion that FF is so much better than crop. The fact that you believe so, does not make is so. The fact that I believe that there is not that much difference in most shooting situations, is my opinion based on my experience. I suggest you read more photographers blogs and articles. You will find that I am not the only one who finds that crop sensors have closed the gap between crop and FF. You can agree or disagree, but there is nor reason to continually insult me or insult my photographic knowledge and experience. Unless, of course, you insult me because you really have no evidence to back up your opinions.
Here's an article by someone far more knowledgeable than I that talks about gear. In many cases - as you read the article - you will see that the camera type matters little, but the most important aspect in regards to noise and IQ is the lens used and how much light it can gather. There are numerous such articles on the net if you care to learn more about it.
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/does.gear.matter/
You don't need expensive cameras for snapshots. That's a fact.
You don't need FF, because even your current crop cameras are overkill for what you do with them.
I don't print small. I don't shoot snapshots. I don't need special 'good enough' camera systems for snapshots (like m4/3). If a picture doesn't deserve great quality, then most likely, it is not worth shooting at all. It may be acceptable to shoot worthless snapshots for money. But not for pleasure.
Get over it.
"Photographic knowledge" (rather ignorance) like - "Crop sensors are constantly getting better and have narrowed the gap ..." - is an insult by itself.
APS-C is too small for me. Perhaps because I'm not rich enough to buy cheap things. And when you buy good optics for it to get closer to FF, it just gets more expensive than the actual FF, while still not as good. I'd rather have 70-200/4 on FF, than 70-200/2.8 on crop, for the same price. And something as simple as 50/1.4, does not exist in crop-world.
Upvote
0
LonelyBoy said:
Nobody is saying you cannot buy a FF camera for any reason you choose. The point is that they do have a certain target group and those mostly buy them. Strangely there are no statistics on cameras based sensor sizes. There are stats about lenses and about a quarter of lenses shipped is for FF but people buy them for crop cameras. Also FF users probably buy more lenses than crop users.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
