Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor

[Sabaki]

I moved from crop to full-frame when the 5D3 arrived. The main reason for me was the AF system; I found myself unable to track the kids with the 50D as they got bigger and faster. In fact, I passed on the 5D2 and bought the 50D because the AF was a little better (the 7D followed too quickly to justify it to she-who-must-be-obeyed).

I immediately noticed the other improvements of the 5D3 as well. I love being able to track and get more keepers. I love the image quality improvements (yet I have nice big prints on the wall from the crop cameras). I love how the 5D3 retains details as you increase the ISO. I can get nice hand-held portraits indoors with window light that didn't work well with previous cameras. I don't even mind the "grain" at ISO 8000-10000.

But there is one frustration I have with the full-frame, and that is for closeups. I got used to what 1:1 meant on the crop, and I can't get that magnification with the FF unless I crop. So I think about getting another crop body every now and then. Or maybe it is time to get the MP-E.

Thank you for this feedback sawsedge. My ultimate intention is to have both a FF & APS-C in my camera bag.

This feedback has just put a FF camera at the very top of my shopping list

 

[DRR]

I honestly cannot agree with the recommendation that the OP keeps the 24-70mm lens. He's a photography student. He still has to learn and define his version of the art. If he uses the 24-70mm, then IMHO, his photographs will look like everybody else's photographs and he won't develop a style of his own that's marketable in a very competitive business. (Over here in South Africa, every idiot with a "Rebel" and Sigma budget zoom considers herself a "pro" photographer ... heck, scratch "pro" ... considers herself a photographer.)

I know others don't, but I agree to this. I won't speak for Sella174 but I will add my own perspective.

Basically, as a student, the fewer options you have, the more you have to work around and think about what you have. It's only then that you fully realize the consequences and tradeoffs, the pros and cons, of your decisions. It's not about zooming versus foot zoom, or having good equipment vs average equipment - it's about having the experience to know when to make those decisions.

Taken to the extreme - if you were teaching someone who knew nothing about photo, and assume money was no object - what would you start them with? A 1DX with a 16-35, 24-70, and 70-200? Of course not - many would say here to start on film, with a 50mm. Get them understanding the basics. Or more realistically, a starter DSLR and force them to shoot monochrome JPEG. That's how you learn the importance of exposing properly, about watching highlight and shadow values, and about composition. Any idiot can fix it in post. RAW is great for salvaging shots, but should not be used in place of making good decisions. Similarly, a zoom is great for its versatility but if you have access to a good zoom, too early, it retards your learning curve because it doesn't force you to think about your decisions.

 

[DRR]

Also let me add I am not speaking about the OP - I have no idea who he/she is or what level their photography is at, and I am not saying they do not make measured decisions - I am speaking purely in generalities.

 

[Sabaki]

Also let me add I am not speaking about the OP - I have no idea who he/she is or what level their photography is at, and I am not saying they do not make measured decisions - I am speaking purely in generalities.

Hi DRR.

I currently describe myself as an intermediate amateur who can take sharp, properly exposed and decently framed photographs.
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

What I do with the 24-70 is that I occasionally lock the lens at a focal length and use it as a faux prime.

As mentioned in my first post, I have loads of theory on full frame. Sharper, cleaner images with perceived higher quality of DOF.

Thank you for your insights, I will try and incorporate your advise into my photography

 

[jdramirez]

Also let me add I am not speaking about the OP - I have no idea who he/she is or what level their photography is at, and I am not saying they do not make measured decisions - I am speaking purely in generalities.

I thought about teaching a class for. 6th through eighth grade and I don't care about their gear... film... digital... slr... but it should have a manual function.

My intent is to teach then about depth of field and the relationship they have with their subject... angle mostly... I'll leave perspective up to a guest speaker...

 

[tiger82]

If you are satisfied with the shots you are currently framing with APS-C and want better ISO performance, consider the 70D which is a much less expensive option especially if you have APS-C lenses

 

[sdsr]

Taken to the extreme - if you were teaching someone who knew nothing about photo, and assume money was no object - what would you start them with? A 1DX with a 16-35, 24-70, and 70-200? Of course not - many would say here to start on film, with a 50mm. Get them understanding the basics.

Why couldn't a competent teacher do that with a student who owned such equipment? I find the notion that you must start with a small, dark viewfinder, a sensor that makes noisy images in low light (or, worse, film, requiring you to wait perhaps days before you can see the results of your efforts), etc., and the implication that top level equipment is some sort of reward that you have to earn by first mastering technique elsewhere, quite bizarre. Of course, money usually is an object, especially if you have no idea whether your interest in photography will "stick", but otherwise....

 

[jdramirez]

I take my ten year old daughter with me to some location shoots and I plug in the manual settings and tell her to have at it. Then after the fact... I tell her what changes should have been done here or there... different ways to learn... multiple destinations.

 

[bholliman]

Other people find different reasons to prefer FF vs crop, but for me it's all about one thing - the view finder.

This isn't the only reason for me, but its a significant one! I considered buying an SL1 last summer as a smaller backup body to my 6D, but after looking through the cramped, dark view finder at one at a store, I decided not to.

 

[tntwit]

If you're wondering what I mean, take the time to go to a camera store (or find someone with a FF camera - film or DSLR) and look through the view finder. Then hold your camera up to your eye. Yeah.

A while ago I picked up my old T70 (35 mm film from the 80's for those who don't know) and looked through the viewfinder and yeah, WOW!

Now I remember why manual focus was never really an issue. Compared to the 300D and T3i I had - what a difference.

I recently sold off my T3i and am now trying to justify the move to full frame vs either the 60D (great deals now) or 70D (currently back to "retail pricing").

The larger/brighter viewfinder will be a plus either way compared to the T3i, but the 6D will be better if I understand correctly. I had a chance to look through the viewfinder of a 70D at Bestbuy and it was noticeably better than the T3i. I haven't had a chance yet with a FF.

I loved my T3i, but of things I wanted to improve (buffer size, fps, external controls, battery life, auto focus, viewfinder, auto focus in video), noise was always at the top. Plenty of pictures of my kids at birthday parties, gymnasiums, auditoriums, etc with too much noise. I fixed some of that with the 50 1.8, but there are still limitations to that solution. FF seems like the right answer, just trying to decide if roughly 2 stops are worth the cost (I also like the DOF advantage and more lenses seems ideal on FF than crop in terms of range).

 

[tntwit]

I must say a lot of the comments here are making my head swell.

There are distinct advantages with FF (and disadvantages of any camera), but some comments make it seem like I'm trying to buy my way to better pictures if I go FF, so it gives me pause as to what is the right decision.

On the other hand, there is never ending criticism of the crop bodies on much of these forums.

I'm quite confident I am a limitation in my own photography and the more experience I get, the better my pictures get, regardless of the equipment.

I am also quite aware of the advice to look at your cameras limitations and decide what you really need before you upgrade. This is where the 60D answers many of my equipment's limitations for a whole lot less than FF. It just doesn't answer the one that bugs me the most (noise).

I'm concerned that I will go FF and still be disappointed. That's why I might just rent first to see.

 

[jdramirez]

I must say a lot of the comments here are making my head swell.

There are distinct advantages with FF (and disadvantages of any camera), but some comments make it seem like I'm trying to buy my way to better pictures if I go FF, so it gives me pause as to what is the right decision.

On the other hand, there is never ending criticism of the crop bodies on much of these forums.

I'm quite confident I am a limitation in my own photography and the more experience I get, the better my pictures get, regardless of the equipment.

I am also quite aware of the advice to look at your cameras limitations and decide what you really need before you upgrade. This is where the 60D answers many of my equipment's limitations for a whole lot less than FF. It just doesn't answer the one that bugs me the most (noise).

I'm concerned that I will go FF and still be disappointed. That's why I might just rent first to see.

Get a Canon professional services if you have enough gear to qualify and then borrow from them.

 

[sdsr]

I'm quite confident I am a limitation in my own photography and the more experience I get, the better my pictures get, regardless of the equipment.

I am also quite aware of the advice to look at your cameras limitations and decide what you really need before you upgrade. This is where the 60D answers many of my equipment's limitations for a whole lot less than FF. It just doesn't answer the one that bugs me the most (noise).

I'm concerned that I will go FF and still be disappointed. That's why I might just rent first to see.

All that is true, except that it's almost inconceivable that you would be disappointed by what a FF body does for your principal annoyance. And while it's true that better equipment won't necessarily improve *your* limitations, it's not likely to make them worse.

But yes, it makes sense to rent/borrow first. That's what I did - and when I did, I couldn't wait to buy one (in fact I ordered my 5DII before returning the one I rented), because I preferred everything about it, from ergonomics through to the actual image; because I enjoyed using it so much more, I used it more and, through practice, improved, probably more than I would have had I stuck with my Pentax K-5. You may have a similar experience - or not....

 

[jeffa4444]

I have a Canon 550d, 7d and the 6d. The 7d is brilliant for sport & wildlife particularly in South Africa but if you want great detailed landscape photographs the 6d is fantastic value for money I simply could not justify a 5dMKIII for hobbie usage.
All the negative comments about the 11 AF points on the 6d in practice Ive never had an issue with and last week the centre cross point only worked great for taking photos of moving elephants at ADDO Elephant Park as it works fast. Low light this camera is amazing also.

 

[Sella174]

What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

 

[verysimplejason]

I've used the a Yashica SLR film camera before getting a 500D then after 3 years, went for a 6D. I won't go back to APS-C again after that. The shots I get from an FF and an APS-C is too different. Aside from that, high ISO capability for an FF is too amazing compared to APS-C. For events, an FF is really a joy to have.

 

[tiger82]

I've used the a Yashica SLR film camera before getting a 500D then after 3 years, went for a 6D. I won't go back to APS-C again after that. The shots I get from an FF and an APS-C is too different. Aside from that, high ISO capability for an FF is too amazing compared to APS-C. For events, an FF is really a joy to have.

You are comparing a current camera with 3+ year old technology. The ISO capability has no connection to full frame or APS-C, it's a function of sensor age. The 70D would have given you as big a bump in ISO capability at nearly half the price and allow you to continue using your APS-C lenses. I could compare a 5D classic with a 7D and conclude that APs-C is superior in many ways.

 

[verysimplejason]

I've used the a Yashica SLR film camera before getting a 500D then after 3 years, went for a 6D. I won't go back to APS-C again after that. The shots I get from an FF and an APS-C is too different. Aside from that, high ISO capability for an FF is too amazing compared to APS-C. For events, an FF is really a joy to have.

You are comparing a current camera with 3+ year old technology. The ISO capability has no connection to full frame or APS-C, it's a function of sensor age. The 70D would have given you as big a bump in ISO capability at nearly half the price and allow you to continue using your APS-C lenses. I could compare a 5D classic with a 7D and conclude that APs-C is superior in many ways.

Hmmm... 70D against 500D? If you are talking of RAW, I'd say there's not much improvement in terms of ISO performance. Comparing 5D with 7D is just comparing apples with oranges. 5D will beat 7D anytime if the target isn't moving. 7D will just win every time though if the target is moving due to superior AF. Have you really tried using a FF camera in low light and compared it next to an APS-C?

 

[jdramirez]

What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

What's funny is that while I'm on the other side of the fence than you are... that's is practically what I did. I hate the 18-55 and the 75-300 so much that I wound up using only the 50mm f/1.8... though I did it negligently... which is to say that I knew I liked the images so much more with the 50mm that I just shooting away without knowing the technical aspect of what I was doing... So there's that.

 

[Loswr]

The ISO capability has no connection to full frame or APS-C, it's a function of sensor age. The 70D would have given you as big a bump in ISO capability at nearly half the price and allow you to continue using your APS-C lenses. I could compare a 5D classic with a 7D and conclude that APs-C is superior in many ways.

Sorry, no. The maximum ISO setting available tracks with sensor age (loosely), but having a setting available doesn't mean it produces usable images. 'High ISO capability' depends on sensor size. The 7D is a better camera than the 5D in many ways...but at the same ISO setting, the 5D has less image noise despite being a much older sensor.

The 70D offers less than 1/2 stop improvement over the 500D, and the 5D is about 1/2-stop better than the 70D. A current FF (6D, 5DIII) is over a stop better than the 70D.