Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor

[Sabaki]

Hi everybody

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

I've never had the chance to shoot full frame so most of what I know is pure theory derived from reading reviews etc online.

With South Africa's economy in a bit of trouble, I can get a hardly used 5D mkii for a reasonable price so I'm considering taking that.

Just what can I expect in terms of image quality and noise performance? Is the IQ of a full frame substantially better than a crops? Will I be able to take relatively noise free images at say ISO 3200?

The reviews seem to indicate that the native system for L series glass is full frame. Does this mean that I will experience a dramatic improvement in IQ?

The more I read, it seems that crop bodies have a singular advantage over full frame and that is the increase in focal length.

Can you guys chip in and throw some opinions and facts my way please?

Thanks in advance everybody.

 

[Sella174]

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

What L-lenses do you own? Zooms? In my opinion, you will never get your photography anywhere with zooms. I suggest you try primes ... like the EF 35mm f/2 (non-IS version). Already own L-primes? Definitely go "full frame" then!

With South Africa's economy in a bit of trouble, I can get a hardly used 5D mkii for a reasonable price so I'm considering taking that.

Yeah, we're pretty much in it, aren't we? Anyway ... personally, I think people are asking way too much for their old 5D2's ... R12000 is pretty much the limit, in my opinion. I'd rather look for a "Student Promotion" on an EOS 6D camera. Oh, no, I just checked ... seems everybody raised their prices by about R2K ... wow!

The reviews seem to indicate that the native system for L series glass is full frame. Does this mean that I will experience a dramatic improvement in IQ?

You'll just see more of the lens.

The more I read, it seems that crop bodies have a singular advantage over full frame and that is the increase in focal length.

Myth. Doesn't happen.

 

[Sella174]

Oh, just saw your signature with your gear list ... Personally, I'd sell the EOS 500D, the EF-S 10-22mm and the EF 24-70mm ... and buy a new EOS 5D3. Why? Because you feel that the 500D is keeping you back; going "full-frame" will end the use of the EF-S 10-22; and the 24-70mm ... it's a good, jack-of-all-trades lens, but it isn't a lens that helps you define yourself in photography. Well, that's just my opinion.

 

[Sporgon]

Hi everybody

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

Might be worth checking out some of the images produced on crop sensors in places like 500px. Here's a link for starters:

http://500px.com/search?q=Canon+550D

FF is disproportionately expensive, but if you can afford it and if you get more pleasure from it, why not ?

 

[GaryJ]

I went from 450D- 7D-6D ,couldn't afford 5DIII , hardly pick up the 7D except for when using MP-E 65 , ff rules. BTW I started shooting pics in 1969.

 

[caruser]

My first and second DSLRs were also the 500D and 5D2, it was a great upgrade, build quality, handling, image quality ... everything except the AF (no, that's unfair, the 5D2's center point did really well in low light compared to the 500D) and frame rate. And yes, many lenses will behave better on full frame, although it depends on the lens and the criterion, for example vignetting is less of a problem with a crop sensor because you are not using the more-vignetted borders of the image circle.

The more I read, it seems that crop bodies have a singular advantage over full frame and that is the increase in focal length.

At the beginning it looks like an increase in focal length, but really you are just cutting away ("cropping") part of the image. The only advantage of crop sensors that is sometimes (!) relevant (except for price) is actually the higher pixel density.

 

[Hillsilly]

The 500D is a nice camera, but Canon's crop cameras do lag behind the FF cameras. You are probably making the right decision to change cameras and a 5Dii is a smart option for many. But some 1Ds and 1D models are in your price range and they have some positives, too.

But personally, it wasn't really until I got a FF camera that I realised how immaterial the whole APS-C vs FF debate is. I'm now using a little APS-C Fuji for much of my photography. It might be technically inferior to my Canon, but the difference isn't that big and it is better suited to what I do.

So the only real suggestion I have is to sit back, evaluate your photographic goals, work out where your 500D is deficient and then decide which camera is best suited for your needs.

 

[caruser]

The 500D is a nice camera, but Canon's crop cameras do lag behind the FF cameras. You are probably making the right decision to change cameras and a 5Dii is a smart option for many. But some 1Ds and 1D models are in your price range and they have some positives, too.

But personally, it wasn't really until I got a FF camera that I realised how immaterial the whole APS-C vs FF debate is. I'm now using a little APS-C Fuji for much of my photography. It might be technically inferior to my Canon, but the difference isn't that big and it is better suited to what I do.

So the only real suggestion I have is to sit back, evaluate your photographic goals, work out where your 500D is deficient and then decide which camera is best suited for your needs.

Even ignoring the image quality, I found just the AF-ON button, the custom-modes, shortest shutter speed, second wheel, top LCD, the view finder etc. a huge plus.

Of course you don't need to go full frame for all of these features, but an older 1-series body as you suggest would have them, too.

 

[aj1575]

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

Buying better gear won't make you a better photographer!!!
The technical IQ of your fotos will improve if you go FF, but it will not help you to improve your composition and lightning, it won't help you to find a creative angle, or to press the shutte just at the right moment. Technology has a habit to go into the way of creativity.

I just moved up the cameratree (no not to FF, just to a better APS-C). I bought a 70D and sold my 350D after more than 7 years. Did the 350 hold me back? No not really; there where situations where the 350 could not keep up with the circumstances (low light, fast moving objects); I missed some shots, but I knew why I missed them, and it was not about me, it was about the camera.
Fact is, you have to learn to live with limitations, even if you go for a 1DX there will be limitiation of what the system can do. I suggest that instead of spending a lot of money for a new FF body, you should spend the money on some books about photography, or you try to shot more with the system you already have and learn more about that.

By the way, is there a way to see some of your work?

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Consider FULL FRAME versus APS-C, both of the same generation technology and using the same lens, the image quality will be indistinguishable at ISO 100. Comparing APS-C at ISO 1600, will look like full frame ISO3200. In this sense one can expect an advantage of 5D mark II about 1 point better than 500D.

When comparing different technology generations, things do not work as well. If you compare the new 70D with 5D mark II using the same lens at ISO 100, then 70D has a slight edge in noise shadows, especially when you need to brighten the image in Photoshop. However, at high ISO 5D mark ii is still better. In terms of noise, 6D takes considerable advantage over 5D mark ii, and I think it is worth having the most current model.

To harness the potential of the camera's full frame sharpness is mandatory to use high quality lenses, and they are more expensive than their equivalent to APS- C. To replace its 10-22mm, the full frame equivalent is 16-35 F2.8, which is much more expensive, and although it is more luminous, 16-35L only have decent sharpness in the corners using F4 or more closed. Lose their 400mm range on full frame, and 600mm (natural replacement) costs a lot more expensive, and is much heavier.

 

[rs]

Sabaki, for a way to compare bodies, take a look at some of the comparisons here:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Comparisons/Canon-EOS-Rebel-T1i-500D-Digital-SLR-Camera.aspx

People can give you the maths and their own personal experiences, but this is an objective way of you seeing differences without having the two cameras in your hands.

Oh, just saw your signature with your gear list ... Personally, I'd sell the EOS 500D, the EF-S 10-22mm and the EF 24-70mm ...

I would personally do anything to keep hold of the 24-70 II. It's a simply fantastic lens that shines on FF.

 

[Sabaki]

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

What L-lenses do you own? Zooms? In my opinion, you will never get your photography anywhere with zooms. I suggest you try primes ... like the EF 35mm f/2 (non-IS version). Already own L-primes? Definitely go "full frame" then!

With South Africa's economy in a bit of trouble, I can get a hardly used 5D mkii for a reasonable price so I'm considering taking that.

Yeah, we're pretty much in it, aren't we? Anyway ... personally, I think people are asking way too much for their old 5D2's ... R12000 is pretty much the limit, in my opinion. I'd rather look for a "Student Promotion" on an EOS 6D camera. Oh, no, I just checked ... seems everybody raised their prices by about R2K ... wow!

The reviews seem to indicate that the native system for L series glass is full frame. Does this mean that I will experience a dramatic improvement in IQ?

You'll just see more of the lens.

The more I read, it seems that crop bodies have a singular advantage over full frame and that is the increase in focal length.

Myth. Doesn't happen.

Hey Sella Awesome to find a countryman on here!

My favourite photography genre is macro and I do a lot of it! Shooting with a MR-14 EX and extension tubes, I absolutely love the IQ of my subjects but equally hate the noise and banding in the shadow areas. Will full frame solve this issue?

Gotta tell you, even on a crop body, that 24-70 rocks! It's a long term keeper for me.

 

[Sabaki]

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

Buying better gear won't make you a better photographer!!!
The technical IQ of your fotos will improve if you go FF, but it will not help you to improve your composition and lightning, it won't help you to find a creative angle, or to press the shutte just at the right moment. Technology has a habit to go into the way of creativity.

I just moved up the cameratree (no not to FF, just to a better APS-C). I bought a 70D and sold my 350D after more than 7 years. Did the 350 hold me back? No not really; there where situations where the 350 could not keep up with the circumstances (low light, fast moving objects); I missed some shots, but I knew why I missed them, and it was not about me, it was about the camera.
Fact is, you have to learn to live with limitations, even if you go for a 1DX there will be limitiation of what the system can do. I suggest that instead of spending a lot of money for a new FF body, you should spend the money on some books about photography, or you try to shot more with the system you already have and learn more about that.

By the way, is there a way to see some of your work?

aj1575, I fully agree with you.

I'm at that phase of my photography where I can hit all the technically required aspects: sharpness, framing, exposure, composition but I have not yet transcended to that level of photography where I am taking compelling, arresting images that my photographic peers will appreciate.

Not being an artistic person, these are qualities I need to steadily unfurl in order to firstly comprehend then integrate in my shots.

Yet I do feel that a full frame is the next natural step for me to take. DxO (I know, I know. Not a fan either) scores my EF 100mm Macro L IS at 13 on the 500D but 25 on the 5D2. I'm trying to suss out if the images really experience such a push in IQ.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

For MACRO work that the OP does, the depth of field wider APS-C becomes an advantage. In addition, the LCD articulated on 70D can be very useful when photographing near the ground.

 

[jdramirez]

All I have are opinions. I upgraded from a 60D to a 5D mkiii... and I really really like/love the mkiii... but I also really really liked/loved my 60D. The 5D is better... and after selling the 60D... the mkiii only cost around $2000... but do I believe the mkiii is worth the money I spent... and here is my answer. Kinda.

The low light performance of the mkiii is truly impressive. I never pushed the 60D passed iso 2500... and even then, that is significantly more than most people are willing to push it... some people are 1600 people. With the mkiii, I try not to go passe 3200... but in a pinch... 6400 isn't a crime. The images clean up nicely with lightroom and the images are still really really good.

The added shots per second... nice... but not mandatory. The magnesium core... nice, but I don't drop my gear, so it is a bit of a non factor for me. I do miss my articulating screen, but that's a small complaint. I do like the double card slots... I'm not a crazed fanatic of the joystick, but it is nice to have.

In great light, I'm not sure that I can tell a crop sensor photo from a full frame, but in low light, definitely.

As for the depth of field, focal length issue... I don't miss the 1.6 conversion factor... and it is nice being able to get in closer with a subject with my 100mm L or my soon to arrive, 135L. As I get closer to my subject, the depth of field shrinks and the aspects of the bokeh can really come out. If I'm shooting outdoor sports, I throw on a 1.4 teleconverter.

I like my mkiii so much that I don't know that I will upgrade to an mkiv... but I also wasn't blown away by it so much. Would I make the jump again... yes...

 

[jdramirez]

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

What L-lenses do you own? Zooms? In my opinion, you will never get your photography anywhere with zooms. I suggest you try primes ... like the EF 35mm f/2 (non-IS version). Already own L-primes? Definitely go "full frame" then!

I have primes... primes are lovely... but there are plenty of exceptional zooms in the Canon lineup. I always break out my zooms when I'm not sure exactly how far my subject will be or the subject moves frequently... so yeah.

 

[Sella174]

My favourite photography genre is macro and I do a lot of it! Shooting with a MR-14 EX and extension tubes, I absolutely love the IQ of my subjects but equally hate the noise and banding in the shadow areas.

In this case, the EOS 70D is the obvious choice. Plus a new one will cost you less than a secondhand EOS 5D2.

 

[jdramirez]

My favourite photography genre is macro and I do a lot of it! Shooting with a MR-14 EX and extension tubes, I absolutely love the IQ of my subjects but equally hate the noise and banding in the shadow areas.

In this case, the EOS 70D is the obvious choice. Plus a new one will cost you less than a secondhand EOS 5D2.

Mind showing your math?

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

My favourite photography genre is macro and I do a lot of it! Shooting with a MR-14 EX and extension tubes, I absolutely love the IQ of my subjects but equally hate the noise and banding in the shadow areas.

In this case, the EOS 70D is the obvious choice. Plus a new one will cost you less than a secondhand EOS 5D2.

Mind showing your math?

In macro, often need to open F11 (on APS-C) to achieve much of the object within the depth of field. In full frame, need to use F16 or more closed to achieve the same depth of field, and this negates (in part) the advantage of full frame at high ISO. Moreover, DUAL PIXEL AF, combined with the 70D articulated LCD is great for macro.

 

[jdramirez]

My favourite photography genre is macro and I do a lot of it! Shooting with a MR-14 EX and extension tubes, I absolutely love the IQ of my subjects but equally hate the noise and banding in the shadow areas.

In this case, the EOS 70D is the obvious choice. Plus a new one will cost you less than a secondhand EOS 5D2.

Mind showing your math?

In macro, often need to open F11 (on APS-C) to achieve much of the object within the depth of field. In full frame, need to use F16 or more closed to achieve the same depth of field, and this negates (in part) the advantage of full frame at high ISO. Moreover, DUAL PIXEL AF, combined with the 70D articulated LCD is great for macro.

With the same composition and framing... yes... but at identical distances (and I'm not sure why this is) the depth of field for full frame is greater. It's all very confusing.