Full Frame or Not???

Have your say on issues related to using a DSLR camera.

Moderator: Moderators

Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.

Full Frame or Not???

Postby leek on Wed Oct 26, 2005 1:37 pm

Here's an article discussing the pros / cons of full-frame sensors in digital cameras...

An interesting read...
Cheers, John
Leek@Flickr | Leek@RedBubble | Leek@DeviantArt

D700; D200; Tokina 12-24; Nikkor 50mm f1.4,18-70mm,85mm f1.8, 105mm,80-400VR, SB-800s; G1227LVL; RRS BH-55; Feisol 1401
User avatar
leek
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3135
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 4:46 pm
Location: Lane Cove, Sydney

Postby Oneputt on Wed Oct 26, 2005 1:40 pm

Personally I do not understand how some people are so fixated on full frame. Unless you are switching back and forth between digital and film surely it would not be a major issue. :?
Last edited by Oneputt on Wed Oct 26, 2005 1:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The good thing about meditation is that it makes doing nothing respectable"

D3 - http://www.oneputtphotographics.com
User avatar
Oneputt
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3174
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 3:58 pm
Location: Stuck in traffic Maroochydore.

Postby Michael on Wed Oct 26, 2005 1:45 pm

Personally I prefer the 1.5 crop I get so far with my sensor, and with the crop you are less likely to get vignetting when you dont want it.

The only advantage of full frame i can really see as being usefull is that the quality of the image at high ISO speeds, I heard that the new sensor boasts really good noise levels.

Though that alone isn't enough to make me get all wet over a silly camera and want to sell all my gear in order to get my hands on one body and a shitty lens.

which was what some of the canon fanboys on dpreview were talking about doing </rant>
Last edited by Michael on Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Are we there yet?
User avatar
Michael
Senior Member
 
Posts: 685
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 8:48 pm
Location: Toowoomba QLD

Postby gstark on Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:09 pm

Oneputt wrote:Personally I do not understand how some people are so fixated on full frame. Unless you are switching back and forth between digital and film surely it would not be a major issue. :?


That article does explain it very well - your lenses behave as they're intended to.

Grab a full frame SLR and pop a 15mm onto it; look through the viewfinder. You caannot match w=that with any of the cropped formats.
g.
Gary Stark
Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
User avatar
gstark
Site Admin
 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Bondi, NSW

Postby Oneputt on Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:14 pm

Gary I know that, however my point is that if you are shooting only digital surely you simply make allowances?
"The good thing about meditation is that it makes doing nothing respectable"

D3 - http://www.oneputtphotographics.com
User avatar
Oneputt
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3174
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 3:58 pm
Location: Stuck in traffic Maroochydore.

Postby gstark on Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:21 pm

My point is one of "why should you?"

:)
g.
Gary Stark
Nikon, Canon, Bronica .... stuff
The people who want English to be the official language of the United States are uncomfortable with their leaders being fluent in it - US Pres. Bartlet
User avatar
gstark
Site Admin
 
Posts: 22918
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Bondi, NSW

Postby Oneputt on Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:23 pm

Well now that is another argument altogether :wink: :lol: Me I choose not to get in a lather over the issue.
"The good thing about meditation is that it makes doing nothing respectable"

D3 - http://www.oneputtphotographics.com
User avatar
Oneputt
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3174
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 3:58 pm
Location: Stuck in traffic Maroochydore.

Postby DaveB on Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:52 pm

Both my current DSLRs are 1.6x units. In full-frame terms the field of view I get with my current lenses ranges from 27mm - 900mm, and that's been fine for me. And I feel the DOF I can get is fine for my current work. I won't be surprised if early next year I add a 5D to my bag (possibly prior to Africa) which will widen my reach to 17mm with the same lenses (and add a few more pixels). But I don't feel like I'm particularly missing out in the meantime.

The 5D has a lower pixel-density than the 20D (or even the 10D) in the centre of the lens' image circle, but a higher density at the edges (ie. there are actually pixels there!) so it will introduce different challenges for the way I use my current glass. But at least I can explore this without having to get a whole set of new equipment!
It's good to see continued development and the ability to get even more pixels out of an image (which at this level mainly just gives more flexibility in cropping images in PP) but I'm not sure if it's a "paradigm shift" as such...
User avatar
DaveB
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1850
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 10:57 pm
Location: Box Hill, Vic

Postby sejanus on Wed Oct 26, 2005 4:56 pm

guys once you are used to FF it is really annoying going back to 1.5 or 1.6 crop.

It is a massive advantage for getting the best out of your lenses.

i.e. take your 85mm lens (either canon 1.2 or nikon 1.4). Both lenses have stunning bokeh but on the cropped cameras you have to stand well back, thus you lose your closeup perspective of the main object.

On the FF you can get up and still have a realy nice close perspective, but still with plenty of room to have a nice background area that is blurred to bring out the object as the central object. This is kinda hard to explain but believe me it's very nice to have.

Perhaps a better example might be a macro lens - the nikon 60mm is a heck of a lot better on FF than on 1.5x crop - on the FF you get up super close and can fit heaps of stuff in whilst still keeping that great closeup view.

hope this makes sense.
sejanus
Member
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 9:30 pm
Location: Sutherland Shire

Postby huynhie on Wed Oct 26, 2005 6:13 pm

Gavin,

do you experience any sort of vignetting or softness from your Nikon lenses on a full frame sensor? Or does it really depend on the lense itself ie - you mainly stick to primes
User avatar
huynhie
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1476
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 12:11 pm
Location: Sydney

Postby sejanus on Wed Oct 26, 2005 7:07 pm

When I used a kodak slr/n I never saw any vignetting although this may depend on the subjects you typically shoot - i.e. although I owned a 17-35/2.8 I never really used it very wide.
sejanus
Member
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2005 9:30 pm
Location: Sutherland Shire

Postby Dug on Thu Oct 27, 2005 9:11 pm

full frame I really missed having my 17mm tokina wide angle lens and PL filter on digital.

Now I have the 10 20mm sigma and I am happy again my only complaint about smaller digital sensors was the lack of a realistic ultra wide lens.
User avatar
Dug
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1082
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 7:58 pm
Location: maroochydore Q


Return to General Discussion