Does size really matter? Educate me on the real difference between sensor size.

[jcolman]

For those who make money with their cameras as opposed to people who shoot for a hobby.

I know that photojournalists don't necessarily need a full frame camera but what about you commercial shooters? How big a print can you go with say a Canon 40D vw a 5D?? How often do you wish you had a full frame camera if you don't own one now?

I'm on the fence between buying a 40D and 5D. My goal is to make money with the camera down the road.

 

[Helen B]

My choice of camera, and hence sensor size, was not made primarily on maximum possible print size. (Pixel dimensions affect my choice, however.) Sensor size matters to me mainly because I like wide-ish lenses and I do a lot of work in low light, so I want fast wide primes. That tends to favour larger sensors rather than smaller because of lens availability.

If you wanted fast long lenses, the preference could be for smaller sensors.

There's also a slight effect on depth of field. A preference for deep focus will be helped to some extent by a smaller sensor, and vice versa for shallow focus. As an experienced cinematographer you will already be well aware of that, however, so I won't elaborate.

Best,
Helen

 

[jcolman]

Thanks Helen,

Please expand a bit more on pixal dimension for me.

I'm also inclined to shoot on the wider side as well. And as a cinematographer, I love lower light levels....(it's much cooler! You wouldn't believe how hot it can get under a 2k!!)

 

[Helen B]

All I meant was that the number of megapixels does affect my choice. It's not a clear-cut thing, but 10 to 12 megapixels is about what I want, because I want the camera to be capable of perfect 10x15 prints without significant upsampling. It's not a guarantee of quality and as I mentioned, it's not clear-cut.

At the moment I use a Nikon D40x and a D3, as well as one or two film cameras. The D3 is a superb camera for low light work. In some ways digital cameras have changed the trite old saw that "it is the photographer not the camera". In some circumstances it really does depend on the camera allowing the photographer to achieve what they want.

I do believe how hot it can get under a 2k. Until I sold off most of my lighting equipment a few months ago, I had a few of them. The annoying loop dangling down in the top left of this photo is the cable tie of one of my 2k Arri Juniors. The camera isn't mine - it's a good old ACL. I used to have an NPR and a couple of Aatons.

Best,
Helen

 

[jcolman]

All I meant was that the number of megapixels does affect my choice. It's not a clear-cut thing, but 10 to 12 megapixels is about what I want, because I want the camera to be capable of perfect 10x15 prints without significant upsampling. It's not a guarantee of quality and as I mentioned, it's not clear-cut.

At the moment I use a Nikon D40x and a D3, as well as one or two film cameras. The D3 is a superb camera for low light work. In some ways digital cameras have changed the trite old saw that "it is the photographer not the camera". In some circumstances it really does depend on the camera allowing the photographer to achieve what they want.

I do believe how hot it can get under a 2k. Until I sold off most of my lighting equipment a few months ago, I had a few of them. The annoying loop dangling down in the top left of this photo is the cable tie of one of my 2k Arri Juniors. The camera isn't mine - it's a good old ACL. I used to have an NPR and a couple of Aatons.

Best,
Helen

:hail: Old school 16mm cameras! I loved the Aaton's huge viewfinder!!

Thanks Helen. I'm still on the fence trying to decide what camera will best serve me for the next 10 + years. My goals are to retire from video production in six years and get back into still work but I want to start bulding up a client base for freelance still work first.

 

[z.peletz]

I was also on the fence between the 40D and 5D and decided to go with the 40D for now and later on down the road get something like the 5D.

The reason I went this way was because the 40D has much newer technology than the 5D does. Canon should be replacing the 5D sometime in the not too distant future so I'm going to wait for that.

I would also prefer a full frame but I'd rather get the newer technology now (40D) and develop a lens collection and then get the 5D. That way you'll have the low light and wide angle benefits of the full frame AND the crop factor of the smaller frame which can help in telephoto shots.