Full Frame SLRs...why or why not?

kundalini · Jul 9, 2009

Would BadAss have been better description? :lol:

tsaraleksi · Jul 9, 2009

I think it's fair to say that if you don't know why you would need or want it, then you won't need or want it! It's only when you start bumping up against the limitations of a given format or camera that you should start looking at changing what you're using.

Big · Jul 9, 2009

dxqcanada said:
... who actually labelled these camera's as "Professional" anyway ?

I took a look at Canon and Nikon's website ... they do not use the word "Pro" or "Professional" in any camera model name.

If I could remember who, I'd love to tell you. I think it was on TPF though.

Big · Jul 9, 2009

I think it's fair to say I finally understand now. I am looking forward to getting a DSLR no matter if it's crop or not. My camera now has only 6x optical zoom and 4x digital which I know is useless. I bought a 3x teleconverter which absolutely sucks. To me, there is a major difference in these 2 images. Guess which one is mine...

I just shake my head in shame when I see shots come out like that that I've done. It definitely lowers my photography self esteem.
I build picture frames out of tree branches and I hope one day to be able to make a sale on some of my work but there is no way I can do that with quality like that while using that teleconverter I have. There's just no substitute for good glass or a good camera.

tsaraleksi · Jul 9, 2009

Bingo. You now know what I mean. You have found something you don't like about your camera, and an SLR, crop or not, will help you achieve what you're looking for. In fact, if you're looking to do bird photography, the greater pixel density of a 1.6x crop sensor will make life easier, and the money that you save can go towards a telephoto lens, because in order to get an image like you have demonstrated, you'll need to spend on a good long lens, at least 200mm long. If you are really serious about it, look at something like a Canon EF 400/5.6L -- it's a favorite lens with birders because it will get you a great deal of reach, is fairly lightweight, and is pretty inexpensive as far as super-telephotos go. (the 400/5.6 is around $1k, the 400/2.8 is around $7k, to give you an idea. )

Big · Jul 9, 2009

tsaraleksi said:
Bingo. You now know what I mean. You have found something you don't like about your camera, and an SLR, crop or not, will help you achieve what you're looking for. In fact, if you're looking to do bird photography, the greater pixel density of a 1.6x crop sensor will make life easier, and the money that you save can go towards a telephoto lens, because in order to get an image like you have demonstrated, you'll need to spend on a good long lens, at least 200mm long. If you are really serious about it, look at something like a Canon EF 400/5.6L -- it's a favorite lens with birders because it will get you a great deal of reach, is fairly lightweight, and is pretty inexpensive as far as super-telephotos go. (the 400/5.6 is around $1k, the 400/2.8 is around $7k, to give you an idea. )

I like wildlife in general. Actually the biggest reason I was looking at the 50D vs the 5D Mark II was the faster fps which would be a huge advantage for birds or fast moving subjects like deer. When I get settled with a DSLR and some basic but somewhat decent lenses, I would love to look into getting an EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM which is somewhere around $1600 from Canon anyway. The wonderful thing about not having a telephoto lens is that when at my camp in Maine, the moose are very photogetic and allow you to take close up shots of them, sometimes from 20 feet away (which is very exciting!)

FrankLamont · Jul 9, 2009

You said it yourself in the thread title... 'why not'?

musicaleCA · Jul 10, 2009

Indeed. For birdies, you're liable to actually want that 1.6x crop factor. That extra reach makes a huge difference. That 400mm lens is going to have a FoV equivalent to 640mm on a crop camera; that's a whole bunch of distance. You'll spend less on glass, and you won't have to lug around such heavy glass too. It's practically a win-win. (I know I mention Scott Bourne wayyyyy too much, but he's a wildlife photog, and has mentioned that he puts a crop body on his lenses sometimes to get more reach out of them; hell, the guy has an 800mm lens—imagine that baby with a 1.5x crop factor! O.O )

Oh, and with a super-tele on a crop, you'll be able to take a picture of the moose's retina! What fun! :-D

Big · Jul 10, 2009

musicaleCA said:
Indeed. For birdies, you're liable to actually want that 1.6x crop factor. That extra reach makes a huge difference. That 400mm lens is going to have a FoV equivalent to 640mm on a crop camera; that's a whole bunch of distance. You'll spend less on glass, and you won't have to lug around such heavy glass too. It's practically a win-win. (I know I mention Scott Bourne wayyyyy too much, but he's a wildlife photog, and has mentioned that he puts a crop body on his lenses sometimes to get more reach out of them; hell, the guy has an 800mm lensimagine that baby with a 1.5x crop factor! O.O )

Oh, and with a super-tele on a crop, you'll be able to take a picture of the moose's retina! What fun! :-D

Thank you so much!! That cleared up a whole lot for me. Plus with the weather sealing the 50D has, it's a plus for outdoor photography.

FrankLamont · Jul 10, 2009

...er.... it's only water sealed on battery and memory card compartments.

The 5D (MK I & II) doesn't have weather sealing, either.

Big · Jul 10, 2009

FriedChicken said:
...er.... it's only water sealed on battery and memory card compartments.

The 5D (MK I & II) doesn't have weather sealing, either.

Hmm, I'll have to look more into it I guess. Thanks for the info. I don't like to use any camera in the rain or snow anyway...I was actually looking at this for bad weather. I guess it gets pretty good reviews.

Big · Jul 17, 2009

dxqcanada said:
... who actually labelled these camera's as "Professional" anyway ?

I took a look at Canon and Nikon's website ... they do not use the word "Pro" or "Professional" in any camera model name.

Hey! I found it! http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...-reviews/142483-shall-i-get-canon-50d-5d.html
It is said in the first post that the 5D was a professional camera and the 50D was only semi-professional. I had the link saved in my favorites from way back for reference. Probably not the best source to use as far as basing "pro" or "not pro".