How much better is Full-Frame really?

[Neil S.]

I have never owned a full-frame DSLR, and wanted to know how much of a difference there is vs. crop bodies.

The benefits as I understand it are improved Iso performance, and generally higher resolution.

Are there any others?

If I can afford it, the 5D mk III sounds like it would be a good upgrade for me when it comes out.

I don't really shoot sports/action much by the way.

 

[oldmacman]

I have never owned a full-frame DSLR, and wanted to know how much of a difference there is vs. crop bodies.

The benefits as I understand it are improved Iso performance, and generally higher resolution.

Are there any others?

If I can afford it, the 5D mk III sounds like it would be a good upgrade for me when it comes out.

I don't really shoot sports/action much by the way.

I can honestly say that the step from my 5D mk I to the mk II was the most dramatic difference in an upgrade I have ever made. I do like having a crop body for sports or birding. I find you get better results with the 1.6x FOV on a camera like the 50D vs cropping to the same level on the FF. I take more landscape shots anyway, so I like being able to eke out every last pixel in my shots. Don't be fooled by what you see on screen. The level of detail in a print far exceeds what shows up on your computer. I love when I send a print out for processing and am "wowed" by the sharpness and clarity of the shot. I recently had a 24x36 made and you can get right up to it and not pick up any noise.

You can realistically use shots with ISO set as high as 3200. I have had decent shots at 6400 with some PP.

 

[freeze3kgt]

I have a d90 and a d700 and the full frame is just amazing in low lights compared to the d90, when you have good lighting they both have fantastic pictures but the low light capability of the full frames compared to the crop was the biggest selling point for me

 

[Robin Usagani]

Do it Neil San!!! When you do.. you can send the 10-20mm my way because you cant use it no more

 

[Neil S.]

I can honestly say that the step from my 5D mk I to the mk II was the most dramatic difference in an upgrade I have ever made. I do like having a crop body for sports or birding. I find you get better results with the 1.6x FOV on a camera like the 50D vs cropping to the same level on the FF. I take more landscape shots anyway, so I like being able to eke out every last pixel in my shots. Don't be fooled by what you see on screen. The level of detail in a print far exceeds what shows up on your computer. I love when I send a print out for processing and am "wowed" by the sharpness and clarity of the shot. I recently had a 24x36 made and you can get right up to it and not pick up any noise.

You can realistically use shots with ISO set as high as 3200. I have had decent shots at 6400 with some PP.

Thanks for your input. I really appreciate it. :thumbup:

Ya this is what I was thinking too.

I wouldnt even consider it until the 5D mk III comes out though.

 

[Neil S.]

Do it Neil San!!! When you do.. you can send the 10-20mm my way because you cant use it no more

LOL Schewtty....

If you edit enough of my photos, I may just do that someday.

Wouldnt wou rather have the 17-55 2.8 though? I know I would.

 

[shaunly]

The ISO only is worth it! To be able to shoot on any lighting and not have to worry is a blessing. Coming a d90 to a d700 my images just pop more now. If you don't need the speed then the 5d is perfect for you. I'd say make the switchnow cause, honestly what more can you ask from the 5dmk2? It already has great resolution and iso level plus the best DSLR video (if your into that).

 

[Neil S.]

I have a d90 and a d700 and the full frame is just amazing in low lights compared to the d90, when you have good lighting they both have fantastic pictures but the low light capability of the full frames compared to the crop was the biggest selling point for me

Ya I hear that the lower noise is quite obvious, this is a pretty important thing to me because I love low light shots. :thumbup:

 

[Neil S.]

The ISO only is worth it! To be able to shoot on any lighting and not have to worry is a blessing. Coming a d90 to a d700 my images just pop more now. If you don't need the speed then the 5d is perfect for you. I'd say make the switchnow cause, honestly what more can you ask from the 5dmk2? It already has great resolution and iso level plus the best DSLR video (if your into that).

I want to wait for the 5D mk III though, because I just bought my 7D, and I am a bit short on money atm.

I am really hoping Canon will really WOW me with some kind of massive improvement to their metering system for it.

I bet that the video on the mk III will be much better too.

 

[Robin Usagani]

the 17-55 you will use that instead for the full frame for wide angle. It is not an EF-S lens is it? Yes.. I will be your photo editor whore if you send it to me

 

[Neil S.]

the 17-55 you will use that instead for the full frame for wide angle. It is not an EF-S lens is it? Yes.. I will be your photo editor whore if you send it to me

The 17-55 is an EF-S ya.

Look it up, its an interesting lens. In image quality it is close to L glass standards, the build quality isnt though. It has UD elements, which are very uncommon for non L glass I believe.

No lol, you got to edit a lot 1st and then Ill send it to you. Got to earn it. :mrgreen:

 

[Robin Usagani]

Ok.. 10-20mm AND 17-55mm it is . You want six pack on your abs? You want more hair? bigger guns? Just tell me

 

[Big Mike]

Another perk of full frame is the shallow DOF. Given the same distance and focal length, you get less DOF with a larger sensor. This can also be seen in all the P&S digi-cams with tiny sensors, their DOF is usually very deep.

 

[Neil S.]

Another perk of full frame is the shallow DOF. Given the same distance and focal length, you get less DOF with a larger sensor. This can also be seen in all the P&S digi-cams with tiny sensors, their DOF is usually very deep.

Cool thanks Mike. :thumbup:

I did not know this.

I really want one, but it is going to have to wait for the time being.

Does anyone know when the 5D mk III is coming out by any chance?

 

[Derrel]

Lenses once again perform and can be used as "what they have engraved on the barrrel"...in other words, a 28 to 70mm on full frame acts like, and actually is, a wide-angle to short telephoto zoom and NOT a semi-normal to telephoto, incapable of being used at distances under 12 feet...

As Big Mike hinted at, FF brings shallower depth of field at each angle of view. FF also brings back normal,traditional camera to subject working distances...with an 85mm on FF, you can shoot a full-length,two persona bridal portrait from 20 feet using an 85mm lens. On a 1.6x Canon body, you will need to be about 34 feet away to get both people into the same height, due to the narrowing of the lens angle of view of the crop sensor. Using the same 85mm lens.