How to get to full frame without breaking the bank

Peeb · Jul 21, 2015

you guys crack me up! No conspiracy here- loved ones keep giving me Canon cameras, and I keep purchasing Nikons

No hate for Canon, just kind of like the Nikons. At one point, Paul Simon told me they were good

Derrel · Jul 21, 2015

Peeb said:
you guys crack me up! No conspiracy here- loved ones keep giving me Canon cameras, and I keep purchasing Nikons

No hate for Canon, just kind of like the Nikons. At one point, Paul Simon told me they were good

Yes, indeed, Canon always has made some fine give-away type cameras! over the decades, all of the major camera makers offered some pretty nifty cameras. At one time, Polaroid cameras and film sold insanely well, according to a "state of the industry" article I read last year, reprinted from the late 1960's era. I was shocked by how many Polaroid cameras the company sold at one point.

The Nikon FG-20 was a good seller for Nikon. The Canon Rebel film cameras were very popular and good sellers when I worked in camera sales some 25+ years ago, and last year I picked up a Rebel XT film camera and Sigma 70-200mm AF zoom for $19.95; the little Rebel XT was actually a wonderfully-designed camera in my opinion, with really simple controls and a great size for carrying, good ergonomics, simple to use, and priced great. I recall Paul SImon 's song Kodachrome very well! So sad that the film had to disappear forever--I shot Kodachrome 64 or 64 Professional almost exclusively for most of my color slide film use in the early-to-mid 1980's period, although in 4x5 sheet film I burned a good deal of Ektachrome 100 Professional.

As to moving from APS-C to FF in d-slr: I am all for that for many people. I made the change myself after six years of APS-C, and I really have enjoyed going BACK TO what I had learned on and shot for 20 years...I prefer the bigger viewfinder image and the lens/shooting situation relationships the FF has to my own experience with how a lens is expected to be used.

chuasam · Jul 21, 2015

Derrel said:
chuasam said:

Curious - you keep switching between Canon and Nikon

Click to expand...

Facile comment. Utterly so. Those are the two biggest-selling brands, and have been since, oh, 1974. How did you miss the Kodak,Polaroid, Yashica models? The guy is old enough to be your grandfather, and he happened to buy TOP-selling models each time he was in the market for a new camera, over an over FOUR-DECADE time span!

OMG--a horrible thought just hit me--he might also have alternated between Coke and Pepsi during that time frame as well!! He might have alternated between Charmin and Angel Soft toilet paper too! And, OMG--what if he also alternately bought BUTTER in the 1970s and then MARGARINE in the 1980's when everybody said butter was horrible for one's health--and then went back to butter in the 1990's, after margarine and partially hydrogenated oils were determined to be bad for one's health!

;-)

He's only 12 years older than I am.
Makes no sense to keep switching between brands because you keep having to rebuild a lens system.
Constantly switching between systems is the sign of someone chasing something and not getting it.

Peeb · Jul 21, 2015

chuasam said:
He's only 12 years older than I am.
Makes no sense to keep switching between brands because you keep having to rebuild a lens system.
Constantly switching between systems is the sign of someone chasing something and not getting it.

Look, friend:

if you want to make up scenarios as to how/why I'm not a great photographer, let me make this easy for you: I am not a great photographer. I've lacked a consistent 'brand' of camera over the decades because I have neither the focus (pardon the pun) or commitment to have developed this over time.

I just have fun capturing memories and talking about photo gear.

EDITED: to remove snarkiness on my part. Sorry.

Peeb · Jul 21, 2015

BTW, I totally agree with Chuasam that it makes no sense to switch back and forth due to the loss of use of any inventory of lenses you've built up. He's absolutely right about that. On the other hand, when I move to FF, I am losing the ability to use the canon EF-S lenses, so Canon made that switch a little easier.

chuasam · Jul 21, 2015

What I'm trying to say is worry less about gear and just take photos.
For what it's worth, the industry is slowly moving away from full frame and moving towards mirror less.

I have a full frame camera when I doing paid stuff but when I'm on vacation, or "off duty" I actually use a micro4/3rds camera.

astroNikon · Jul 22, 2015

Yeah, you can move to Full Frame Mirrorless at some point in the future

Instead of switching brands, you can switch technologies

Peeb · Jul 22, 2015

astroNikon said:
Yeah, you can move to Full Frame Mirrorless at some point in the future

Instead of switching brands, you can switch technologies

I agree with Chuasam to a point. I borrowed a friends D3x with Nikkor zoom- what a ton that thing weighs! I dreaded carrying it around. At some point, I would love to have EITHER

A) A full frame camera PLUS a mirrorless camera OR
B) what you said- full frame mirrorless.

Tech keeps getting better!

Derrel · Jul 22, 2015

chuasam said:
Makes no sense to keep switching between brands because you keep having to rebuild a lens system.
Constantly switching between systems is the sign of someone chasing something and not getting it.

Quite the theory you're advancing. Consider the following information, based on my forty years' worth of experience in cameras/photo: First off, look at the time intervals:

Nikon FG20 (1980s)
Canon EOS Rebel Film Camera (2000)
Nikon D40 (2001)
Canon T3i (2014)

Four cameras over the 1984-2014 time span? Two Nikons and two Canons? That's four cameras over about a thirty year time frame! Wow!

You seem to be confused about the "lens system" that regular shooters "build"....it's often one zoom, then a second one, both cheapies.

I actually understand the FG-20, Rebel, D40, T3i progression over a thirty-year time span.

astroNikon · Jul 22, 2015

Myself, I used to swap between Kodak and FujiFilm disposable cameras all the time!! before a Nikon d70, then more recently a d7000 then d600.

Derrel · Jul 22, 2015

A super low-budget setup with the Canon 5D classic and mixed-brand arrangement of manual focus, adapted lenses. From lower left: $12 yard sale Super Lentar 35mm f/2.8 m42 threadmount with A/M on-lens stop-down controller; Vivitar 55mm f/2.8 1:1 macro in m42; Canon 4D classic with Asahi 55mm f/2 Super-Takumar in m42; Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 Ai-S; Tall, back left is Asahi Super-Takumar 135mm f/3.5 in m42, and back far right is Asahai SUper Takumar 200mm f/4 m42; Olympus $28mm f/2.8.

The Vivitar Series1 macro lens has a hugely extending, precision, silky mechanical helicoid focusing system and wonderful markings!

chuasam · Jul 22, 2015

Derrel said:
chuasam said:

Makes no sense to keep switching between brands because you keep having to rebuild a lens system.
Constantly switching between systems is the sign of someone chasing something and not getting it.

Click to expand...

Quite the theory you're advancing. Consider the following information, based on my forty years' worth of experience in cameras/photo: First off, look at the time intervals:

Nikon FG20 (1980s)
Canon EOS Rebel Film Camera (2000)
Nikon D40 (2001)
Canon T3i (2014)

Four cameras over the 1984-2014 time span? Two Nikons and two Canons? That's four cameras over about a thirty year time frame! Wow!

You seem to be confused about the "lens system" that regular shooters "build"....it's often one zoom, then a second one, both cheapies.

I actually understand the FG-20, Rebel, D40, T3i progression over a thirty-year time span.

Tell me more about the D40 from 2001

Peeb · Jul 22, 2015

I can speak to the D40. Still have it, and it never sees the light of day. I think it was actually 2006 instead of 2001.

The 18-55 kit lens (at least on mine) was not very sharp, and it's only 6.1 MP. Also, no internal focusing motor, so it doesn't play nice with other Nikons.

Not a fan, personally.

The_Traveler · Jul 23, 2015

A few years ago, I was shooting a D200 with a 18-200 and a 50 1.8 for my only lenses - and I wasn't able to get the quality that I wanted.
My children got together and bought me a D700, 24-70, 70-200 and a 50 1.4 and I was in heaven.
But I couldn't disentangle what part of the improvement was due to the fine lenses and what was due to a much better sensor.

With the newer camera bodies and sensors - even in crop frame - switching to FF may not give you the boost in quality that you are expecting.
If there is a financial component, the argument for upgrading both body and lenses vs just upgrading lenses and using lower cost crop frame bodies might be even harder to make.

(If this has been said before, pardon me. When there are 5 or 6 pages of replies there are usually people grinding their own axes and I don't read them)