The FF question- tell me your story

[Markw]

Well, if you buy a D800, you'll kind of never have to question. It's DX crop mode is still 15MP. (it's a pain to have to frame in the little box, but it also has a bigger viewfinder than DX cameras)

Mark

 

[TCampbell]

Part of the difference is because full-frame cameras are only available in the pro range... there's no entry-level full-frame body. So anyone who used to use an entry body and then switched to a full-frame body would think there's a HUGE difference ... but contributing to that is more than just the crop factor difference. Odds are that the resolution is better, ISO performance is better, noise is lower, etc..

If you're switching from a higher-end body (pro-sumer or pro) crop-frame to a full frame than mostly you'll just notice the difference in framing... e.g. a 24-70mm lens doesn't really seem wide at all on a crop-frame body (it's just barely wide), but is quite noticeably wide on a full-frame body.

With the change in angle of view for a given focal length, there's also an indirect change to DoF.

 

[kric2schaam626]

If you're switching from a higher-end body (pro-sumer or pro) crop-frame to a full frame than mostly you'll just notice the difference in framing... e.g. a 24-70mm lens doesn't really seem wide at all on a crop-frame body (it's just barely wide), but is quite noticeably wide on a full-frame body.

Glad you said so because I've had people ask what my widest lens is, being the 24-70mm, their reply is, "that's good for wide angle" and then there's me with said lens attached to my D80 going, "huh?"

 

[Buckster]

I started with 35mm film, so I shot "full frame" for 30 years.

When I went digital, I started with crop sensor cameras, and missed my full frame and wanted to get back to it, which I eventually did.

I also branched off to finally dabble in medium format film, which is something I always wanted to do. That's even more fun when it comes to size and the detail and depth that's possible with that larger medium. I'd love to be able to afford medium format digital someday.

Cliche as it sounds, bigger is generally better from my POV.

That said, I still use all the sizes from crops to full to MF for different purposes. Sometimes the crop sensor is the right choice.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

If you get paid for a job, you need to provide the best IQ you can possibly produce...for weddings and birth now would be the D800 with the 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 2.8 or/and fast primes

Not true. I saw a wedding photographer a few months ago shooting on two D2x's and did beautiful work. I shoot my weddings on 35mm and 645 film, they look beautiful, and to most people those are inferior mediums to a D800.


It's more like "If you get paid for a job, you need to provide photos that communicate your style and vision..doesn't matter what you shoot them with".

 

[o hey tyler]

If you get paid for a job, you need to provide the best IQ you can possibly produce...you'll get the investment back from the money you gain after working a few gigs, the 'ideal' (without selling your house), for weddings and birth now would be the D800 with the 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 2.8 or/and fast primes...its almost as good as having a hasslblad (with quality lenses of course) for 3k$..

Good thing this is just your opinion. Also, 35mm and medium format are quite different. I would not say that shooting with a D800 is "almost as good as having a hasselblad.

I will never be shooting a wedding with a D800. That doesn't mean I am "compromising on quality."

 

[Solarflare]

Uh-hu.

There is always an even better, larger image format.

You have APS-C, you go full frame. You have full frame, you go middle format. You have middle format, you go 4x5".

Even 4x5" isnt the largest. Though probably the biggest you still can carry around in a backpack. And I kind of wonder if there will ever be a digital 4x5" camera. Probably there will be, in 10 years or so.

Either way, I'm fine with 1.5 crop factor. My camera is already twice as heavy and three times as big as my last one. The heavier it gets, the more unlikely I am to use it.

 

[HallieD]

Until I sold my photography business I had both DX (D300 - x2), and FX (D3 - x2) camera bodies. (I also had medium and large format cameras for commercial work)

Each has it's pluses and minuses. I had the DX bodies for the crop factor, and the FX bodies for the resolution.

Your task is to list the pluses and minuses that apply to you, and then decide which format works best for you.

So, I don't see it as a have either/or, but as have both.

I would venture you could benefit from learning how to do photographic lighting rather than relying on high ISO, because then you have a lot more control and creative latitude.

Thanks for the perspective. See, the times I need the better ISO- is when lighting isn't available, space is limited, or bringing lighting would not be appropriate- like during a birth (homebirth or birth centers primarily) Its ofetn very dark, and while I CAN bounce flash, it really would be amazing to have a camera with more range to really capture the mood better. (kind hard to describe I guess lol) Hospital settings offer plenty of light, and with the exception of some wedding receptions, I generally either have enough light, or can bring enough light with me! Ive been using a D90 for the past year. And its been a great camera. Don't get me wrong! It has been great for most settings Ive been in. I just happen to have found myself with the finaical means to make an upgrade right now that may not otherwise be possible. To "dream gear" so to speak. i just really wanted some practical reasons to upgrade, vs "oh my work got better" because to me, that just isn't answering the question. Thanks guys!!

My local photo store has been getting D800s in every few weeks. So I think I will just make that jump, upgrade some glass as well.

 

[Alex_B]

Well, simple story here: with film I never went smaller than FF ... then I tried some smaller than FF sensor cameras and was very disappointed by the possibilities that would give in terms of DOF and dynamic range. At least with given lenses.

FF seemed so much more natural.

Also I would not want to miss the FF size in the viewfinder.

Hence when I ventured from film into digital, I did this full frame and I never did regret as sub-FF seemed painful for me personally.