1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

"who needs full frame"

Discussion in 'General Equipment Chat & Advice' started by Learning, Feb 28, 2012.

  1. P_Stoddart

    P_Stoddart Well-Known Member

    Actually I think the same arguments were kicked around when 35mm camera started being used for fashion shooting.

    In that MF offers massive DOF control were as 35mm can itself at times be more limiting. I think it is one of the reasons for the drive for faster shutter speeds on 35mm cameras to help keep the f stop at a low number. But again you use ND as well.

    I cannot see in term of dSLR the size of the sensor making much difference in terms of weight. With something like the 5DMKII you can just crop back to give you a APS image.

    Example of this is the 7D (820g) against the D800 (900g).

    But looking at prices it would appear making FF sensors is a expensive business where as APS ones are much cheaper.

    So in that case it comes down to personal cost and choice.

    So I reckon if you can afford FF and you don't mind carry a dSLR you might as well get dSLR with FF on board. :)

    I'd like to see a FF sensor in a lightweight body with a EVF. I am hoping that Sony make the NEX9 like this.

    I reckon you could get the body weight right down to say 250g then with a long lens (400mm) the whole kit might go under 1KG. :)
  2. alanS

    alanS Well-Known Member

    Funny how this argument often seems to boil down purely to DoF.

    There's nothing to stop you getting shallower or deeper DoF from a smaller format than a larger one. A bit of judicious altering of zoom length, settings, position, framing and cropping can work (almost) magic assuming you've got enough resolution to pull it off. Check out those DoF tables beloved by some and I'm pretty sure that there'll be combinations of lens focal length, aperture and camera to subject distance that'll make one format look pretty much the same as another. But in reality they'll all be slightly or even very different pictures.

    If you like the look that one format gives it's easiest to achieve that look with that format. The smaller formats like full frame, APS-C and MFT are more practical and for many offer good enough options and quality. The images they produce will be pretty similar but IMVHO 50mm on FF, 30mm on APS-C and 25mm on MFT will all give images which are ever so slightly.... different and you'll see it if you're anal enough to take the "same" shot with two or three different set ups and then sit and study the results. I am that anal :)

    Anyway, size. There is a difference in the packages as a whole. There has to be as the bigger the format the larger the image circle and the larger and heavier the lens to provide it. Compare three easily available formats with similar lenses... FF+50mm, APS-C+30mm and MFT+25mm and what you'll see (ignoring the odd anomalous big fat heavy body and/or lens) is a gradual reduction in both size and weight.
  3. beejaybee

    beejaybee Marvin

    DoF & image noise ....

    FF with 50mm @f/8, APS-C with 35mm @ f/5.6 & 4/3 (cropped to 3:2 aspect ratio) with 25mm @ f/4, with the camera in the same position, pointed at the same target, will give pretty close to identical framing and depth of field. (I'm assuming that the sensors have pretty similar pixel count). Of course there will be differences in detail as no two sensors are the same - even if you take the same scene twice within a second using the same camera & touch none of the settings, the two frames will be different because of quantum, thermal and readout noise varying between the exposures.

    The point here is that frame size does have an impact on DoF. If you want more DoF, you are better off with a smaller format. If you want less, you are better off with a larger format. This is because it is difficult and expensive to source very fast lenses, and even if you do the optical quality at full aperture tends to be not as good as working in the "sweet spot" around f/5.6 - f/8.

    It's actually pretty marginal for normal & wide lenses. When you get to telephotos, the difference in size and weight (and cost!) becomes very significant indeed.

Share This Page