I am deeply poisoned by full frame cameras...

[edutilos-]

You are right. At this stage my skills (compositional, lighting, and pp) are the limiting factors. Thanks... BTW, low lSO performance of CF and FF are after all different. You can check out some online reviews.

How different?

Online reviews can be biased - one has to process and think whether they make sense and internalise the points if you agree. How are they different? Saying it is different is very different from knowing why it is different. And frankly, until you are fully aware of the differences, I cannot say that you have made an informed decision.

 

[pinholecam]

APS-C has come a long way.

Here is the grain and Dynamic range capability of an APS-C camera.


Comparing Pentax K5 and 5DII
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alpi-costerni/5572987044/sizes/o/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alpi-costerni/5572985144/sizes/o/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alpi-costerni/5572392577/sizes/o/in/photostream/

 

[donut88]

Well... I guess I was just looking for reasons to upgrade. Not sure why I did that though.

Then u are just trying to justify yr desire.

Nothing is perfect. There will always be reasons or excuses to do something. But the big question is "is it necessary?"

Is it yr hand too itchy or is there a real necessary reason for u to upgrade?

U haven't even earn your first dollar from a real job after graduation and u are already thinking of spending.

 

[Reno]

How different?

Online reviews can be biased - one has to process and think whether they make sense and internalise the points if you agree. How are they different? Saying it is different is very different from knowing why it is different. And frankly, until you are fully aware of the differences, I cannot say that you have made an informed decision.

hmmmm..... This is hands on experience between D700 and D5100. The noise level on D5100 at ISO 400 is like the noise level on D700 at ISO 800 - 1600. Image on D700 is a lot sharper than D5100 with the same lens. But APS-C sensor is better if you are shooting birds or wildlife where the reach is needed.... else a FF is really good for almost all kinds of shoots. Well, people might argued that why not compare with D7000, D5100 and D7000 are using the same sensors right?

By the way, the settings on the camera are default, all photos compared are shoot in RAW Format and compare.

 

[Reno]

I was poisoned precisely by the low ISO performance of the FF camera...

wait till the latest FF camera to launch... then you can pick up cheap cheap older version FF at a steal at the BnS section...... lol......

 

[edutilos-]

hmmmm..... This is hands on experience between D700 and D5100. The noise level on D5100 at ISO 400 is like the noise level on D700 at ISO 800 - 1600. Image on D700 is a lot sharper than D5100 with the same lens. But APS-C sensor is better if you are shooting birds or wildlife where the reach is needed.... else a FF is really good for almost all kinds of shoots. Well, people might argued that why not compare with D7000, D5100 and D7000 are using the same sensors right?

By the way, the settings on the camera are default, all photos compared are shoot in RAW Format and compare.

Nikon is not the only one making CF and FF cameras la... Plus I think the D7K is much better than the D5100.. That said, D700 is older generation, I suppose the successor will make another quantum leap (hopefully).

If TS is saying very happily that CF camera at low ISO is significantly different from FF camera... Then perhaps pinholecam's links are worth looking at..

 

[edutilos-]

Then u are just trying to justify yr desire.

Nothing is perfect. There will always be reasons or excuses to do something. But the big question is "is it necessary?"

I quote a FB contact of mine, a friend who's a photography instructor (verbatim):

"Learning Calligraphy is learning how to hand held the brush?
Even when you know how to hand held the brush, but... can you write?
The same for photography.

When one blindly pursue a certain style or technique-howabout or new gears, it won't grow and very soon he will have this misconception that everything can be paid for.

Then, what's the point of doing photography?"

 

[Reno]

Nikon is not the only one making CF and FF cameras la... Plus I think the D7K is much better than the D5100.. That said, D700 is older generation, I suppose the successor will make another quantum leap (hopefully).

If TS is saying very happily that CF camera at low ISO is significantly different from FF camera... Then perhaps pinholecam's links are worth looking at..

come on man, i just feedback my findings based on the stuffs i have and tested out. Better that "think" here and "think" there.... Geez....

 

[FrozenRiver]

My poisons came from viewing the following two images:

To me, enough is said. Please make your own judgement.

 

[Reno]

My poisons came from viewing the following two images:

To me, enough is said. Please make your own judgement.

No worries... i believe it too...... i got too many photos to compare between the two.... lol

 

[Ben Ang]

There is ALOT more behind that image than camera and iso.

what was the lens? aperture, shutter speed. was it a constant light source or fluorescent that flickers? where was the focus point, how was it focused, was it properly stabilize. and i could go on on a few other factors. besides, the magnification in the upper image is greater than below.. and no one brings 2 cameras to shoot side by side and compare anyway..

point is, while there seems to be an advantage, this will not necessarily make your photography any better. practice with the gear you have now, and you ll see alot more improvement. can understand how you feel as i was in the same position 2 years ago, shooting with a d200 (for 5 years). but with practice and learning to work around the issues that are involved, you can improve yourself to a point where you can make the most of the FF system when you finally get there.


just to prove a point, can you tell which was taken with a fullframe sensor?

1

2

3

My poisons came from viewing the following two images:

To me, enough is said. Please make your own judgement.

 

[nikonriana]

Once FF User, Always One. Seriously.. the only possible for a ASP-C Body is for either back up or light travel. No way you'll be able ti convert from FF back to APS-C.. haha

 

[edutilos-]

My poisons came from viewing the following two images:

To me, enough is said. Please make your own judgement.

To me, the D7K ISO image is OOF, but that's me. Loads of review sites have OOF images, just look at Imaging Resource. Where got some parts of the picture sharper than the rest, like that how to compare. :bsmilie:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Go to New Indoor ISO 100 for both 60D and 5DM2 for Canon.

Based on that particular set of test images , the 60D outperforms the 5DM2. :bsmilie: Being fair, it looks more like a DOF issue or OOF. It's just not very good to blindly pick and choose the examples you like to support your own preformulated argument. Once again, I don't think you would find a highly significant difference at low ISOs between modern FF and modern CF cameras.

 

[edutilos-]

come on man, i just feedback my findings based on the stuffs i have and tested out. Better that "think" here and "think" there.... Geez....

No problem with that la, just highlighting why you might have such a difference. Of course a long time ago, when I was using a Pentax K100D, FF was wow... But increasingly so, CF cameras are holding their own in the low ISO department. I'd be silly to say that a CF camera can outperform the noise performance of a FF camera given the right know-how; but I don't think it's fair to say that a CF camera at low ISO is visibly, undeniably outperformed significantly by a FF camera.

 

[larlarloo]

I think a cure would be to start buying Zeiss and all those expensive manual lenses! :devil:

 

[JW73]

For me, if I go to "FF", I will be printing in large prints most of the time. Imagine, myself after pixel peep, i resize it and post online, what a waste of money.

 

[sfoto100]

i think the iso advantage of FF bodies is getting insignificant day by day... if one day we can get decent IQ for ISO6400 for crop bodies, i think that advantage is gone. Of course a FF camera using the same technology will like to be able to deliver the same IQ for even much higher ISO, but do you use such high ISO often?

To me, the only FF attraction will be the working distance when you use prime lens to shoot portrait..

 

[sfoto100]

My poisons came from viewing the following two images:

To me, enough is said. Please make your own judgement.

they look similar to me .. there is a difference of course, but the diff is not great enough to be significant.

 

[daredevil123]

i think the iso advantage of FF bodies is getting insignificant day by day... if one day we can get decent IQ for ISO6400 for crop bodies, i think that advantage is gone. Of course a FF camera using the same technology will like to be able to deliver the same IQ for even much higher ISO, but do you use such high ISO often?

To me, the only FF attraction will be the working distance when you use prime lens to shoot portrait..

Actually FF will always be better. CF can get better by the day, but the manufacturers are also improving FF capabilities.

In the end, all these don't matter. What matter is what your needs are. It is as simple as that. You need ISO 3200 today. Does it mean when a new camera is released tomorrow you will suddenly need 6400?

 

[Kenneth67C]

The same as Medium format will always be better than FF...technology continues to move.