Advice needed - which DSLR, an full frame or APS-C?

This is the place to discuss cameras, camcorders and anything you want to do in relation to photography. Also home to the 'photography competition'.

Moderators: Kryten, Alan b

Dave B
Posts: 3623
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 5:00 am
Location: Back in the bloody UK!
Contact:

Post by Dave B »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APS-C

Read the Advantages and disadvantages bit

"Comparing smaller and larger sensors, keeping all other factors the same, image quality increases with a larger sensor due to its higher resolution. Besides yielding a lower resolution (or lower sensitivity), smaller sensors also have other effects."

Dave
User avatar
Stevie G
Posts: 12265
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:13 pm
Location: By the seaside

Post by Stevie G »

Thanks Dave. I *think* I'm barking up the right tree then....! :suspect:
PSN Gamertag: NoMrMoreNiceGuy
It's all about the scrobbling...
RobDickinson
Member
Posts: 11334
Joined: Thu May 04, 2000 4:00 am
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Contact:

Post by RobDickinson »

If both sensors are the same resolution and the lenses are of equal quality then the ff sensor should show a small amount more detail and sharpness.

Effectively the larger sensor uses more glass so defects are less obvious, flip side is the crop sensor uses the best part of full frame lenses so may actually be better in that situation, also lower vignetting..

But ff sensors also have better Bayer and AA filters generally showing more accurate and graduated colour. But they really come into their own at mid to high iso.

So.. Shoot an identical landscape on a 700d and 1dx at iso100 say with 10-22 and 17-40 and pretend my them at 24x16 and you would be unlikely to spot a difference. Perhaps at 36x24 - but more so if there was a lot of foliage it wide colour gamut
X360 tag : RobJD
User avatar
Woz
Posts: 12647
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: Beneath The archways of aerodynamics

Post by Woz »

You also need to read about how the sensor size affects the aesthetic of the picture, irrespective of image quality.

Taken to extremes, a 10x8 view camera picture will look different to a 35mm picture due to depth of field effects.
User avatar
Stevie G
Posts: 12265
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:13 pm
Location: By the seaside

Advice needed - which DSLR, an full frame or APS-C?

Post by Stevie G »

That's again guys. Woz, yes, I understand the differences with that - I've been reading up a lot and using YouTube videos to swot up as well! There's so much rubbish on You tube, but there's so much useful info as well!
PSN Gamertag: NoMrMoreNiceGuy
It's all about the scrobbling...
User avatar
RomerojpgX
Posts: 10535
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: In Hell

Post by RomerojpgX »

Did you decide in the end Stevie? :)
AndyWilson
Posts: 12046
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2000 4:00 am
Contact:

Post by AndyWilson »

Well, I've just been trying to decide between FF (probably Sony A7), Mirrorless APS-C (probably Sony A6000), mirrorless m4/3 (probably something from Olympus) or replacing my Sony A77 with a dying shutter mechanism with the new model..

And I've just pre-ordered a Sony A77mk2 - I know it will do everything I want without faffing around with adaptors or anything, and if I want to faff around with adaptors and stuff I bought a cheap second hand NEX-5
User avatar
Woz
Posts: 12647
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: Beneath The archways of aerodynamics

Post by Woz »

I'm in the same boat Andy. I might have a bit of cash to get a camera for the odd wedding and the obvious choice is a full frame Canon to go with my prime lenses.
The problem I have is that from the weddings I've done in the past the couple have chosen just as many pictures from my OM-D as from the larger sensored camera.

It's a much lighter kit to lug around all day, so while I can see the advantages to full frame, I'm not sure prospective clients will!
User avatar
Stevie G
Posts: 12265
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:13 pm
Location: By the seaside

Post by Stevie G »

RomerojpgX wrote:Did you decide in the end Stevie? :)


Yeah.... about that.....!

I'm very much Mr Indecisive generally (and like to research and make 100% sure when I buy stuff), and it's turning out no different this time! I've still not decided. Everytime I think I'm nearing a decision, I have second thoughts and go in the other direction! To be fair I was ill for a few weeks plus I've had not stop friends and family visiting for the last few months (that's my excuse anyway!)

I veering towards the Canon 6D, but I do really like the weight of the smaller A7, and I'm more likely to take a lighter camera out more often on occasions when I'm not going to take photos but might be able to get some good street or scenery photos, but it's working which lenses that I'm struggling with for that. I've read a number of things about the third party adapters and they seem to be fairly mixed on how well they work with them.

I need to revisit my list of essential requirements as well. We recently did a workshop with this guy - http://www.danielcheongphotography.com/ - on his digital blending technique. Pretty inspiring, but it's made me realise I need to get one with a good bracketing system, and which does bracketing in raw to get the best out of it. I'm not sure that the A7 does do bracketing in raw (I think I read it's jpeg only but I need to check again - unless anyone can verify either way).

I definately need to make a decision very soon though and should have a lot more time in a couple of weeks to go back through it all.
PSN Gamertag: NoMrMoreNiceGuy
It's all about the scrobbling...
User avatar
driver8
Posts: 12233
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2003 11:24 pm
Location: Malé, Maldives
Contact:

Post by driver8 »

Imho, if you shoot in RAW and edit in Lightroom, there's no need for bracketing at all - you can really push the settings in LR, so far in fact that it looks faux-hdr. The level of detail you can pull out of both highlights that appear to be blown and shadows that are seemingly impenetrable is pretty amazing.

Unless of course you shoot in unusual conditions, or plan to do arty stuff !
AndyWilson
Posts: 12046
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2000 4:00 am
Contact:

Post by AndyWilson »

The A7 definitely brackets in RAW - it's only some of the processing modes that are jpeg only
User avatar
Stevie G
Posts: 12265
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:13 pm
Location: By the seaside

Post by Stevie G »

Ah, thanks Andy. So that's still high up on my choices, but I need to work out what lenses will work well with it. I think I'd like a 14-24 or similar wide lens and then something like a 24-70 or 105 as a more everyday lens. A fixed length portrait one can come later.

Does anyone have any knowledge of what adapters work best with these new Alpha's?
PSN Gamertag: NoMrMoreNiceGuy
It's all about the scrobbling...
AndyWilson
Posts: 12046
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2000 4:00 am
Contact:

Post by AndyWilson »

The "best" adaptor is the LA-EA4 - that allows full, fast autofocus with any A-Mount Lens

For Canon and Nikon lenses the most highly rated adaptors seem to be Metabones - they do both manual and fully auto+AF versions
User avatar
Stevie G
Posts: 12265
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:13 pm
Location: By the seaside

Post by Stevie G »

OK, so I'm finally get nearer to making a decision.

I'd pretty much shortened it down to the Canon 6d, Nikon D610 and Sony A7 (I wanted the R!).

I think I've talked myself out of the Sony, as the cost of good Sony lenses and the limit of them means using adapters to use different makes of lenses, which adds to the cost and, from what I've read, option limits the abilities of lenses.

I think I've settled on the Canon 6D, as I can get it for around £1050 for the body, so around £300 cheaper than the Nikon, with lenses similary priced.

I was going to go for it with the kit lens initially, as reviews of it seem to be very good value, but after doing a little more research I think I will go for a Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 instead. Not much more expensive and a shorter reach than the 24-105 kit lens, but the wider aperture should give us creative options we won't get with the Canon's F4, and reviews of it are generally excellent (can anyone give their opinion?)

The plan is to then look at getting a wider lens. Probably the Canon 17-40. I was looking at getting a Sigma 12-24 until I realised you cannot use filters with it (not without the additional cost of those bigger filter kits anyway), and the wider Canon lenses are too expensive (ie a grand +).

I'll probably also look at getting a portrait lens later on, probably the Canon 50mm or 85mm, but I'll see how I get on with the Tamron first. I'm sure my wife will be on at me to get a longer variable lens at some point, but I'll deal with that if and when it happens!
PSN Gamertag: NoMrMoreNiceGuy
It's all about the scrobbling...
User avatar
Woz
Posts: 12647
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: Beneath The archways of aerodynamics

Post by Woz »

I bought both a 5DIII and a OMD EM1 from HDEW cameras and I'm impressed with both the service and price.

As to which is the 'best'...I'm STILL on the fence. This weekend we went to a show in a village that had a ukulele band on an outdoor stage, and say what you like about the low light capabilities of the full frame, I got more keepers from the OMD because of the amazing image stabilization, even though I'm pretty good at low light handheld shots.
Oh, and the range of brilliant primes for Micro 4/3 keeps growing and growing...they're priced better than Canon too.

OMD EM1 with 45mm prime at 1.8:
ImagePaD2014 Day 12 by Woz!, on Flickr

However, there are some aesthetics that you can't reproduce on a smaller sensor.
I used both cameras at my son's prom and I don't believe I could get this look from the OMD:

Canon 5DIII with 85mm prime at 1.8:
ImageOlly and Lucy's Prom by Woz!, on Flickr
User avatar
driver8
Posts: 12233
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2003 11:24 pm
Location: Malé, Maldives
Contact:

Post by driver8 »

So Stevie (& Andy) did you buy new kit in the end ? What did you go for ?
AndyWilson
Posts: 12046
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2000 4:00 am
Contact:

Post by AndyWilson »

I bought an A77ii in the end - everything about it is just a little bit better than the a77 - apart from the crap "standard" hotshoe and the loss of the AF illuminator. The AF tracking is apparently the best out there - but most of my models are quite slow moving...

I'm now craving an A7s though - just can't afford it :(
User avatar
driver8
Posts: 12233
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2003 11:24 pm
Location: Malé, Maldives
Contact:

Post by driver8 »

Thanks, Andy. And yes - there doesn't seem to be a 'perfect' camera from any of the manufacturers at a certain price point - a modular mix & match would be ideal !

Stevie G - here's a good article about full frame v crop, and the effects on dof, etc (only 6 short pages of text, but elongated due to the sidebars).

Meanwhile, I'm wondering if I should go for a used A7 (+ 28-70) with all its full-frame goodness for $1250 ...
User avatar
Stevie G
Posts: 12265
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 6:13 pm
Location: By the seaside

Post by Stevie G »

We went for the Canon 6D in the end. Got it for a good price (my step dad has a John Lewis discount card through work) and couldn't justify the price of the A7.
PSN Gamertag: NoMrMoreNiceGuy
It's all about the scrobbling...
User avatar
driver8
Posts: 12233
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2003 11:24 pm
Location: Malé, Maldives
Contact:

Post by driver8 »

Well body-only, the A7 is slightly cheaper than the 6D of course, but buying into the A7 family is expensive. I'm thinking the only way I could justify it is to buy body-only with the 35mm/2.8 and leave it at that, for the very best possible quality walkabout and indoor lowlight use. And then continue to use my aging Canon 40D for 17mm (27mm FF equiv) and 50+mm.

So what are your first impressions of the 6D, and what lens did you get ?
Post Reply