UPGRADING TO FULL FRAME sensor, does it worth or not ??? APS-C versus Full Frame ....
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 08. 2018
- Hello CZcamsrs.
We all arrive at one point or another to the question SHOULD I UPGRADE TO FULL FRAME OR SHOULD I STAY WITH APS-C ???
But this is a complex question and before you commit to buying a new full-frame DSLR, you could consider the alternative option of purchasing a second-hand model or a great APS-C camera even mirrorless . Most of the time we do not need the full frame sensor. These days APS-C cameras are soo good that you will not need at all the larger sensor . But let`s discuss a little bit the benefits of both systems.
Benefits of full frame
Traditionally, full-frame cameras have offered better image quality at high sensitivities and greater dynamic range compared to their APS-C-format contemporaries. With the rapid advances in sensor technology, however, older full-frame SLRs tend to have less of an advantage over current models with APS-C sensors, so it’s worth thinking about this if you intend to buy an older or second-hand model. In general, though, they still give impressive image quality, often with specific advantages in terms of either resolution or high ISO image quality, or both.
Full-frame DSLRs are also compatible with lots of film-era lenses without any cropping of the angle of view. This means that any nice lenses you still have for an old 35mm film camera will work on a full-frame digital model in much the same way as before. However, note the word ‘nice’ - it’s probably not worth buying a full-frame camera to resurrect zooms that were relatively cheap when new, as their optical quality won’t match modern lenses.
Despite this, perhaps the biggest advantage of DSLR cameras are the huge range of lenses available, and primes in particular. Wide angles in the 20-24mm range, or short telephoto ‘portrait’ primes of around 85-100mm, and you can use these lenses on APS-C as well but you have to keep in mind the 1.5 crop factor.
One further benefit of full-frame DSLRs used to be that they usually have larger, brighter viewfinders than APS-C models, which can help with composition. Older models also often have interchangeable focusing screens, including manual focus and grid screens, but these days APS-C cameras have the same excellent viewfinder so this advantage is kind of non existing .
APS-C lens compatibility . Any full frame lens can be used on APS-c body but the fiels of view will be changed because of the 1.5 crop factor and any APS-C lens can be used on Full Frame camera with some disadvantages .
While full-frame DSLRs can often be used with APS-C lenses, compatibility varies between brands.
Canon’s own EF-S lenses simply won’t fit onto its full-frame cameras, but third-party lenses will, and can sometimes be used with acceptable results. However, vignetting can confuse the evaluative metering, so it’s best to switch to partial or spot.
Nikon full-frame (FX) DSLRs are designed to be fully compatible with APS-C (DX) lenses, and will switch automatically into a DX crop mode when such a lens is mounted. A viewfinder frameline shows the active area, and the metering adjusts to match. Of course, the resolution drops, and in DX mode the D700, for example, only produces 5.3-million-pixel images.
Full-frame Sony cameras like the Alpha 99 also have a crop mode for use with APS-C lenses, which the user can turn on or off as desired. The big advantage compared to the D700 is that the resulting image size from the Alpha 850 is a much more usable 10.7 million pixels.
Size and weight
If you are interested in photography and in videography well then enjoy this video and if you like it please like and subscribe and share my videos . If you want to add something constructive to this video , feel free and leave a comment down below. Other than that I wish you a great day and I`ll see you in the next one .
My work .
www.zonerama.com/BlueSkyPhoto...
www.flickr.com/photos/1406555...
I think for many APSC is perfectly acceptable for a whole range of shooting types. I chose to go Full Frame because I needed the ability to shoot as wide as possible and that extra bit of ISO performance was something I needed too. Having shot film years previously I was more used to the focal length representation, adding that 1.5X crop when using APSC made it harder for me to visualise my focal range sometimes. I also use M43 occasionally and get good results. I do think there is a tendency for Full Frame snobbery amongst photographers. I say, get over it and just use what works for you 😊
Definitely. If you need it it's a different story, but people think that they are great photographers if they use full frame 😂😂😂
Buy what you need to do what you do, why buy what you don't need.
What a refreshing sensible approach! ☺️
Thanks mate.
Absolutely agree with you! I have Fuji XE-2 with three lenses and just bought a Sony a6000 for £399! Three Sigma lenses also and I’m good to go. Image quality is outstanding on both cameras but most importantly the kit is really light! Especially the Sony a6000. Full frame would not give me personally any advantage but would be heavier and much more expensive. The best camera is the one you carry with you.....😀👍
Absolutely correct. I love my APS-C gear as well. 👍👍👍
My sentiments exactly. Full frame is great, but APSC does what I want it to do. So I can't justify the cost for a full frame system that has everything that I want. Funny you should say that the X-T2 is the best APSC camera at the moment. Because of the price drop recently, I'm thinking of selling my d7200 and a6000 systems to get an X-T2 and some lenses. The lens lineup on Fuji is quite amazing. With the Fuji and the 56mm 1.2 we can get great DOF. They also seem to have great lenses at reasonable prices for all situations. I'm thinking of an X-T2 and grip as my main work camera and an X-T20 as my backup/travel camera. With three our four lenses I should be set for everything 😀
It is an excellent plan. But myself I am a DSLR guy and like the bigger bodies. Unfortunately Nikon disappointed me recently with their stupid move (Z6 and Z7) Anyway the X-T2 is the best price /value for money at the moment.
Absolutely correct video
I had the same way
Thanks mate.
Awesome video. I agree!
Thanks mate
Hi Atilla,
Thanks again for this interesting video. All opinions are good to be taken.
So finally I now got an A99mark2 (FF 42mpx sensor of A7r2/A7r3) thanks to a grey shop you may know very well on your island :D And I can directly compare to my A77mark2 (APSC 24mpx).
And it is impressive FF 40+ Vs APSC 20+. On the other hand I must concur that a FF 20+ mpx won't be so different in details rendering and resolution. I think that it is due to the pixel density itsel of the 2 formats.
If I have understood well,the size of sensor and pixel density is pushing an APSC of 24Mpx could be direct comparabale to a FF of 50+mpx...
I am a bit surprised by the market today. Especially by Sony. They are pushing FF and nothing else. Like if anybody could throw 2k€ in a camera just snapping finger. For me it's something I don't understand especially because:
1) I started with a minolta A D7D and a Sony A58 apsc 20mpx. This camera is superb and entry level (no more at the catalog though)
2) after 1,5 year my skills got better and I updated to APSC A77m2 24mpx which is a fantastic camera (still at the catalog)
3) and finally after 2 more years I have just upgraded to the flagship sony FF A99m2 42mpx. For various reason and the low price of the grey store was one.
But in 2010/2012 It was logic to start with apsc to learn the basics, to know what you do, to improve your skill. And I say, still in 2018 it should be still the logic path. I don't get this marketing thing to try to "steal" or "fool" some random newcomers letting them think that the gear makes the skills...
So I continue to applause your way to see things because I do agree 500%
ActionPhotoPassion the a99 ii is an excellent camera. And with the recent price reduction it is a good deal. You will love it. Yes you are right about the APS-C 24mp = 50mp FF (approx) if we talk about pixel density and detail reproduction.
Try to get the Sony/Zeiss 135mm f1. 8 lens. It is one of the best portrait lens. It's a pity that Sigma art version is not available in Sony a mount.
Enjoy your new gear my friend. 👍👍👍
As a landscape/wildlife photographer I find a couple of advantages with my A7R3. Firstly the added resolution adds a bit to the quality of a landscape image. Secondly for wildlife the added frame size gives a bit of "cropabilty" if you don't or can't fill the frame.
Thirdly the ability to shoot in crop mode still gives you an 18 mpixel image whilst giving a bit of a boost to your lens if you are focal length limited. So in this camera I have the best of both worlds;the only downside being the cost of entry.
If you have the budget, obviously it is a great idea. Or if you need it. 👍👍
To be frank... I had a D7200 and I wasn’t happy with my pictures until I decided to get a pro lens. A lot of research and certainly Atila convinced me on Sigma 50-100 f1.8.
Ever since I had the combo, I have never looked back.
Great lens and great camera 👍👍👍
Agree with you 100%. Only difference between FF 24MP and APS-C 24MP is low light or high ISO performance 1-2 stops (FF shots are cleaner with less noise). I find absolutely no difference in picture quality in adequate light. 36-45MP FF is another story, but the cameras are bulky and heavy (except Z7, which is too costly for my pocket).
Definitely agreed. I think that after a year or so the D850 will be a good Deal to purchase because the price of it will drop (hopefully) if not the Sony a7R iii 😂😂😂😂
Thanks Attila. Unfortunately I am fully invested in Nikon glass, and I do not also want to invest in costly GM series Sony glass, so A7R III is not for me.
@@dsu2002 👍👍👍 D850 is brilliant camera.
👍👍👍 3 Thumbs up ! Totally agree with you ! I'm using Nikon D500(APSC) at the moment. I find it just as good as the D5 full frame. Which I dont need it abit more "bokeh" which i find it just abit different, why pay more ? The same 21 megapixels on a APSC and on a full frame sensor. 21 megapixels on a APSC will get more details.
Yep definitely true. I think that 99.8 % of the time APS-C is more than we ever need. The rest of the 0.2 % I will work around it. 😂😂😂😂
I'm a huge fan of Brassai and Ansel Adams, and that style of extreme contrast is the only reason I can justify the expense of a Pentax K1 and full frame lenses... for everything else, a K3 and an XT1 will probably be over kill, but they'll also save me loads of post processing time considering how I learned to squeeze an awful lot from film and older Olympus Four Thirds. Also, I'm sick and tired of fighting with shallow contrast and grain, LOL!
Both photographers you mentioned are brilliant and very inspiring. That's why I love the FujiFilm X-T3 because it has the possibility to adjust the color temperature of black and white photos. You can decide if you want to get a blue - ish or more like a Brains / yellow - ish photos. I really like B&W photography and I think that Fuji lens quality is outstanding in regards contrast and colors.
Atilla I recently went and found my first film camera, and repurchased it, a Canon AE-1 and I try to shoot 2 rolls a month just to keep the perspective. It is really nice to rediscover film and enjoy the tradition again. ; )
I agree with you 100 %. I do have as well my film gear in great working condition (2 Pentax cameras and a few zooms and primes) the only issue is that I have to send the films up to Dublin to develop them and it costs a fortune. 😂😂😂
@@BlueSkyPhotographyI sent mine to the Dark Room and they scan the negatives and email me the prints, I pay a little more because I shoot 400 speed film at 200 and then have them pull it a stop. I think it's around $20 to do that
@@longrider9551 they don't scan it over here unless you pay for it separately. it costs around 25 euro plus postage to develop the film and you can get 10pcs 6x4 print the rest you have to pay for it.
Yes I had one too when first released. Great camera then but NOTHING would persuade me to use film now. I used Nikon and Olympus cameras too but weddings were a nightmare as you didn’t know you had ANY images until the proofs came back. Nerve wracking! The processing cost these days is prohibitive. Let’s not get too nostalgic about obsolete technology.....🙂
I understand completely Steven, I am not a paid photographer, just a devout hobbyist and its more about the experience than the workflow for me.
Hi sir,
I'm from india.
I had Nikon D700, now upgrade with Nikon D750. The D750 had circular eyepiece viewfinder, i loved that but D750 has rectangular eyepiece, I dislike this.
After many recherche on internet, I found Nikon DK-22 eyepiece adapter & purchased it from Amazon.in
Please tell me which circular eyepiece fitted on Nikon DK-22 adapter (DK-17, DK- 17M, DK-18, DK-17C or any other)
Please Reply.....
What do you recommend for the best mirrorless camera under $2100, including a kit lense? This will be my first camera, and I need it to have a flip out screen that can be seen from the front. I'd like it to be versatile, I plan on shooting stills, sports, and wildlife. I'll also be taking this camera hiking with me. What do you think?
With the flip out screen it is a bit difficult. Especially if you want mirrorless. The only brand does that is Panasonic. And Canon with the new EOS R which is an expensive joke. 😂😂😂 I would buy the FujiFilm X-T3 and a small external monitor for vlogging. But hey it is up to you. 😂😂😂
@@BlueSkyPhotography
I appreciate your advice, that's probably what I'll get. I was looking at the olympus em1 mkii as well. The fuji xt3 is superior?
@@gilbertopadilla3611 the EM-1 mark ii is a great camera but it is smaller sensor. I don't really like micro 4/3. In my opinion Fuji X is superior
@@BlueSkyPhotography
Thank you, I'll get the fujifilm x-t3.
Atilla!!! I might be getting a full-frame camera in the autumn, depending on what we see at Photokina, but I don"t really see it as an upgrade, it's just a different system. Is medium format an upgrade, or large format? Not if you are a sports or wildlife photographer. I don't think you'd want to do a wedding with medium format either. They are different systems better or worse depending on your subject and needs. So I don't see FF as an 'upgrade' to apsc or M43. But I would like to do more low-light photography and for that the bigger senser is probably better particularly without tripod.
Mate just admit that you want to show off with your Full Frame gear 😂😂😂😂
I'm only messing man. 😇😇😇
If you come to Photokina, we should meet and have a beer 😂😂😂
Blue Sky Photography Yes you got me!! I'll be running down the street "Fuull-Fraammee!!" I don't think I will be going to Cologne personally Atilla, so many CZcamsrs will be going I don't need to. But I will be watching you very carefully!!
@@justininfrance OK I will try to post as many videos as possible.
FF is ok for good Dynamic range and some Low light when you shoot in the dark .Since shallow DOF is not determined by the sensor size while video 4K etz is cropped anyway I would say Apsc has more applications for less money.
Definitely true. 👍👍👍
Lenses, technique, and post processing matter more than anything else. A sharp lens with slow film at f8 on 35mm or 120 can give you nice 20x30 prints if you know how to handle a film scanner, but holy shit and shove me in it is it a pain in the ass to go through that process! On the other hand, getting nice 12x18 , 16x20 or 18x24 prints from Olympus Four Thirds DSLR's from circa 2008 to 2010 is trivial, even with the kit lenses, and 20x30's with really good lenses isn't that tough, with careful processing. Personally, I'm sick to death of both scanning and post processing
I agree with you 100%, there's not a huge difference between IQ, except in low light and high ISO, and it's still not that dramatic of a difference. For travel, unless you're carrying mirrorless FF it's too darned heavy, and now everyone is using smartphone or small mirrorless gear, that I feel like a bit of a clown with a big DSLR and lens in public lol
My problem was last year that only the camera bodies and lenses were 13kg. I can bring on board only 10kg. But with the FujiFilm system, it is about 7-8kg. It's a huge difference.
I think my Nikon D7200 is the best APS-C Camera Nikon ever.
It is a great deal even now although the the FujiFilm X-T20 is really close in price and it is a better camera over all. The big advantage of the D7200 is the dual SD card slot and the huge lens selection. ISO and auto focus on the X-T20 is better.
I am trying to use APC (D80) and Sony A7R3 at the same time and that is really hard. In post you can get so much more out of a full frame picture than out of a APC picture. It is like an insurance.
It is obvious that you can get more out of a full frame camera, but the difference is not that big to justify the price difference in my opinion.
Not only the quality is important but the costs too. To get 10% higher resolution of the new full frame camera you have to invest a lot of money in new gear. The most of the cheaper lenses are not prepared for the hi res sensors. You can spend 3300 € for Sony A7R3 + 850 € for Sony 55mm 1.8 or 500 € for Sony A6000 body +200€ for Sigma 60mm 2.8 lens. Does your client (or your wife) see the difference? Probably not.
Not probably 100% not. Believe me I did try this several times with my clients. They care about exposure and composition. If the photo is not very soft, they will not notice any difference.
To be perfectly honest, for street shooting and candid photography, you'd be shocked (or maybe not) at what you can get from an old Olympus Four Thirds DSLR with their first 14-54 lens.
I currently have a 700D, and my next upgrade will be 80D, not full-frame. Colleagues tell me I'm mad. It's good to be mad.
😂😂😂It is good to be mad man.
80D is a great camera.
Question: Which camera/lens combination has given you the most consistent, most life-like skin tones so far?
This is a thought enough question because it depends a lot on lenses as well. But in my experience Nikon and FujiFilm
They are kind of the same. The overall colors I prefer FujiFilm over all the others.
Thanks, that actually helps me quite a bit. Now I know I can to migrate to Fuji for photographing people, and keep upgrading to Pentax from Olympus for everything else (which is actually quite a lot.) I have never been completely satisfied with Olympus FT (terribly shallow contrast for everything but social photography!) OR FILM, for that matter, for skin tones, oddly enough. Many older Pentax lenses have gorgeous color/contrast and Sigma/Tamron support Pentax fairly well, too.
Nikon sure blew it with their new full frame mirrorless cameras! The aps-c Fuji XT-3 is next on my list.
FujiFilm has a unique chance to get a lot of customers... Hopefully they don't make the same mistakes as Nikon did. 😂😂😂 I have really big hopes for the X-T3
Attila, Tony said FF is 2xbetter, should i believe him with 1m subscribers , or you!!! (just a joke) Every format has advantages and disadvantages, but also depends on system you currently use and lenses you have invested in. For me transition to FF Nikon was quite easy and simple, but would be to expensive to go Sony, that is why i am looking forward to Z7(or later model) in future.
Mate 1000000 subscriber is a big number 🤔🤔🤔 but you know what, I believe what I see, so I advise you the same thing. You have the Nikon D750 and the D7200. Do you see any difference?? (except the 1 stop advantage in ISO / low light performance and a little bit of more dynamic range which you will notice very rarely) 😁😁😁
People think they should go full frame and it will make them a better photographer...it will not.
@@steven2809 no it won't. But it will hurt your pocket badly 😂😂😂
To be honest i am torn apart, like them both, but find myself often grabbing FF instead of APS-C.
NEVER let a computer geek and over-zealous technical fanatic teach you about photography!
Low light and shallow depth of field! I would get low megapixel (~20MP) Full Frame for low light!
If you shoot in low light all the time yes but if you do only sometimes the newer APS-C sensors are really good as well.
Blue Sky Photography agree Sir. Thats why i am still using aps-c. Nowadays aps-c like Nikon D500 are so good ...
@@zackchoy1969 definitely. In my opinion the D500 is as good as the D750 maybe a little bit better (low light performance) the D750 is a bit better when it comes to dynamic range.
Yes Sir, especially with good lens like the Sigma 18-35mm f/1,8....
Mate you didn't see the difference between FF and APSC because in all your video you compare apple with orange, apsc have 1.7 crop so it is 1.7 times closer to the subject is normal to look sharpen but if you gonna frame the picture the same so go 1.7 time closer with FF camera or change the focal lens to match the apsc you gonna see a big difference.
You think DXomark and all photographer's are lies and only you discover apsc now?
You fool yourself mate.
First of all MATE the crop factor is 1.5 not 1.7. Second of all I did frame the same way and I did try many different situations and the result was the same. The only advantage of full frame is 1 stop extra dynamic range and 1 stop extra ISO performance. If you want to prove me wrong please supply some photos as well (if you own full frame and APS-C cameras) otherwise it is only bla bla bla.... 😂😂😂 I have my prove in my videos where I compare many times these cameras. But this is my experience and if you don't agree it is completely fine. Prove me wrong with photos!!!
@@BlueSkyPhotography No mate the crop factor can be 1.5 1.6 and 1.7 depend on the mark, second you didn't frame the same look how large is the frame on 750 when you shot you that woman in the store then you zoom on her face but her face on 750 if you look at the hole frame if fall the zise that's because the frame is much more large.
@@BlueSkyPhotography And yes I have 7200 d600 5d mark II and III and belev me you cannot compare d7200 at Image quality even with 5d mark II wich is 22 mp, the clarity is far more superior to 7200.
@@Elzan01 well I don't agree at all. I owned the Sony a7R and the a7ii and the a6000 as well, and my experience was the same. Send me proof. Share some images made with the same lens or the best possible option for both cameras, so we can see that what you say is true.
@@Elzan01 look at this video where you can see the difference between the Sony a7R and the a6000.
czcams.com/video/EWK1Fuh6MSQ/video.html
Too much filler talk. Get to the point quick!