Another crop or ff

M

mr bill

Messages
492
Edit My Images
Yes
Want another body partly as back up and so I don't have to change lenses too much, my main interest is macro and wildlife though my time for wildlife is very limited with work I have a sigma 70mm macro, sigma 100-300 f4 and sigma 50mm 1.4 and will probably add another lens to cover everything. I bought a 5d classic as I would like to try ff but it was faulty so had to return it.Tbh apart from the sensor it felt a step backwards so would go for something more up to date but do It need ff? I don't print anything bigger than A4 size prints so would I really get any better iq thats noticeable than my 60d produces which is great when I get it right
 
i wouldn't be replacing the 60d, for bird shots and the like would always use the 60d,that's staying so wouldn't need to miss anything the crop does
 
Last edited:
I moved from a 40D to a 5Diii last year, there is a huge benefit in detail resolution, light sensitivity and crop potential... probably things that are of little interest to you if you are only producing A4 prints. While FF may help with your macro work, you would probably be better off getting another 60D if you are happy with the IQ you are getting and save the extra buckets of money for longer lenses for wildlife shooting.
 
Id probably go for a 7d if sticking to crop and ill stick to the 100-300 for wildlife (too little time for serious stuff i'm afraid) i was just wondering if i got a 6d for example would i see any great difference in iq ? if i put 2 shots together and could see little or no difference it wouldn't be worth the layout but then would ff be better for macro? that would make a difference as thats what i do the most
 
Having moved from a 60d to a 5Diii the main improvements I found was in the quality of each pixel (more detail) however this is purely pixel peeping, probably unnoticeable at A4. I also found the noise levels were better but mainly when it came to shooting at high ISO settings. Although the 60d was good up to 6400. I've had the 5diii at 25600 and got useable pictures.
 
I know you aren't swapping. What I meant was if you bought a second body and it was FF would you miss the extra FL of the crop sensor so it not be as useful for your interests as the 60d? FF will obviously have massive benefits in other areas though.
 
Bear in mind that I use Nikons rather than Canons...

What FF adds for ME is extra width, and coming from a 35mm background, I get what I'm used to from a given focal length. The high ISO performance of the FF Nikons is also ahead of the Dx (crop) bodies.

Having said the above, I now use my crop bodied Fujis more than the Nikon kit due to weight. I tend to shoot more on holiday than at home so the weight saving in the smaller bodies and lenses (along with the excellent IQ!) is important.

Were I to shoot more wildlife, I would hate to lose the extra apparent reach that crop bodies give and I also have a Nikon 1 series body with an adaptor to allow me to use my F mount (DSLR) lenses on the 2.7x crop body. I tend to keep an 18-200 VR lens on that body which gives the EFL of about 50-510mm in a very compact package (although IQ isn't perfect at the long end!)
 
minnnt said:
I know you aren't swapping. What I meant was if you bought a second body and it was FF would you miss the extra FL of the crop sensor so it not be as useful for your interests as the 60d? FF will obviously have massive benefits in other areas though.
Click to expand...
No as i would use the 60d when i needed the FL and the FF when that was more beneficial, just not sure how much the benefits would be apart from the 50mm being a true 50mm
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
Having moved from a 60d to a 5Diii the main improvements I found was in the quality of each pixel (more detail) however this is purely pixel peeping, probably unnoticeable at A4. I also found the noise levels were better but mainly when it came to shooting at high ISO settings. Although the 60d was good up to 6400. I've had the 5diii at 25600 and got useable pictures.
Click to expand...

Yes thanks it seems buy most i've read your only going to see any real difference in larger prints which is irrelevant for me and most people i expect which is why iv'e asked as i don't want spend to the extra on FF and then think i didn't need it unless there's other benefits that would make it worth while
 
if you want FF you can get a 6D for not much more than a 7D though tbh in your shoes i'd get another 60D second hand and spend the difference on upgrading your macro lens
 
big soft moose said:
if you want FF you can get a 6D for not much more than a 7D though tbh in your shoes i'd get another 60D second hand and spend the difference on upgrading your macro lens
Click to expand...
Good point thats the other thing i want, optically the 70mm is probably as good as any but mechanically its not so great infact it can be a pain and want to replace it with either the canon 100mm or sigma 105, i could get that and say a 50d and have the extra fps
 
Last edited:
I 'm sure there's many out that have bought a mkiii or d800 etc because it's FF and don't get the benefits of it because they don't really need it, i don't want to be one of those
 
mr bill said:
Good point thats the other thing i want, optically the 70mm is probably as good as any but mechanically its not so great infact it can be a pain and want to replace it with either the canon 100mm or sigma 105, i could get that and say a 50d and have the extra fps
Click to expand...

Tamron 90 is a good lens as well if you are looking at reasonably short macros - if you do a lot of bugs and flying things you might be better off with a sigma 150
 
Was looking at a sigma 150 older non os is it good do you know?
 
Last edited:
Its supposed to be - I use a tamron 90mm with a doubler so ive no first hand experience of the siggy. I wouldn't worry about the lack of OS as if you are photographing flying insects your shutter speed will be high enough to eliminate wobble anyway
 
big soft moose said:
Its supposed to be - I use a tamron 90mm with a doubler so ive no first hand experience of the siggy. I wouldn't worry about the lack of OS as if you are photographing flying insects your shutter speed will be high enough to eliminate wobble anyway
Click to expand...
i know os/is etc not important for macro but i do want internal focus which i believe it has, a bit heavy but i prefer that to and of course the extra reach for bugs, better to have it than wish you had
 
Last edited:
It doesn't really matter but you have to remember that with the crop factor magnification you also need an increase in shutter speed, or OS/IS to compensate.
 
mr bill said:
Do think it's better on crop/FF or doesn't really matter?
Click to expand...

Yes, it focuses internally as far as I remember and IMVHO It's best on crop, I think...

With FF to fill the frame you'll need to be closer and that reduces your depth of field and so you need to use smaller apertures and then you're batting shutter speed and ISO. If your subject is still or you're shooting with a tripod I suppose it wont matter so much but if shooting handheld it could matter.

It's a good lens whatever you use it on.
 
mr bill said:
I don't print anything bigger than A4 size prints so would I really get any better iq thats noticeable than my 60d produces which is great when I get it right
Click to expand...

No.
 
also on FF the sensor can 'see' the edges of the lens - which is where most aberrations occur in cheaper glass
 
mr bill said:
so which macro is best would it be worth the extra for the 100mm L
Click to expand...

If you are putting it on a FF possibly - if you are putting it on a crop probably not

personally I'm happy with the tamron 90mm
 
One thing I noticed when I moved from crop (1.3 or 1.6) or 5D1 to 5D3 was the better detail in red items, I always found the red items blocked up with my other cameras whereas with the 5D3 full detail was maintained, anyone else find this?
Matt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top