full frame dslr

D

debrito

Messages
1,410
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
ok then i think i want a full frame dslr now!!! i have had my sony a200 for nearly a year and im starting to get really interested in landscapes so to get the full benift ill need a full frame !!! then all the glass i have will seem like new lens ? right ?
or i have i got this wrong ?
:shrug:
 
What exactly are you expecting full frame to do for you? I've seen for perfectly decent/pretty darn fine photos taken with a Nikon D50 and 18-55 kit lens. If you think full frame is suddenly going to help you take better landscape shots, think again. For a start are you currently lenses compatible?
 
As above, A better camera wont make you a better photographer.
There is advantages to having full frame, but I think if you have to ask then you probably wont find them.

On the other hand, if you have the money going spare and you find one you like, why the hell not.
 
Well , the main benefit of FF is that you can get wider shots as you wont have the crop factor to contend with.

Id go for it if you can afford it.

Matt
 
One of the biggest advantages of FF is how little noise you get at high ISO settings. Of course for landscapes, you'd be better off just using a tripod anyway for most photos.

There are plenty of ultra-wide DX lenses around so you only really need an FX camera if you need to go spectacularly wide.

Still, as others said, if you have the money to splash out and care enough to see the small benefits, then go for it.
 
My Sigma 12-24mm goes wide enough for me on APS-C and I manage with a similar range 20-35mm on my film body. The 17-40mm seems to be very popular but I myself can't see the attraction of that lens on APS-C as there are very good lenses in the 17-50mm range that are also f2.8.
 
Here's an example of why you don't necessarily need a full frame camera for landscapes.

Put a Nikon 10-24mm lens on a D300 and at it's widest the 10mm will be 16mm with the 1.6x crop factor. However if you put the same lens on a full frame D700 you'll get vignetting at anything up to 18mm. So you actually get a wider field of view with the DX camera. You can of course get full frame compatible wide angle lenses but they cost a lot more.

It all depends on whether you really have the money to invest in a new body and new lenses that are full frame compatible.
 
For me one of the biggest gains of upping the sensor size is increase the viewfinder size. The extra clarity and size make shooting much more pleasurable.
 
ok all that has been taken in
but am i not right in saying that my minolta 28mm wide lens will come into play more if i get a full frame

as well as my 50mm as now wth the crop factor they seem to be in the bag more and the kit lens on in order to get back to 20s say ???
doea that make any sence ?
or do i sell the lot and start again
i was thinking of keeping the lens !!:shrug:
 
what you need is a wider lens. im a prime person but when it does come to landscapes, a zoom is more versatile as it allows you to capture the landscape if your in an awkward position. what sort of landscapes are they, wide and vast or just the average countryside picture?
 
Option 1: Buy something like a 10-20mm zoom. Job done. Total cost: £300ish.

Option 2: Buy a full-frame DSLR and use your existing 28mm lens. Two problems. One: 28mm isn't very wide, even on FF and nowhere near as wide as the 10-20 zoom on your crop sensor camera. Two: You've spent £2000 without achieving your objective.

Hmmmm... decisions, decisions. It's a touch one.
 
or yes i see ya piont now so i supose i cant loose really if i shell out on a 10-20 lens i have always got the option but if i go full frame then yes i got full frame but i still goto buy more lens
thanks guys
thats why i love this forum :thumbs:

now then which lens i understand what your saying about zoom rather then prime what options have i got at around 400 :thinking:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top