Quick one from someone who moved "up" from a D300s to a D700.
If your work involved wide angle work, and you value a big viewfinder and you want to use a range of traditional lenes rather than DX or crop only ones the yes, move up.
However if you use tele lenes and your work involves say Aviation, then no, don't bother. And this is where the market falls down. Nikon and Canon appear not to be providing quality semi-pro or even pro crop bodies. Yes, Nikon still may sell you a D300s and Canon a 7d. But these are old bodies.
I think what work you do will determine what type of body to go for. Crop does not mean crap. One option may be to move up to a FF and buy a bottom end crop for that distance work. I bought my Mrs a D3200 for just that, then she doesn't let me use it for aviation work!
Quick one from someone who moved "up" from a D300s to a D700.
If your work involved wide angle work, and you value a big viewfinder and you want to usea range of traditional lenes rather than DX or crop only ones the yes, move up.
This.For me personally there's little in it these days unless you are pushing at the very edges of what these cameras can do.
.
For me personally there's little in it these days unless you are pushing at the very edges of what these cameras can do.
This.
Mainly For portrait/lifestyle photography
Yup. I went APS-C -> FF -> micro 4/3rds. Weight and size whilst retaining 90% of the image quality was my reason for change.As good as full frame's image quality advantages, the biggest disadvantage I found was its price, weight and size. When you factor in the full frame lenses' weight and size, you are looking at almost doubling the amount of stuff you carry.
The main thing i noticed was my bag got a lot heavier & my wallet got a lot lighter :bonk:
This is where I think u4/3 has a significant advantage. Not only are the f2.8 zooms significantly smaller and lighter, the 70-200 equivalent is way cheaper than the Canon/Nikon versions. The consequence is I can afford to buy and actually carry the f2.8 for u4/3rds instead of the f4 70-200 I had for the 5D2. That gets back 1 stop of noise advantage there. Let alone the fact I always have it with me if I have my camera out with me as it's 300odd grammes as opposed to 1.6kgFor me it was all about noise performance.
..
Like others, the big draw back for me was the cost of quality lenses, particularly decent fast zooms.
This is where I think u4/3 has a significant advantage. Not only are the f2.8 zooms significantly smaller and lighter, the 70-200 equivalent is way cheaper than the Canon/Nikon versions. The consequence is I can afford to buy and actually carry the f2.8 for u4/3rds instead of the f4 70-200 I had for the 5D2. That gets back 1 stop of noise advantage there. Let alone the fact I always have it with me if I have my camera out with me as it's 300odd grammes as opposed to 1.6kg.
barratt1988 said:What lenses do you own? If you own crop lenses its going to work out very pricey. And depending on what sort of photograhy you do depends how much you'd benefit from FF
I have a 70-200 f4.0l, a 17-55 f2.8 and a 50mm 1.8 and I use them for portrait/lifestyle photography
70-200 f4L is FF. 50mm f1.8 is also FF.
17-55 f2.8 is crop only.
The switch will require you to buy 24-70 f2.8L, also perhaps 85mm f1.8 for portrait if you want to retain 50mm on crop's field of view.
If I was to upgrade from a crop sensor to a full frame body what would be the benefits?
Thanks
Also the lenses have an easier time projecting onto smaller sensors,...
Quick one from someone who moved "up" from a D300s to a D700.
If your work involved wide angle work, and you value a big viewfinder and you want to use a range of traditional lenes rather than DX or crop only ones the yes, move up.
However if you use tele lenes and your work involves say Aviation, then no, don't bother. And this is where the market falls down. Nikon and Canon appear not to be providing quality semi-pro or even pro crop bodies.
Except they don't. You have to squeeze more onto a smaller sensor which means the lenses have to work harder the smaller the sensor...Also the lenses have an easier time projecting onto smaller sensors,
Yes you do. I can afford (and have owned) FF, I choose to shoot micro 4/3rds. The supposed advantages just aren't there in all but the extremes woof woof has mentioned.I think once you go full frame you'll never go back to crop....as long as the finances allow.