full frame v the rest

D

dunk

Messages
140
Edit My Images
Yes
ok guys, in a way i can understand. what benefits would i get from going to an eos 5d 12.1mp from an eos 500d.
can you say as a percentage how much better the photos will be cropped and uncropped?
or am i asking an impossible question? :)
 
dunk said:
ok guys, in a way i can understand. what benefits would i get from going to an eos 5d 12.1mp from an eos 500d.
can you say as a percentage how much better the photos will be cropped and uncropped?
or am i asking an impossible question? :)
Click to expand...

This has been discussed quite a few times recently, do a little search :)
 
Remember a wise man once said, "A journey of a billion threads is started by reading the first one."

I think.
 
dunk said:
do any of them explain it simply? :thinking: :LOL:
Click to expand...


Yes.

My favourite is #1, #17, # 999,999 oh and no forgetting 774,111,002

HTH :)
 
dunk said:
ok guys, in a way i can understand. what benefits would i get from going to an eos 5d 12.1mp from an eos 500d.
can you say as a percentage how much better the photos will be cropped and uncropped?
or am i asking an impossible question? :)
Click to expand...

I recently bought a 5D after years of APS-C use. I think that there's no denying that the 5D takes a better picture and gives you different options but I don't think you'll see a night and day difference. I didn't anyway.

The most significant changes I've seen are...

Slightly better high ISO performance after noise reduction, the 5D images seem include quite a bit of noise but they seem to clean up better.

A much more sensible shutter/mirror noise when compared to the awful anvil chucked into a tin bath noise that my 20D makes.

And the negatives...

There's no inbuilt flash so if you like to use the inbuilt flash for fill flash or snap shots you're out of luck and will need an add on unit.

The camera and lens combination is probably going to be bigger and heavier and more conspicuous than a similar APS-C set up even before you start thinking about flash.

Good or bad, you decide...

Vignetting. I've noticed vignetting in 5D shots that I never saw with very similar APS-C shots. In some cases this is nice and it takes me back to my Nikon 35mm days.

Framing etc and the dreaded DoF. As you may well be shooting with different lenses or closer to your subject to get the framing you want you may notice that you're using smaller apertures and / or longer shutter speeds. I've noticed this and as I mostly shoot hand held it's a potential issue, one potential fix is to boost the ISO to keep the shutter speed up so it's fortunate that 5D shots seem to respond well to NR. On the positive side a full frame camera and a fast lens combined with the (possibly) shorter camera to subject distance for the same framing as APS-C will possibly give you more control over depth of field, if you like it shallow, but the other side of the coin is that if you want a lot of depth of field you may end up using smaller apertures than you're used to and that could impact on shutter speed and ISO choices.

Bigger viewfinder. Not really a massive issue though, IMVHO.

On the whole, I'd say go for it.
 
You'll probably find better answers there as well, because not everybody can be bothered to discuss the same thing week in week out, so have a look.

I'm pretty sure the same topic came up as recently as last week here on TP, did you find the thread?
 
scottthehat said:
simply put better high iso, better picture quality all together and better depth of field.
downside is dearer lenses. worth it if you can afford it,
Click to expand...

Only better depth of filed if you want it shallow. Crop is better for a nice deep DoF at bigger apertures.

To the OP, its swings and roundabout and depends on what you photograph. However, the differences are often moot when the images are viewed small on the web! ;)
 
Alan (woof woof) pretty much summed it up, I have both a 60D and on Monday picked up a 5D classic.

You'll notice two things straight away - firstly your EF-S (Sigma DC, Tamron Di II) lenses will not work properly (you can fit them, but really don't!), the second is that with the classic the screen on the back is just for a histogram as compared to what we are used to the picture is rubbish - really it is! In fact it may be why people are so pleased with them, you hope you got a good picture and if you;re lucky you did - there is just no way of knowing for sure.

Once you're past the two obvious ones, there are the more subtle ones:

The way you think about lenses has to change, you expect what you call as 100mm lens to look a certain way, but really it will look more like 65mm lens - I know thats the wrong way round but if you're coming from a crop as I have thats the way you'll probably perceive it.

Now oddly things do just look better, no idea why - I guess its the depth of field or just that the noise is somehow nicer - its still there, don't believe it isn't, it is - just not as annoying.

If you want so see what I mean take a look at my 5D gallery, although bear in mind I've only just got it and don't really know what I'm doing with it (or my 60D for that matter!), as it happens I'm in the process of uploading my 500D gallery but its not a fair comparison as I didn't have as good lenses and it was over two years ago, but its there if you want to look.

Now if you can ignore the writing on the bottom, here are two relatively similar shots using the same lens - sorry I couldn't find any closer ones!

 
Last edited:
JohnN said:
...with the classic the screen on the back is just for a histogram as compared to what we are used to the picture is rubbish - really it is! In fact it may be why people are so pleased with them, you hope you got a good picture and if you;re lucky you did - there is just no way of knowing for sure.
Click to expand...

I know that this is an issue for many people. I don't mind the crappy screen on the 5D and the even crappier one on the 20D because I only use them for a quick check and that's it. In fact, I find myself being annoyed by the huge flat screen TV on the back of the 5D as it takes about 4 seconds for it to become smeared with finger and nose prints.

I find the G1 to be great as I can turn the screen around and fold it away :D
 
Funnily enough despite my tone its not that annoying when you actually come to use it, after all even on our flash hi-res foldout screens its only a quick glance to make sure its not a total dud and you can still do that with the screen, and as I understand it if you got a later 5D (serial 03xxxxxxxx) or higher they made the screen a little better (or at least not tinted green).
 
zulupentax said:
:) oh now i get it.

Because not always shallower DOF is best, depends upon your requirements.
That's why I prefer to shoot with the 7D this one rather than with the 5D MKII :)
Click to expand...
to be honest amin you only need to stop the lens down if the dof is to shallow so i dont think its a problem, but its nice to have it, also someone mentiond noise saying that its still there (try a d700 or d3 or d3s):D
and amin thats a lovely shot.
 
scottthehat said:
to be honest amin you only need to stop the lens down if the dof is to shallow so i dont think its a problem, but its nice to have it, also someone mentiond noise saying that its still there (try a d700 or d3 or d3s):D
and amin thats a lovely shot.
Click to expand...

Thanks Scott,
D700 wouldn't cut it for me, sorry :). Not enough pixels for my needs ;)
Besides, I love white :LOL:
 
zulupentax said:
Thanks Scott,
D700 wouldn't cut it for me, sorry :). Not enough pixels for my needs ;)
Besides, I love white :LOL:
Click to expand...
i cant see the difference as ive pointed out before between the d700 and the 20meg boys like the 5dmk11 and the sony a900
5d mk11 full image.
http://i727.photobucket.com/albums/ww272/scottthehat/E5D2INBI00100.jpg
crop
http://i727.photobucket.com/albums/ww272/scottthehat/E5D2INBI00100c-1.jpg
and just for fun the d700 upscaled to match the 5dmk11
full image.
http://i727.photobucket.com/albums/ww272/scottthehat/D700INBI00100.jpg
crop.
http://i727.photobucket.com/albums/ww272/scottthehat/D700INBI00100c.jpg
 
Last edited:
scottthehat said:
i cant see the difference as ive pointed out before between the d700 and the 20meg boys like the 5dmk11 and the sony a900
5d mk11 full image.
http://i727.photobucket.com/albums/ww272/scottthehat/E5D2INBI00100.jpg
crop
http://i727.photobucket.com/albums/ww272/scottthehat/E5D2INBI00100c-1.jpg
and just for fun the d700 upscaled to match the 5dmk11
full image.
http://i727.photobucket.com/albums/ww272/scottthehat/D700INBI00100.jpg
crop.
http://i727.photobucket.com/albums/ww272/scottthehat/D700INBI00100c.jpg
Click to expand...

I like the Menu system of the Canon
 
zulupentax said:
:) oh now i get it.

Because not always shallower DOF is best, depends upon your requirements.
That's why I prefer to shoot with the 7D this one rather than with the 5D MKII :)
Click to expand...

If you want more DoF from your 5D with the same lens and aperture you'd use on the 7D just back up a bit and then crop the image, et voila, you've got the same framing and the same DoF you'd get with the 7D... well... possibly. Cropping isn't always ideal but you might still get a large enough print :D and I find it works well enough to allow me to take flower shots with a 5D when I haven't got my 20D.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top