I have kind of stumbled into paying photography gigs, and do enjoy them. Recently upgraded to a 77d but have been torn as to if I should have gone full frame.
I mainly shoot indoors at night without additional lighting (flash or continuous) in a reportage style. I bought a sigma 18-50 f2.8 to help, and it has, my client is very happy with my shots, but I think they could be better and it is a camera/light limitation.
Looking at FF cameras and read that they are batter in low light but have a narrower DOF at large aperture, so could f2.8 be too small DOF on FF but ok on aps-c in the same situation?
Because the sensor is bigger I understand it gathers more light (higher iso with less noise) so if I was shooting at a higher iso at f4 on FF rather than lower iso at f2.8 on crop I would still get better results or would they balance out to be almost equal.
Being self employed it is hard to justify large spending, but have to have the right tools for the job.
Cheers, T
I mainly shoot indoors at night without additional lighting (flash or continuous) in a reportage style. I bought a sigma 18-50 f2.8 to help, and it has, my client is very happy with my shots, but I think they could be better and it is a camera/light limitation.
Looking at FF cameras and read that they are batter in low light but have a narrower DOF at large aperture, so could f2.8 be too small DOF on FF but ok on aps-c in the same situation?
Because the sensor is bigger I understand it gathers more light (higher iso with less noise) so if I was shooting at a higher iso at f4 on FF rather than lower iso at f2.8 on crop I would still get better results or would they balance out to be almost equal.
Being self employed it is hard to justify large spending, but have to have the right tools for the job.
Cheers, T