If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Do full frame sensors make sense for you?
Given that many people use telephotos, is the extra "reach"
afforded by less than full frame sensors a positive benefit? Or, do you dislike having to have extreme wide angles (11-18mm) to do the job formerly done by less expensive SLR "normal" 20-28mm wide angles? -Rich |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
RichA wrote:
Given that many people use telephotos, is the extra "reach" afforded by less than full frame sensors a positive benefit? Or, do you dislike having to have extreme wide angles (11-18mm) to do the job formerly done by less expensive SLR "normal" 20-28mm wide angles? -Rich yes yes |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"RichA" wrote in message ... Given that many people use telephotos, is the extra "reach" afforded by less than full frame sensors a positive benefit? Or, do you dislike having to have extreme wide angles (11-18mm) to do the job formerly done by less expensive SLR "normal" 20-28mm wide angles? -Rich I use the great DA Pentax 14mm f:2.8 (IF) ED on my *ist D body. It closely matches my SMC Pentax-M 20mm f:4 in FOV. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
RichA wrote:
Given that many people use telephotos, is the extra "reach" afforded by less than full frame sensors a positive benefit? Or, do you dislike having to have extreme wide angles (11-18mm) to do the job formerly done by less expensive SLR "normal" 20-28mm wide angles? I don't particularly want full-frame. I can go as wide as I care to with a 1.5x crop, and I like the crop effect. And reality utterly fails to bear out the theories of "larger sensors have less noise" and such. Not to mention the lack of edge falloff, chromatic aberration, and etc. The only real advantage I see in full-frame would be the ability to achieve less depth of field. Having said that, we'll probably end up there sooner or later. -- Jeremy | |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Jeremy Nixon" wrote in message ... RichA wrote: Given that many people use telephotos, is the extra "reach" afforded by less than full frame sensors a positive benefit? Or, do you dislike having to have extreme wide angles (11-18mm) to do the job formerly done by less expensive SLR "normal" 20-28mm wide angles? I don't particularly want full-frame. I can go as wide as I care to with a 1.5x crop, and I like the crop effect. And reality utterly fails to bear out the theories of "larger sensors have less noise" and such. Not to mention the lack of edge falloff, chromatic aberration, and etc. The only real advantage I see in full-frame would be the ability to achieve less depth of field. Cropping is something I would like to have as an option. Here is the reason behind my dis-like of the FOV crop sensors: The whole idea of "full-frame" and FOV crop should really be meaningless. Who is to say that medium format is not "full-frame" and that 35mm is a "cropped" version. The reason that the FOV crop notion exists, is that the SLR lenses are designed to take advanatage of the 35mm geometry. All the top lenses have focal lengths designed around this geometry: 16-35 f2.8 - supposed to be ultra-wide 24-70 f2.8 - suppoesd to be wide to "normal" 50mm - supposed to be "normal" On my 20D these lenses do not really make sense (except the 16-35, but again, I will not be getting ultra wide here and only a 2X zoom for a high price). So, all the top-of-the-line lenses are still designed with this in mind. There has been a slew of "for-digital" lenses, but frankly these are not up to scratch. Their are cheap plasticky consumer lenses that provide satisfactory results. I would be much happier if Canon decided to release: - 10-22 f2.8L - 15-50 f2.8L - 30mm f1.4L - The tele lenses can stay as they are, but could be refined to use less glass due to smaller image cirlce required, so my 70-200f2.8LIS does not need to weigh so much. This would show me that Canon are serious about these "1.6x" sensors being the future. So two things need to happen to make me happy: 1) Begin to "end-of-life" the 35mm format and introduce the "hypothetical" lenses. Release "pro" bodies which have the 1.6x FOV crop or 2) Evolve the prosumer (20D) cameras to use a FF sensor I really dont care which, except that 2 above has the potential for lower noise and the DOF we are used to from film (alas, at the potential for higher prices). Having said that, we'll probably end up there sooner or later. I hope you're right - but I fear that you may be wrong. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
RichA wrote:
Given that many people use telephotos, is the extra "reach" afforded by less than full frame sensors a positive benefit? Or, do you dislike having to have extreme wide angles (11-18mm) to do the job formerly done by less expensive SLR "normal" 20-28mm wide angles? -Rich I would prefer that DSLRs broke out of the "35mm" mould and went to a smaller, lighter system such as 4/3 might become. David |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 20:01:06 -0400, RichA wrote:
Given that many people use telephotos, is the extra "reach" afforded by less than full frame sensors a positive benefit? Or, do you dislike having to have extreme wide angles (11-18mm) to do the job formerly done by less expensive SLR "normal" 20-28mm wide angles? -Rich Yes. Yes. I am in a position where I can do either job using the tools at my disposal. I treat my Nikon digital as a different system to my Nikon film but with some overlap. Works for me. -- ? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"RichA" wrote in message ... Given that many people use telephotos, is the extra "reach" afforded by less than full frame sensors a positive benefit? Or, do you dislike having to have extreme wide angles (11-18mm) to do the job formerly done by less expensive SLR "normal" 20-28mm wide angles? -Rich There is no 'extra reach', it's just a cropped full frame. You just enlarge it more. I look forward to full frame with justifyable (to me) prices, and my lens will do what they say on the box ie 20mm=20mm. next.. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
RichA wrote: Given that many people use telephotos, is the extra "reach" afforded by less than full frame sensors a positive benefit? Or, do you dislike having to have extreme wide angles (11-18mm) to do the job formerly done by less expensive SLR "normal" 20-28mm wide angles? 'Full frame' sensors start to make sense when people can afford more than one sensor. At the moment, the 1.5x/1.6x crop sensors are probably best in line with what 35mm film used to be: a practical and affordable format. The advantage of full frame 35mm sensors over 1.5x crop sensors is that you can have: 1) more pixels. Which is good for big enlargements, or 2) (in theory) better sensitivity if you keep the number of pixel the same as in the cropped format, or 3) better colors (you can afford filters that are less efficient). Bigger sensors make sense if you need one of those three features. Once sensor technology is stable enough that almost no progress is to be expected, camera manufacturers are likely to produce sensors with different trade-offs that are dedicated to specific markets (low-light, large crop factor, high resolutions, accurate colors, etc.) -- That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make. -- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
RichA wrote:
Given that many people use telephotos, is the extra "reach" afforded by less than full frame sensors a positive benefit? Or, do you dislike having to have extreme wide angles (11-18mm) to do the job formerly done by less expensive SLR "normal" 20-28mm wide angles? The thing that doesn't make sense is having these huge lenses which are designed for a full sensor. For that reason alone, it's inevitable there will be a push for affordable full size sensors. I would want one for low noise but I'd also want to keep my D70 for telephoto. -- Paul Furman http://www.edgehill.net/1 san francisco native plants |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
CANON - The Great Pretender | nikonpro | Digital Photography | 48 | August 23rd 04 11:36 PM |
CANON - The Great Pretender | Martin Francis | 35mm Photo Equipment | 14 | August 23rd 04 11:36 PM |
Master Mason Handbook | Doug Robbins | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | July 15th 04 03:33 PM |
Framed and Exposed: Making Sense of Camera Sensors | Frank ess | Digital Photography | 0 | July 7th 04 05:18 AM |
This can make you some extra cash, check it out. | Nick Burns | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | July 14th 03 05:25 PM |