[normhead]

Its really time for an END to this bickering over FF versus APS. I don't see bickering like that in the gallery i work for, i don't see it in the theater i work for nor do i see it in the photography club i attend. The bickering is just ugly and personal and its time for it to end. My hope is that the moderators will just close down all threads with this petty bickering in it. Its just petty BS. Do you really think that is all photography has to offer- bickering and trading sarcasm over who has the best equipment Thats the sole takeway for young people to emulate?

After all, with the Pentax FF in the works, it's even more pointless than ever. The Nikon and Canon fanboys trying to win new converts are going to have a lot fewer arguments in their favour. It's been frustrating at times, it's been amusing at times... but I agree is should end. 99% of it is just people being idiots. I'd still like t see the "hey look what I can do with my camera" stuff, no matter what brand or format. But most of the format stuff isn't that. Most of the format stuff, isn't informative, doesn't have visual examples, and is pretty much useless even to people who are interested in the topics. It's just people tossing around opinions as if format was a religion.

---

Last edited by normhead; 04-05-2015 at 08:09 AM.

[jsherman999]

...(several paragraphs of diatribe, and then...) its a camera folks. It doesn't affect 99% of your life. It's no big deal.

^ Good advice, Norm. Will you take it?

Meta: Note that the main question of the thread was "what are the advantages of FF." Very valid question, especially when we now have a FF body on the way and folks are working out their wants/needs/budgets. It would be nice if the FF threads could start to take on a new flavor, away from the FF-bashing that always seems to happen when certain people enter the FF thread.

For example, if this is your contribution:

What I see when I read these guys going on and on about FF as if it's the be all and end all, are little kids in short pants telling you all about their new toys, or the toy they are hoping they get for Christmas. Only now they're grown up, and still reciting the fantasies that go with their new toys.

.... Maybe just move along? (and did you notice the subform you're posting in?)

.

[Rondec]

^ Good advice, Norm. Will you take it?

Meta: Note that the main question of the thread was "what are the advantages of FF." Very valid question, especially when we now have a FF body on the way and folks are working out their wants/needs/budgets. It would be nice if the FF threads could start to take on a new flavor, away from the FF-bashing that always seems to happen when certain people enter the FF thread.

For example, if this is your contribution:



.... Maybe just move along? (and did you notice the subform you're posting in?)

.

I guess I wish that the formats could coexist better, rather than full frame folks basically telling folks that shoot crop frames that their cameras are second rate cameras that they only shoot because they are too cheap to buy a full frame camera. Other than Norm, I see little bashing of full frame cameras. I have felt very strong from you and from others, Jay, that my photos are not adequate because of the format I shoot with. There is too much depth of field, too much distortion, etc. Like it or not, that is the message that is sent regularly and consistently in these threads.

Not every one has money for full frame cameras, but that doesn't make their photographic contributions to this forum any less important. Nor, if they choose to shoot Q or V1 or four thirds for that matter.

The goal is to create images and instill memories, particularly for those of us who shoot for a hobby and not a job. Little of what we create will be "art" regardless of the sensor size used to create it.

[jsherman999]

I guess I wish that the formats could coexist better, rather than full frame folks basically telling folks that shoot crop frames that their cameras are second rate cameras that they only shoot because they are too cheap to buy a full frame camera.

Can you show me where that ^ was said in this (or any) thread? (or are you fighting 'the last war' )

Other than Norm, I see little bashing of full frame cameras.

Norm is the main basher, and he gets personal at the drop of a hat, depending on his mood or when he finally realizes he's losing an argument. Pal is another gem. There are others who drop in from time to time.

I have felt very strong from you and from others, Jay, that my photos are not adequate because of the format I shoot with. There is too much depth of field, too much distortion, etc.

If you use an aps-c shot you made as an example of something in an FF thread, and someone tries to tell you how the FF shot could have been different, don't take it as an insult on your image - take it as it was meant, (hopefully) instructive. These FF threads are not gallery threads where the object is to get 'likes', they're meant to be discussion threads on the technical and aesthetic merits of our equipment and shooting choices.

(On the other hand, if someone comes in here just to insult, they'll get the same back.)

Not every one has money for full frame cameras, but that doesn't make their photographic contributions to this forum any less important. Nor, if they choose to shoot Q or V1 or four thirds for that matter.

Again.... Look at the subform thread title. Folks are not going into the K5 and K3 threads telling people they need to upgrade (I don't think. I'm not anyway!) You're coming in here. The topic of discussion in here and in the off-brand forum is often FF, merits, advantages, thoughts & shots.


.

[Rondec]

Can you show me where that ^ was said in this (or any) thread? (or are you fighting 'the last war' )



Norm is the main basher, and he gets personal at the drop of a hat, depending on his mood or when he finally realizes he's losing an argument. Pal is another gem. There are others who drop in from time to time.



If you use an aps-c shot you made as an example of something in an FF thread, and someone tries to tell you how the FF shot could have been different, don't take it as an insult on your image - take it as it was meant, (hopefully) instructive. These FF threads are not gallery threads where the object is to get 'likes', they're meant to be discussion threads on the technical and aesthetic merits of our equipment and shooting choices.

(On the other hand, if someone comes in here just to insult, they'll get the same back.)



Again.... Look at the subform thread title. Folks are not going into the K5 and K3 threads telling people they need to upgrade (I don't think. I'm not anyway!) You're coming in here. The topic of discussion in here and in the off-brand forum is often FF, merits, advantages, thoughts & shots.


.

I have said I plan to get a full frame camera. These threads won't change that one direction or the other. I just want to make certain that folks who don't have resources for such a camera do not feel like second class citizens.

I do not sense that on the "Post Your Full Frame Shots Here" thread, but in these gear discussions, it tends to degenerate quickly into discussions of distortion, lack of sharpness, lack of tone depth and color depth with smaller sensors than full frame. And no, no one picks a particular photo to attack, but the overall tone is one that whatever photo one might post that was shot with a crop camera could have been improved through the use of a bigger sensor.

[jsherman999]

... And no, no one picks a particular photo to attack, but the overall tone is one that whatever photo one might post that was shot with a crop camera could have been improved through the use of a bigger sensor.

But that ^ begs the question... isn't that part of the reason the 'FF' subforum exists, to discuss the format differences?

This isn't a "please compliment my aps-c shot" subforum, is it? We have plenty of those!

[Winder]

I have said I plan to get a full frame camera.

Why will you buy a FF? Most of your posts seem to be implying that there is no real advantage to FF over APS-C. Why spend the money?

I have felt very strong from you and from others, Jay, that my photos are not adequate because of the format I shoot with.

I don't think anyone has implied anything negative about your work. We have all been shooting with ASP-C, so it not just the format "you" shoot. Its the format all of us shoot. Some of us also shoot FF or other formats as well.

no one picks a particular photo to attack

Its kind of pointless to post web quality pictures and discuss, and again nobody is attacking anyone's work. 2MP 8-bit JPEGs aren't what many of us are shooting for and since I would bet most of the people on this forum don't actually have color calibrated monitors there is no telling what they are seeing.

[ElJamoquio]

Again.... Look at the subform thread title. Folks are not going into the K5 and K3 threads telling people they need to upgrade (I don't think. I'm not anyway!) You're coming in here. The topic of discussion in here and in the off-brand forum is often FF, merits, advantages, thoughts & shots.

quoted for emphasis

[Rondec]

But that ^ begs the question... isn't that part of the reason the 'FF' subforum exists, to discuss the format differences?

This isn't a "please compliment my aps-c shot" subforum, is it? We have plenty of those!

You and I have different memories. The whole point of the full frame forum was to attempt (unsuccesfully) to limit bickering to a smaller portion of the forums, rather than have every thread turn into and equivalence or full frame versus APS-C thread.

---------- Post added 04-05-15 at 01:19 PM ----------

Why will you buy a FF? Most of your posts seem to be implying that there is no real advantage to FF over APS-C. Why spend the money?






I don't think anyone has implied anything negative about your work. We have all been shooting with ASP-C, so it not just the format "you" shoot. Its the format all of us shoot. Some of us also shoot FF or other formats as well.




Its kind of pointless to post web quality pictures and discuss, and again nobody is attacking anyone's work. 2MP 8-bit JPEGs aren't what many of us are shooting for and since I would bet most of the people on this forum don't actually have color calibrated monitors there is no telling what they are seeing.

I do plan to get full frame. I have the money and I want it. Do I need another reason?

[Winder]

I do plan to get full frame. I have the money and I want it. Do I need another reason?

Why do you want it if you don't think there is an advantage? Why do you want to spend the money on a format that won't improve the quality of your images?


As you said in a previous post: "The whole point of photography is the image."


You don't need another reason, but I sure you have one unless the whole point is not the image, but collecting gear.

[Rondec]

Why do you want it if you don't think there is an advantage? Why do you want to spend the money on a format that won't improve the quality of your images?


As you said in a previous post: "The whole point of photography is the image."


You don't need another reason, but I sure you have one unless the whole point is not the image, but collecting gear.

I'm sure there is improvement available. I have mentioned that my wife shoots professionally and does weddings, so she will probably benefit from better high iso. As for me personally, I just want to try it. I definitely don't need it, I probably don't need the gear I have, but photography is one of the few hobbies I have and so I do spend a little bit of frivolous money on it. At the same time, I don't really expect my images to improve a whole lot, except as I invest myself in the effort needed to improve myself.

I hope this isn't turning too personal, but as I look back at images I have shot, I have made many mistakes. Generally, I am not let down by the gear I used, but often I didn't know how to get the most out of it. There are a handful of images that I am truly pleased with and a few more that aren't too bad, but most of what I have shot needs a lot of work. Getting a new camera might inspire me to work harder to get better, but the camera itself certainly won't get me out of bed at the golden hour or, see the world in such a way as to capture it better.

[normhead]

Meta: Note that the main question of the thread was "what are the advantages of FF." Very valid question, especially when we now have a FF body on the way and folks are working out their wants/needs/budgets. It would be nice if the FF threads could start to take on a new flavor, away from the FF-bashing that always seems to happen when certain people enter the FF thread.

I'm not sure why discussions of format are seen as an excuse to repeat the media propaganda and idiocy around the topic. People will see a need to correct stupid. If you don't like that, don't post stupid. People like yourself tend to see FF through some kind of rose coloured glasses, and say all kinds of wild things, make all kinds of wild claims, like snake oil salesmen. Is that positive? No that's not what the thread is about. It's about the real advantages. Not the ones so insignificant you can't see a difference, not the ones that are just plain erroneous. Making up stuff to justify your FF purpose is not the purpose of the thread.

The advantages of FF are pretty simple... you can buy higher resolution cameras, but many full frame enthusiasts don't, you can achieve narrower DoF, but again, many FF users don't or actually go to far and ruin their chance for a good image, with too narrow DoF, and better low light and noise performance, if you sacrifice DoF and if you actually believe any low light image is a good image. After that, people are pretty much just making up stuff. And that's the problem, people need to get to what's important to them about their FF, and cut out all the imagined crap that in so many cases has proved to be just nothing more than propaganda.

I can totally understand someone saying an FF is good for them. I have no use for people implying it would be good for me. Sorry, but that's just out of line. As for why I'm in the FF threads. I own a couple of film FFs and used one of them for 30 years. I might know a little bit about the format. Some people just want the facts, not the fluff.

[TomTextura]

I wouldn't claim that APS-C cameras are just bridge cameras to FF. The smaller format does a damn good job of standing on its own. That being said, I'm going to run with the metaphor anyway.

There are plenty of people who will never have a need or desire to cross that format bridge. Nonetheless, with the K mount full frame officially on it's way now it will soon be entirely possible to have have one foot on each side of that bridge and still firmly be in Pentax land. Unfortunately, people who are simply asking and answering questions about what to expect on the other side of that metaphorical bridge can't seem to do so on this forum without a non-metaphorical troll butting in each and every time.

Often times I get a laugh out of watching the troll jump up and down while it waves its arms and grunts repeatedly. But after a while, it reduces to simply being obnoxious, unnecessary, and unwelcome. It's as if the troll believes that if it is relentlessly louder than everyone else it will succeed in preventing anyone from journeying across that bridge or even casting a glance in that direction. Well, the troll won't ever succeed to that extreme but it sure has made it difficult for people on the two sides of that format bridge to have an intelligent and fruitful conversation. It's a shame.

[mecrox]

I'd like to feel I could get the best shot I possibly can when capturing silence and stillness in old country churches. Isn't the feeling that I'm still hunting the best shot, and always will be, one of the whole draws in photography? Nothing is ever finished. When is a painting ever finished? Only when the artist stops painting it. From what I've seen something like a Nikon D810 and an appropriate WA lens will get me nearer to my goal than anything I've so far experienced on APS-C. Whether I could ever afford it, well who knows. But that sensor strikes me as clearly a step up with my purpose in mind. The notion that a sensor half as large is just as good me strikes as inherently implausible. In some circs yes it will be, because a larger format would be complete overkill, but not in all circumstances at all. Alas, though, I am not really waiting for a Pentax FF. Chances are a second-hand D800E or A7R will be affordable a long, long time before a Pentax equivalent is. I'll keep the K3, though, regardless of what pans out. It's too good to pass up for plenty of things.

[Kunzite]

Image quality alone was not, and is not "one of the whole draws in photography". If that were true, there would be no medium and small formats. So we have to accept that smaller formats can have their own advantages, be it only cost and convenience.
It's entirely plausible that, for small birds (like the one posted a page or so ago), a high pixel density APS-C camera would be more suited, than a lower or even same pixel density camera of a larger format. Perhaps we could reach a compromise, that no format can be "the best" in every possible situation?