Do I want FF or not?

AV82GOLF · 03-11-2009, 03:27 PM

Ever since I started shooting digital, noise has been my constant pet peeve. I have been patiently waiting for Pentax to come out with a FF camera so that I can finally put an end to this noise issue. Recently though I have been giving more thought to the type of shooting I do and I was wondering if FF would really be better. A good half of my shots are BIF (birds or bugs) and macro. Both usually require a good bit of cropping for the final pic. Since I received my K20 I've noticed an improved ability to crop and retain really good resolution over my old K10. This got me to thinking. Suppose two 14mp cameras had the same pixel count and 300 mm lens, but one was FF and one wasn't. If you took a shot of a distant object with both and then cropped both to get the same final view, wouldn't the FF shot produce a poorer pic and suffer from less resolution and more pixelation? Both cameras had 14mp, but the FF camera is spreading them over a much larger area (viewing angle). It seems to me that for FF to be a benifit, it MUST also come with a much larger file size? This also makes me wonder why Nikon's D300 and D700 have the same 12mp? The D700 produces less noise, but wouldn't the 300 produce a superior picture if it were cropped?
I was hoping that someone with a better understanding of this could reply. Also, besides the less noise and shallower depth of field, what are (if any ) the benifits of FF cameras? They are bigger, heavier, more expensive, and, it would seem, make it more difficult to take good telephoto shots...although wide angle would be improved.

Thanks
Tony

TonyC · 03-11-2009, 03:42 PM

For some of the reasons you suggest I use Pentax for telephoto photography and a full frame digital camera or medium format for wide angle. It works OK, but as long as I stick with Pentax it does mean two systems. By the way the noise on my FF camera is worse that on my Pentax.
Tony

mrt10x · 03-11-2009, 04:12 PM

read this thread
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/40091-could-someon...advantage.html

I just did.. end to end.. .great info.. I still havent made up my mind

mithrandir · 03-11-2009, 08:37 PM

There is an interesting article on whether now is the time to go to FF in the April Popular Photography Magazine.

AV82GOLF · 03-11-2009, 09:21 PM

''read this thread
Could someone explain FF advantage ?''

mrt10x
Thanks for the link to this thread! I have been giving this a lot of thought lately, and it looks like I was correct in my assumptions. One format (DX or FX) is really no ''better'' than the other. How good a format is really depends on your style of shooting and requirements. If you shoot primarily landscapes, portraits, weddings ect, and can afford the money, FF is the way to go. If, on the other hand, you shoot mostly telephoto and can't achieve the same field of view with a longer lens, then the DX has the advantage.
I hope this post is a help to anyone else considering FF Just ''because that is what the Pros use''. I think too many people just assume something is better because the Pros use it and don't give any or enough thought to the nuts and bolts involved in WHY they use somthing. The link you provided covers the explantions very well. I'm actually surprised that this is the first time I've come accross this informatiom. Anyway...thanks again.

Tony

Damn Brit · 03-11-2009, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by mithrandir

There is an interesting article on whether now is the time to go to FF in the April Popular Photography Magazine.

Conveniently published at a time when people are tightening their belts. I think the media will be full of articles suggesting that FF is the new wheel.
Cynical I know but Pop Photo and Sony especially, share a bed and it is Sony that is tanking,

Mike Cash · 03-12-2009, 05:03 AM

A wonderful full frame Pentax:

I couldn't resist.

mithrandir · 03-12-2009, 05:58 AM

Actually, the Pop Photo article is not pushing FF at all. They are recommending FF for just a small group of users and actually make recommendations for APS-C for the vast majority with the reasoning behind their recommendations.

Billgscott · 03-12-2009, 06:16 AM

Originally posted by Mike Cash

A wonderful full frame Pentax:

I couldn't resist.

Oh I wanted one of these SOOO badly. Went with ME Super though in the end.

dkittle · 03-12-2009, 08:02 AM

I'm actually jumping on the FF (N***n) bandwagon tomorrow, but not really for the sensor! I just want the auto focus system for my people photography. I'm keeping my K100D, though, and will use that mostly for vacations and trips to the park and such - the 55-300mm is ideal for that.

A friend of mine and I shot for a fitness facility the other weekend, he with a D700 and me with a K20D. Our photos on hires LCD monitors looked identical. Mine were a bit sharper (I used my 31mm, he used a 35-70mm f/2.8) but his has slightly more DR to my eyes. Essentially very little difference, though.

Oh, and going FF for wide angle seems like a strange concept too. I just picked up a Tamron 17-35mm and it's pretty terrible performance in the corners on a FF camera. Considering the price of a Sigma 10-20 used, going wide on APS-C seems like a very viable option.

pasipasi · 03-12-2009, 08:07 AM

I want a digital FF body, because there's no cheap wide angle primes for the crop sensor.

PentaxPoke · 03-12-2009, 08:32 AM

Originally posted by pasipasi

I want a digital FF body, because there's no cheap wide angle primes for the crop sensor.

I want an APS-C body because there's no cheap long telephoto primes for FF.

Gooshin · 03-12-2009, 08:32 AM

Originally posted by pasipasi

I want a digital FF body, because there's no cheap wide angle primes for the crop sensor.

whats a cheap wide angle prime for a FF?

Gooshin · 03-12-2009, 08:33 AM

Originally posted by PentaxPoke

I want an APS-C body because there's no cheap long telephoto primes for FF.

2X converter

dkittle · 03-12-2009, 09:21 AM

I think those things are the origin of the line:

"It's a bird, it's a plane, no, it's SUPERMAN!"

Originally posted by Gooshin

2X converter

03-11-2009, 03:27 PM	#1
AV82GOLF Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, Ca. Posts: 78	Do I want FF or not? Ever since I started shooting digital, noise has been my constant pet peeve. I have been patiently waiting for Pentax to come out with a FF camera so that I can finally put an end to this noise issue. Recently though I have been giving more thought to the type of shooting I do and I was wondering if FF would really be better. A good half of my shots are BIF (birds or bugs) and macro. Both usually require a good bit of cropping for the final pic. Since I received my K20 I've noticed an improved ability to crop and retain really good resolution over my old K10. This got me to thinking. Suppose two 14mp cameras had the same pixel count and 300 mm lens, but one was FF and one wasn't. If you took a shot of a distant object with both and then cropped both to get the same final view, wouldn't the FF shot produce a poorer pic and suffer from less resolution and more pixelation? Both cameras had 14mp, but the FF camera is spreading them over a much larger area (viewing angle). It seems to me that for FF to be a benifit, it MUST also come with a much larger file size? This also makes me wonder why Nikon's D300 and D700 have the same 12mp? The D700 produces less noise, but wouldn't the 300 produce a superior picture if it were cropped? I was hoping that someone with a better understanding of this could reply. Also, besides the less noise and shallower depth of field, what are (if any ) the benifits of FF cameras? They are bigger, heavier, more expensive, and, it would seem, make it more difficult to take good telephoto shots...although wide angle would be improved. Thanks Tony

03-11-2009, 03:42 PM	#2
TonyC New Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Posts: 10	For some of the reasons you suggest I use Pentax for telephoto photography and a full frame digital camera or medium format for wide angle. It works OK, but as long as I stick with Pentax it does mean two systems. By the way the noise on my FF camera is worse that on my Pentax. Tony

03-11-2009, 04:12 PM	#3
mrt10x Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Woodland Park CO Posts: 102	read this thread https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/40091-could-someon...advantage.html I just did.. end to end.. .great info.. I still havent made up my mind

03-11-2009, 08:37 PM	#4
mithrandir Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,895	There is an interesting article on whether now is the time to go to FF in the April Popular Photography Magazine.

03-11-2009, 09:21 PM	#5
AV82GOLF Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, Ca. Posts: 78 Original Poster	''read this thread Could someone explain FF advantage ?'' mrt10x Thanks for the link to this thread! I have been giving this a lot of thought lately, and it looks like I was correct in my assumptions. One format (DX or FX) is really no ''better'' than the other. How good a format is really depends on your style of shooting and requirements. If you shoot primarily landscapes, portraits, weddings ect, and can afford the money, FF is the way to go. If, on the other hand, you shoot mostly telephoto and can't achieve the same field of view with a longer lens, then the DX has the advantage. I hope this post is a help to anyone else considering FF Just ''because that is what the Pros use''. I think too many people just assume something is better because the Pros use it and don't give any or enough thought to the nuts and bolts involved in WHY they use somthing. The link you provided covers the explantions very well. I'm actually surprised that this is the first time I've come accross this informatiom. Anyway...thanks again. Tony

03-11-2009, 09:30 PM	#6
Damn Brit Guest	Originally posted by mithrandir There is an interesting article on whether now is the time to go to FF in the April Popular Photography Magazine. Conveniently published at a time when people are tightening their belts. I think the media will be full of articles suggesting that FF is the new wheel. Cynical I know but Pop Photo and Sony especially, share a bed and it is Sony that is tanking,

03-12-2009, 05:03 AM	#7
Mike Cash Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,950	A wonderful full frame Pentax: I couldn't resist.

03-12-2009, 05:58 AM	#8
mithrandir Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,895	Actually, the Pop Photo article is not pushing FF at all. They are recommending FF for just a small group of users and actually make recommendations for APS-C for the vast majority with the reasoning behind their recommendations.

03-12-2009, 06:16 AM	#9
Billgscott Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: York Posts: 241	Originally posted by Mike Cash A wonderful full frame Pentax: I couldn't resist. Oh I wanted one of these SOOO badly. Went with ME Super though in the end.

03-12-2009, 08:02 AM	#10
dkittle Inactive Account Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Toronto, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 429	I'm actually jumping on the FF (N***n) bandwagon tomorrow, but not really for the sensor! I just want the auto focus system for my people photography. I'm keeping my K100D, though, and will use that mostly for vacations and trips to the park and such - the 55-300mm is ideal for that. A friend of mine and I shot for a fitness facility the other weekend, he with a D700 and me with a K20D. Our photos on hires LCD monitors looked identical. Mine were a bit sharper (I used my 31mm, he used a 35-70mm f/2.8) but his has slightly more DR to my eyes. Essentially very little difference, though. Oh, and going FF for wide angle seems like a strange concept too. I just picked up a Tamron 17-35mm and it's pretty terrible performance in the corners on a FF camera. Considering the price of a Sigma 10-20 used, going wide on APS-C seems like a very viable option.

03-12-2009, 08:07 AM	#11
pasipasi Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Oulu Photos: Gallery Posts: 532	I want a digital FF body, because there's no cheap wide angle primes for the crop sensor.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-12-2009, 08:32 AM	#12
PentaxPoke Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Oklahoma Posts: 1,411	Originally posted by pasipasi I want a digital FF body, because there's no cheap wide angle primes for the crop sensor. I want an APS-C body because there's no cheap long telephoto primes for FF.

03-12-2009, 08:32 AM	#13
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	Originally posted by pasipasi I want a digital FF body, because there's no cheap wide angle primes for the crop sensor. whats a cheap wide angle prime for a FF?

03-12-2009, 08:33 AM	#14
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	Originally posted by PentaxPoke I want an APS-C body because there's no cheap long telephoto primes for FF. 2X converter

03-12-2009, 09:21 AM	#15
dkittle Inactive Account Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Toronto, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 429	I think those things are the origin of the line: "It's a bird, it's a plane, no, it's SUPERMAN!" Originally posted by Gooshin 2X converter