and help to keep the site free for all
Full frame or not?
- Thread starter sandychristiephotography
- Start date
- Messages
- 343
- Name
- Rick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Weak wrists? lol I don't think its anything to do with strength..if you are carrying lots of lenses and a couple of bodies, saving that bit of weight makes a difference when walking/hiking miles.
Anyways, the smaller package is only part of it, technically the sony's put all canon cameras to shame.
Anyways, the smaller package is only part of it, technically the sony's put all canon cameras to shame.
big soft moose
Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy...
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
yeah course they do ... the easter bunny told me , just after he landed his winged horse next to the unicorn paddock
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
Well the a7 series are better then the 5d3 etc when it comes to IQ and features.
yeah course they do ... the easter bunny told me , just after he landed his winged horse next to the unicorn paddock
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 40,777
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
One of the reasons I don't is that big chunky kit attracts attention. It may not be an issue if you are in the countryside somewhere, other than carrying it there, but apart from the issue of carting it I honestly hate attracting attention when I'm out with a camera.
On the Canon lens thing... When I had Canon most of my lenses were Sigma's and I think it's still safe to say that at certain focal lengths and price points Sigma offer the better choice when compared to Canon. Maybe some of Canon's offerings are rather old and in need of a refresh? Maybe.
Sony's latest offerings seem to be aimed at the higher end of the market.
There's enough choice for everyone.
big soft moose
Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy...
- Messages
- 20,964
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I doubt if many impartial reviews say that - but even if they do are they better than the 5DS and 5DSR , or for that matter the 1DX .... its odd how the legions of pros using Canon and Nikon havent rushed to swap
- Messages
- 5,732
- Name
- Daryl
- Edit My Images
- No
I have big hands so diddy cameras are not for me. plus if you want small for ease of use get a high qual compact or a Leica M9 etc.
These days you don't need to carry shed load of lens with you.... Few primes and 2 high quality zooms and bingo your off.
- Messages
- 4,717
- Name
- Ian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Many prefer a smaller camera body. But others attach one of the various grips systems and battery packs available. The benefit is you can remove the grips when travelling light.
It's not odd. Many are heavily invested in lenses. Some will miss the choice of lenses. Some are happy with their IQ. And some are just not open to change.
It's not odd. Many are heavily invested in lenses. Some will miss the choice of lenses. Some are happy with their IQ. And some are just not open to change.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,687
- Name
- .... Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Has anyone noticed that some csc owners are becoming a bit like the first generation of apple users who had some kind of desire to preach the gospel of their product choice and convert the heathens to worship at their shrine.
No? Maybe just me then
No? Maybe just me then
- Messages
- 25,621
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
And maybe some genuinely believe they have the best tool for the job? I mean, they are pro's, you'd hope they'd made business decisions rather than fanboy behaviour.
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
Lots have swapped.
Cant speak of the mythical 5ds until it's released but the 1dx. Yes the a7 beats it has it has better iso handling and DR as well as features. It's unfair tbh to compare features as canon pro bodies ain't been updated for a while
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
Has anyone notice that some dslr owners are becoming like iPhone users who preach the gospel about there beloved products trying to convert android users?
My point is you yourself sound more of that typical user.
I'm not as unlike some here I actually own both types of systems.
- Messages
- 25,621
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
So there's loads of sports shooters binning their 1Dx's for the 4fps or 5fps Sony?
Are you passing that joint round or keeping it to yourself?
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
Can you re read my post again and highlight the bit I said how the a7 beats the 1dx in terms of burst rate and af?
Can I have some of what your using lol
- Messages
- 25,621
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
You said 'and features'. You could have said just the ISO, but the 1Dx beats it in every other respect as a pro tool and you know it does.
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
Features such as wifi. Swivel screen focus peaking. Evf etc. Stuff that you may or may not care.
I also said way earlier on that a 5d3 nevrrmind the 1dx af Stil better then a7.
See I ain't no typical brand fanboy. You seem to act and defend like one though.
I know each strength and weakness and not afraid to put them across as I don't have any shares with either company so I couldn't give a Damm which is better or not.
- Messages
- 509
- Name
- Matt
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've dropped my A77 a few times with the screen open and it's not broken yet, just snaps back shut. Actually been really impressed with how well that part is engineered!!
It is nowhere near as good as a 1Dx for specs/features or build quality in general though so I agree with the sentiment
- Messages
- 509
- Name
- Matt
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I love the EVF but most people I know hate it so that's a niche selling point IMO rather than a reason why pros would consider moving
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
Yea the that's why I said on my other reply that those are features u may it may not like. But most photographers do care about iq though .
No one would complain about better iso and Dr
- Messages
- 509
- Name
- Matt
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But they might complain about build quality, manufacturer support, flash options and lens choices?
Don't get me wrong I've got all kinds of Sony cameras and for me they are great, but if I were to move to making a living off photography I'd have to think about shifting to Canon/Nikon.
If you're being honest you must be able to see all the massive shortfalls that Sony cameras have as a professional tool?
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
I could use a Sony system professionally. Providing I shoot anything besides birds in flight /sports.
I just found out I can trigger all my studio strobes and even my canon flashes remotely using the radio triggers I already have. I can use yhe legendary nikon 16 to 24 landscape lens on a a7r for massive prints of landscape and I can use any of the Sony zeiss primes e mounts for street /general walkabout shots.
For my needs I could easily use Sony.
In terms of build quality. Yes the nikon and canon are better. But the a7 camera are not built on cardboard though. They are well built.
No system is perfect. Why else do I still use my 5d3
- Messages
- 1,687
- Name
- .... Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I don't see myself as a typical dslr user as I don't even own one anymore (daughter has 'acquired' the only one I had) and also i only shoot film these days, and then it's usually on a rangefinder.
And I don't even own a mobile phone.
So not sure if that is in your definition of typical
Doesn't bother me what system you use if it suits you and you like it. Just get tired of 'my system is better than yours but you can't or won't see it' posts.
My system is film and I know it is inferior to yours in almost ever single way....but I like it and it suits me. So no trying to convert anyone here.
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
Ironically your film system is probably smaller and lighter then a dslr. Which is one of the plus points of a mirrorless
I have both sets of systems so I can say which one is better or not in different points!
Edit. O and I too sometimes shoot on film. I have a Canon a1 mate.
- Messages
- 1,687
- Name
- .... Steve
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ironically your film system is probably smaller and lighter then a dslr. Which is one of the plus points of a mirrorless
I have both sets of systems so I can say which one is better or not in different points!
Edit. O and I too sometimes shoot on film. I have a Canon a1 mate.
I mainly shoot medium format and they are quite large and bulky but I take your point... my 35 mm rangefinders are comparatively light and small.
I had a friend with a Canon A1 at school in the late 1970s. Lovely camera and we were all jealous as he was the only one whose parents could afford such a camera and we all had practikas and other eastern European horrors.
Hope it works well for you and will be interesting to see how many of the current digital cameras will still be used in 30 years time.
I would just buy a 5D1 and have a play with it, if you don't get on with it sell it for a tenner less than it cost you which should be around 300 quid. I had a cracker and like a prat, sold it for its lack of live view, idiot! Its nigh on the perfect camera for me, no auto this and that, no video, just a simple fantastic camera. I will be looking for one soon with a nice 28-135 and simply enjoy taking good general photos. I shall also have a play with medium format and see what thats all about.
To me, most of the latest cameras seem to be bloated with crap I won't use and they make me feel even more stupid than I am. Film is a great medium I have a mint A1, and a minolta x700 and about 60/70 old manual focus lenses. The pleasure I got out of sodding around buying stuff was immense and I bet i didn't spend a grand on the whole lot, the best grand I've spent on my hobby.
I use a 600d for product shots/video for my business, a cracking camera that I won't outgrow for what I need it for.
But, I really loved the images that I got from the 5D and its simplicity, it really is a true classic, everyone should have a play with one.
I think dslr shape will always feel better than the nex shaped type models, it just feels more like a camera some how, and for me, thats a massive part of the hobby, the feel and atmosphere of what you are using to get your images.
I'm only half p***ed now
To me, most of the latest cameras seem to be bloated with crap I won't use and they make me feel even more stupid than I am. Film is a great medium I have a mint A1, and a minolta x700 and about 60/70 old manual focus lenses. The pleasure I got out of sodding around buying stuff was immense and I bet i didn't spend a grand on the whole lot, the best grand I've spent on my hobby.
I use a 600d for product shots/video for my business, a cracking camera that I won't outgrow for what I need it for.
But, I really loved the images that I got from the 5D and its simplicity, it really is a true classic, everyone should have a play with one
.I think dslr shape will always feel better than the nex shaped type models, it just feels more like a camera some how, and for me, thats a massive part of the hobby, the feel and atmosphere of what you are using to get your images.
I'm only half p***ed now
- Messages
- 54
- Name
- Mitch
- Edit My Images
- No
I think the gap between higher end crop sensor cameras, and entry level FF cameras is definitely getting smaller in terms of low light performance and so the questions to ask yourself are:
How much do you need the perceived benefits of a FF camera?
Will switching to FF significantly improve the quality of your work?
Can you justify the additional expense on the body and the lenses?
There is no right or wrong answer as everyone's circumstances are different. Personally I love the extra weight and sturdy build of a FF camera, but I'm still shooting with a DX Nikon as I am happy with the performance and I would have to completely re-learn what to expect from my camera at various focal lengths and apertures if I made the switch. The temptation is always there though.
How much do you need the perceived benefits of a FF camera?
Will switching to FF significantly improve the quality of your work?
Can you justify the additional expense on the body and the lenses?
There is no right or wrong answer as everyone's circumstances are different. Personally I love the extra weight and sturdy build of a FF camera, but I'm still shooting with a DX Nikon as I am happy with the performance and I would have to completely re-learn what to expect from my camera at various focal lengths and apertures if I made the switch. The temptation is always there though.
wegotitugetit
On the hit list !!!
- Messages
- 7,146
- Name
- alex
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I looked at this before and one to a simple conclusion but won't be what every one says
Full frame - landscapes , portrait , still life.
Croped body - sports fast , paced
Don't get me wrong both bodys in modern times are capable of both but if you want to focus more on certain areas this will hopefully help
Full frame - landscapes , portrait , still life.
Croped body - sports fast , paced
Don't get me wrong both bodys in modern times are capable of both but if you want to focus more on certain areas this will hopefully help
- Messages
- 25,621
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
Unless you are buying a Canon
Who haven't significantly improved the IQ of their crop sensors for years and have put what might be their best sensor for low light performance in their cheapest FF body.
However the rest of what you said holds true even for Canon, the 2nd best sports / wildlife body is the 7dII.
- Messages
- 54
- Name
- Mitch
- Edit My Images
- No
I'll take your word for that Phil as I've no knowledge of the Canon brand at all. I have noticed a similar concern being raised on other forums by long-time Nikon users that they fear Nikon are also starting to focus all their efforts solely on the FF range and that interest in improving the crop-sensor technology is waning. As the price gap between high end DX cameras and entry-level FX cameras also narrows, I think that is a distinct possibility.
D
Deleted member 49549
Guest
Personally, I thought the biggest problem for nikon dx was their poor range of quality dx lenses. Fuji, after just 30 odd months since the release of their new lens mount, have a much better range of lenses designed for their mount than nikon have for their DX range. From memory they had just 2 or 3 quality dx zooms, and 4 primes (3 being relative odd-balls, 2 macros and a fish-eye). It was this (and playing with an om-d em-5) that prompted my move from nikon after the better part of a decade.
- Messages
- 25,621
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
I think the IQ Achilles heel is hitting it's peak. The latest Canon crop cameras are significantly better cameras than their predecessors, but only marginally better in IQ terms.
The 7dII is awesome, almost a 1d in many ways, the 70d adds great AF performance for video, the latest xxxD announcements include handling improvements that make them closer to xxD models. But for IQ they're so far behind the Sony sensors. It's so disappointing, great cameras let down because Sony are now so far ahead in sensor tech.
- Messages
- 343
- Name
- Rick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have a 1dx and now an a7r...comparing them is like comparing a hammer to a screwdriver, different tools for different jobs.
For pure image quality the a7r is by far the best, and that's all I give a toss about. Sure, if I want to go to the track or out getting wildlife shots in the rain the 1dx will be coming with me, but landscapes and portraits the Sony will always come out. When they release a mk2 I will have that too.
I can buy two a7r and take home a lot of change for the cost of one 1dx which is just crazy considering what you get for your money.
For pure image quality the a7r is by far the best, and that's all I give a toss about. Sure, if I want to go to the track or out getting wildlife shots in the rain the 1dx will be coming with me, but landscapes and portraits the Sony will always come out. When they release a mk2 I will have that too.
I can buy two a7r and take home a lot of change for the cost of one 1dx which is just crazy considering what you get for your money.
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 40,777
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
The A7II came out some time ago and the A7rII is expected soon and as a result there are some good deals to be had on the first generation models. I have an A7 and it's the best camera I've ever had.
- Messages
- 3,545
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Phil for me it's the same with Nikon. I have had the D3100, D7000 & D7100 and currently the D750 and IMO the DX cameras don't come near the D750 in low light and ISO performance. There have been very small improvements for me when going from D3100 >D7000 >D7100 where I wouldn't like going above ISO 800, with the D750 I am happy going to ISO 3200 for my bird photography.
Some will also argue that the D7000 has a better sensor with it being Sony than the D7100 one being Toshiba, not sure whats gone into the newly released D7200 though.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
Can't wait for the a7r2
- Messages
- 54
- Name
- Mitch
- Edit My Images
- No
Interesting comments there Simon. I went from the D3100 to D7100 and am very happy with it, although I regularly drool over the D750 and toy with the idea of making the jump. I think I'll need to get my hands on one and experience it for myself.
- Messages
- 3,545
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
For me, the gains were the more external controls over the DX bodies.. But I will say the AF with the newer 51 point system of the D7100 was an improvement. ISO and low light there wasn't hardly any improvement over the bodies IME.
But for me, low light and ISO performance of the D750 is on another level. When I first had the D750 I did a trial to see how it would focus in the dark. I focused in a room with no light and the only available light was froma 15w energey lamp in another room which was also seperated by a hallway. I was suprised how it focused.
Have a look at this review of the D750 > http://www.rossharvey.com/reviews/nikon-d750-review
