Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

[Danny Chau]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

Full frame for me, it is much easier for F/F to get shallow depth of field, something DX chip struggles badly. Also most of DX lenses have much smaller aperture to start of with, and this will increase the DOF further.

The other obvious is shadow noise, which is again less with full frame.

[Ian]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

Full frame for me, it is much easier for F/F to get shallow depth of field, something DX chip struggles badly. Also most of DX lenses have much smaller aperture to start of with, and this will increase the DOF further.

The other obvious is shadow noise, which is again less with full frame.

Danny - did you vote?

Surely shadow noise on a FF sensor is much the same as a DX sensor if the pixel pitch is the same? 21MP The EOS-5D Mark II has a similar pixel pitch to the 10MP EOS-40D, while the 24.6MP Sony Alpha A900 has a similar pixel pitch to the 12MP Sony Alpha A700.

Only Nikon has gone bigger in sensor size without being tempted to add pixels, which is why I'm a bit surprised that you observe Nikon has less headroom than the older sensor in the original 5D.

Ian

[Danny Chau]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

I did say the Nikon f/f has less noise when compare to DX size sensor, not yet of the small pixel pitch of the latest 5DMKII or the Sony A900. Still, Canon's old 5D sensor still hold more detail in the highlight, as the overall contrast is less than the D3/D700. I suspect it is the intention in how each of the manufacturer tweak their RAW processing for their particular look of feel.

Take a look at the OLD Epson RD1, to me it is still by far the best 6mp camera to date, they have squeezed all of the pixels from that sensor, plus they have managed to make the noise very very close to film grain. I'm trying to convince them to work on the RD2, if they can do the same as the did to the RD1, 10mp - 12mp (just as Nikon's D3/D700) is more than enough for majority of our work.

[Bob Ross]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

Take a look at the OLD Epson RD1, to me it is still by far the best 6mp camera to date, they have squeezed all of the pixels from that sensor, plus they have managed to make the noise very very close to film grain. I'm trying to convince them to work on the RD2, if they can do the same as the did to the RD1, 10mp - 12mp (just as Nikon's D3/D700) is more than enough for majority of our work.

Hi Danny,
There are a lot of people who hope that you succeed in convincing Epson (or even Cosina) to make a sequell to the RD1. Those would be the folks that wont fork over the price of the M8 and those like you that have, use and love the RD1. Have you had any encouraging feedback?
There are serious problems with Full Frame in M mount rangefinders. It will take some amazing technologies to get around the edge fall off. The M8 has awaken RF users and the slapped them with a high price to play. There might be even a better market now for an RD2 then there was when the RD1 came out. Personally I'd like a Zeiss Ikon version
Bob

[Danny Chau]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

Hi Bob,

I should have said 'to convince them to finish the R&D of the RD2', as the designer in charge has already done some work but due to time factor the camera project is left on the shelf. The RD1 was purely as a money no object exercise for Epson and Eddie San (designer) to prove that they have advance understanding in digital imaging technology (they still make the best photo printers on the market). That's why I'm still persistent with them hoping they'll continue with the next version, and that would be a great news for us all.

Although I voted as a f/f user, but for range finder I never had any problems for not being full frame, maybe I have come to the acceptance that the limitation of the range finder design, what we see in the finder is not exactly we get. Even this statement now has to be changed as my new Leica M8.2's view finder is now 96% plus accuracy in it's framing (RD1's handling is still better IMO). I'm sure this is the same for new comers of photography are used to the DX size format, some don't know what full frame is of the film days.This is rather a problem for us old film folks than is for the digital users.n

It would be nice to have more choices in digital range finder cameras, but with today's economics, it is quite difficult for a manufacturer to survive small production and try to keep prices low at the same time.

To me, I have always maintain that our camera and lenses are CHEAP, they are fantastic value for our money. Just think of the money that we earn (however hard), is still no match for the money these manufacturer have invested plus time and expertise in design and manufacturing. I just can't imagine how much will it cost just to tool up to make glass and have it polished off to the shape each element requires to make a lens, let alone the know how in design.

Danny

[Bob Ross]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

Hi Bob,

I should have said 'to convince them to finish the R&D of the RD2', as the designer in charge has already done some work but due to time factor the camera project is left on the shelf. The RD1 was purely as a money no object exercise for Epson and Eddie San (designer) to prove that they have advance understanding in digital imaging technology (they still make the best photo printers on the market). That's why I'm still persistent with them hoping they'll continue with the next version, and that would be a great news for us all.

Although I voted as a f/f user, but for range finder I never had any problems for not being full frame, maybe I have come to the acceptance that the limitation of the range finder design, what we see in the finder is not exactly we get. Even this statement now has to be changed as my new Leica M8.2's view finder is now 96% plus accuracy in it's framing (RD1's handling is still better IMO). I'm sure this is the same for new comers of photography are used to the DX size format, some don't know what full frame is of the film days.This is rather a problem for us old film folks than is for the digital users.n

It would be nice to have more choices in digital range finder cameras, but with today's economics, it is quite difficult for a manufacturer to survive small production and try to keep prices low at the same time.

To me, I have always maintain that our camera and lenses are CHEAP, they are fantastic value for our money. Just think of the money that we earn (however hard), is still no match for the money these manufacturer have invested plus time and expertise in design and manufacturing. I just can't imagine how much will it cost just to tool up to make glass and have it polished off to the shape each element requires to make a lens, let alone the know how in design.

Danny

Hi Danny,
Good luck woith Epson. Printer mfrs. probably have the best understanding of image structure algorithms and they don't have size restraints or the need for portability, that cameras do.
I hadn't planned on upgrading my M8 to the M8.2, but it gets tempting when I hear comments like yours about the framelines and shutter. I haven't had any problems with the M8 crop either. The frame lines are there, learn them and use them.
I read where lens design work up is the most time consuming (compared to bodies), even with computer aided design. While I like top end lenses, I also find it fun to find one of the consumer grade lenses that for some reason is excellent. One of the areas about FF format is that you have to really be careful about lenses' corner and edges. For me I'll take corner to corner sharpness over narrow DOF, because I need it more often in the way that I shoot.
It will be fun to see how this all settles out in a few years, as each glitch the users find in each format is taken care of and technology marches along.
Bob

[Danny Chau]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

Hi Bob,

Word of warning, if your're not ready to upgrade your M8, don't touch the new M8.2 or fire the shutter, as it is CONTAGIOUS

Danny

[Bob Ross]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

Hi Bob,

Word of warning, if your're not ready to upgrade your M8, don't touch the new M8.2 or fire the shutter, as it is CONTAGIOUS

Danny

Hi Danny,
I may be sliding back into my habit of antique RF cameras. My M6 is from the first run out of Wetzler with a Leitz Red Dot
Bob

[carman]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

I just had a play with the new Sony A900. The must have feature for me is the viewfinder. Looking through the viewfinder is like a wide screen monitor. Where can I get 2K

[Danny Chau]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

The bank

All the more reason to vote for full frame, you do get a bigger viewing area.

[Chris]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

Here's a simple poll for you... how tempting is a full frame DSLR for you? Is it worth the significant extra cost?

Since getting into digital a few years back with a little Minolta A414, then a Minolta A1 and currently a Minolta 7D, I have always found that although small prints look OK, larger ones do show a distinct lack of fine detail with just 6MP to play with. For example, foliage detail can go to extinction really close to the shooting point in landscapes.

Sony have now launched the A900 and I am very very tempted. The high pixel count will have some issues with respect to noise, but with potential to produce near medium format quality images, it is a pretty remarkable instrument. For fine detail landscapes and scenery, the high ISO performance does not really matter to me.

On the upside, the full frame sensor makes best use of the lenses by making any softness less of the total frame. On the downside, the lenses must be sharp all the way across, not just in the middle bit where an APS-C sensor works it.

Depth of field is an issue in as much as you gain more ability to isolate the subject, but less ability to fit in a deep image. Of course, you can always shoot for the crop, thus getting an image similar to that from say the A700 by discarding the border.

The only real downside I can see is cost and weight. The full frame coverage lenses are heavier than a lot of the "developed for digital" equivalents. I am trying to not get too tempted, but I can get a very strong deal on the A900 at the moment, so may indulge myself. For me, if I had to pay list for the A900, it would not be worth it. But I can get a deal and the A900 is as close to the camera I always hoped the digital revolution would produce as I ever hoped to afford one day.

Chris

[Ian]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

Since getting into digital a few years back with a little Minolta A414, then a Minolta A1 and currently a Minolta 7D, I have always found that although small prints look OK, larger ones do show a distinct lack of fine detail with just 6MP to play with. For example, foliage detail can go to extinction really close to the shooting point in landscapes.

Sony have now launched the A900 and I am very very tempted. The high pixel count will have some issues with respect to noise, but with potential to produce near medium format quality images, it is a pretty remarkable instrument. For fine detail landscapes and scenery, the high ISO performance does not really matter to me.

On the upside, the full frame sensor makes best use of the lenses by making any softness less of the total frame. On the downside, the lenses must be sharp all the way across, not just in the middle bit where an APS-C sensor works it.

Depth of field is an issue in as much as you gain more ability to isolate the subject, but less ability to fit in a deep image. Of course, you can always shoot for the crop, thus getting an image similar to that from say the A700 by discarding the border.

The only real downside I can see is cost and weight. The full frame coverage lenses are heavier than a lot of the "developed for digital" equivalents. I am trying to not get too tempted, but I can get a very strong deal on the A900 at the moment, so may indulge myself. For me, if I had to pay list for the A900, it would not be worth it. But I can get a deal and the A900 is as close to the camera I always hoped the digital revolution would produce as I ever hoped to afford one day.

Chris

Hi Chris, do let us know if you take the plunge!

We have a hands-on preview article with some samples here:

http://dpnow.com/5166.html

I found the camera nice to use and it's not as big and heavy as I feared it was going to be.

There is a lot of noise visible on-screen from ISO 400 and upwards, and from ISO 800 upwards the noise is quite bad in terms of chroma noise.

However, the sheer number of pixels does tend to mask the noise when making prints.

Ian

[Chris]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

Hi Chris, do let us know if you take the plunge!

We have a hands-on preview article with some samples here:

http://dpnow.com/5166.html

I found the camera nice to use and it's not as big and heavy as I feared it was going to be.

There is a lot of noise visible on-screen from ISO 400 and upwards, and from ISO 800 upwards the noise is quite bad in terms of chroma noise.

However, the sheer number of pixels does tend to mask the noise when making prints.

Ian

Hi Ian

I have checked out the articles a few times over the last few weeks along with various other samples from around the net.

I am trying to find someone who has one in stock so that I can check it out. I will be spending the day in London on Friday, so hope to get a look at one then. No one around here (Essex) holds them in stock and I would never buy without checking the ergonomics suit me.

Image noise is going to be an issue if shooting at high ISO, but for me, this camera is about making finely crafted images that will print large. I have not had my 20x16 enlarger out for many years now and am looking forward to being able to do some decent size prints again.

Situation at the moment is that if I like the ergonomics, I will be placing my order immediately.

Chris

[Graham_of_Rainham]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

NO

My requirement is image quality and that the camera will not break my back or my bank account...

[Josh Bear]

Re: Poll: is 'full frame' for DSLRs a must-have feature?

Great thread. I am off out shooting soon. My 5d2 arrived yesterday and I am keen to see what it can do.

Josh