Full Frame Advantge ?

[hpebley3]

Originally Posted by smc1377

As an FYI to others that might be reading this, you can change the focusing screens on just about all DSLR's to ones that have grid lines showing useful crop factors. See the following page...

http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/page--C...gridlines.html

Cool. I didn't know the lower end cameras could be changed too. Thanks for the info.

...looking at link above...

Ouch. At what they charge, on lower end cameras it's almost half the cost of the body.

[kunaldaswani]

Call me stupid, but I'm hella confused!

Say if you were using a 5D and I'm sitting right next to you using a 40D, and we are both using a 50mm lenses shooting the same subject, would i be in closer to the subject than you ? I know that this is what you have been trying to explain to me, but don't get technical on me.

Also, Can the crop factor be an advantage ?

[RexK_Cozumel]

Originally Posted by hpebley3

Cool. I didn't know the lower end cameras could be changed too. Thanks for the info.

...looking at link above...

Ouch. At what they charge, on lower end cameras it's almost half the cost of the body.

not all DSLRs have a removable focusing screen be sure to check if you can remove the screen on your camera before you buy a new one.

[RexK_Cozumel]

Originally Posted by kunaldaswani

Call me stupid, but I'm hella confused!

Say if you were using a 5D and I'm sitting right next to you using a 40D, and we are both using a 50mm lenses shooting the same subject, would i be in closer to the subject than you ? I know that this is what you have been trying to explain to me, but don't get technical on me.

Also, Can the crop factor be an advantage ?

To answer your questions... no you will not be closer shooting with a 40D than a 5D the image you get out of the 40D would be the same as if you took the image from the 5D and cropped it down. This does not mean that you are closer to the subject. The crop factor is never an advantage you can do the same thing in post processing by cropping the image from a full frame camera down a bit. The only advantage for having a smaller sensor is that it is cheaper. With cannon switching to the full frame sensor means that you will have to get all the glass that you have that is designed for a smaller sensor replaced with glass that is designed for the full frame cameras which sucks a lot.

[kunaldaswani]

Originally Posted by RexK_Cozumel

To answer your questions... no you will not be closer shooting with a 40D than a 5D the image you get out of the 40D would be the same as if you took the image from the 5D and cropped it down. This does not mean that you are closer to the subject. The crop factor is never an advantage you can do the same thing in post processing by cropping the image from a full frame camera down a bit. The only advantage for having a smaller sensor is that it is cheaper. With cannon switching to the full frame sensor means that you will have to get all the glass that you have that is designed for a smaller sensor replaced with glass that is designed for the full frame cameras which sucks a lot.

Thank you Rex! I understand now.

[RexK_Cozumel]

Oh just noticed your signature.. I believe that the L lens is compatible with but the full frame sensors and the smaller sensors as well but I am not too sure about the other two lenses you have. Anyways the 50 and the sigma are pretty cheap so switching now would not be too big a deal but in the future when you have more glass then it can be expensive. That is one good thing about Nikon. when they made the full frame D3 they made it compatable with the lenses designed for the smaller sensor even though you lose the full frame effect at least you can still use the glass.

[Jamesc359]

Sorry about confusing you kunaldaswani. It wasn't intentional I assure you.

[jdepould]

Originally Posted by Jamesc359

No, they're not measured in 35mm terms. Focal length isn't intrinsically bound to the 35mm format. It's a constant, regardless if you're using a medium format, a 35mm, APS-C, or a teeny-tiny 1/1.8" sensor. It's the field of view that changes.

You can't say a EF-S or DX lens has a crop factor because their is no cropping going on, just a shrinking field of view. The term focal length multiplier isn't perfectly accurate either, but it's less misleading than stating there's a crop factor that doesn't exist.

There's still a crop factor in the context of 24x36, which is how most people think, and most things are measured. Just because it doesn't work on a FF body doesn't change anything.

[Jamesc359]

Originally Posted by jdepould

There's still a crop factor in the context of 24x36, which is how most people think, and most things are measured. Just because it doesn't work on a FF body doesn't change anything.

Most people think their advanced P&S with it's 18x zoom, and near unusable ISO 3200 is the Alpha and the Omega. How most people think is completely irrelevant to the technical realities of anything.

True most things are measured by the standard 35mm film. But people don't mandate that the terminology of a FF camera revolves around that of a medium format camera. Why? Because they're not the same thing.

They may have interchangeable lenses, but a standard DSLR's sensor size sets it apart from a FF sensor. The EF-S and DX lenses are designed solely for the standard DSLR sensor. Their terminology should reflect that fact.

[NOT SERIOUS]
The whole point of listing a crop factor is to allow people to calculate the Field of View. So in reality camera manufacturers should be listing a FoV divisor, not a crop factor.

“I reject your reality and substitute my own!”
[/NOT SERIOUS]

[jdepould]

You're just clouding the issue. That's nice that you don't like the fact that 35mm is the standard for SLRs, but that's just the way it is. Saying there's no crop factor because digital lenses have a reduced image circle is counterproductive and irrelevant.