Full Frame Advantge ?

[Jamesc359]

Originally Posted by 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.

I'm clouding the issue? You're the one that's twisting my words. I never said, nor implied that I didn't “like the fact that 35mm is the standard for SLRs.” That's something you just fabricated and spewed forth in a blatant attempt to discredit me.

I couldn't care less what the standard is for SLRs, because we're not talking about SLRs. We're talking about DSLRs, and the standard for them is most certainly not 35mm. What's counterproductive is ignoring the fact that DSLRs have in effect created their own standard.

[jdepould]

The standards haven't changed since the advent of DSLRs, and I'm really not concerned with discrediting you, so don't try to make it personal.

[Jamesc359]

You're pulling my leg right?

Do you really think the size difference is so insignificant they could really be considered to be a part of the same standard as the 35mm format? The APS-C sized sensor has half the surface area, and the performance between the two is dramatically different.

And besides that, there's a reason they're called APS-C sensors. It's because they're the same size as the APS-C film. The only way you could consider an APS-C sensor to be a part of the same standard as 35mm format would be if you were to consider the whole of the APS-C format to be a part of the same standard.

[smc1377]

James, I really am trying to understand what point you're trying to make. I gotta agree with jdepould in that in terms of FOV, 35mm full frames are still the standard and probably will forever be the standard for DSLR's.

[Jamesc359]

Originally Posted by smc1377

James, I really am trying to understand what point you're trying to make. I gotta agree with jdepould in that in terms of FOV, 35mm full frames are still the standard and probably will forever be the standard for DSLR's.

I would not and am not arguing that point.

The core point that I'm trying to make is that jdepould is mistaken when he states that “There's no focal length multiplier.” Because there is such a thing, it is only because of jdepould's misunderstanding of what I'm saying that he makes such statements. He seems to believe that I am stating that on EF-S and DX lenses that the focal length multiplier some how magically increases the focal length of the lens, despite the fact that I have stated many times that isn't the case. I am not saying that.

What I am saying though is that camera manufacturers did have it right when they initially claimed their camera's had a focal length multiplier. They never intended that this term would be twisted by the layman into meaning that the focal length was magically magnified. What they intended it to mean is this;

The focal length multiplier is the number by which one multiplies the focal length of a lens on a crop body to attain the focal length of a lens with an equivalent field of view on a full frame body. Hence the term focal-length-multiplier.

So there was a valid reason for their use of that particular terminology, and from a descriptive stand point it makes more sense than using the term crop factor to reference this number.

Is it a crop body? Yes.
Is the sensor cropping the image from the lens? Yes.
Does this mean the focal length is magically multiplied? No.
Does focal length multiplier mean the same thing as crop factor? Yes.

What this boils down to is a debate over semantics. As I'm sure we're all aware, debating semantics is almost as bad as debating politics or religion.

Just so nobody jumps to the conclusion that I am or have ever been perturbed by this conversation; I enjoy debating, even just for the sake of debating. And I've really enjoyed all of this.

[JAHphoto]

the only other advantage besides the lack of a lens multiplier, is the inherently better noise reduction. :P

[Pernod]

One important consideration that hasn't been mentioned is the 'sweet spot' factor.

The centre of the lens is the sweet spot, with image sharpness (and other quality factors) decreasing as you go towards the edges...

That means if you are using 'consumer grade' lenses, you will actually be using the best part of the lens, whereas a full frame may have more trouble with low quality images...

Sure, that can be fixed with cropping the image on a full frame... but it is an important consideration if your using anything other than top quality glass.

[DonA]

This is my first post in this forum and I will not tell you that I know all about SLRs or DSLRs but almost 40 years as a semi pro and pro photographer have qiven me some insight. I think jdepould is right but confused(confusing) and that Jamesc359 may be less confused and therefore more correct. I agree that digital is setting its own standards and that eventually focal length multipliers will go away. I say this because, in my mind, focal length multipliers were created to help us old farts transition from film to digital and have little meaning for those that don't need them to understand why when we look through the view finder of our Canon EOS 35mm film body with a 55 mm EF lens we see much more than when the same lens is used on a Canon 20D body. (Please note that this is an over simplification and the lenses and cameras sited are for illustration purposes.) Maybe a better way to explain the use of FLM is to say that when I go to buy a new lens for my DSLR and I am thinking in terms of my experience with a 35 mm film body and what I am looking for in field of view I can use the FLM to pick the proper lens. However, if you are a serious photographer you know that lens manufacturers build all kinds of lenses with different attributes and one of those attributes is FOV. Best to study all the specs before you invest. Yes, more money will buy bigger and better...if you have it!! And that brings us to the question of full frame sensor or APS-C size. Each has its pros and cons, most of which have been sited on other posts, but making a choice has very little to do with the lens that you will buy and mount to that body afterwards. Yes, the manufacturers are making more lenses dedicated to APS-C sensors but are not discarding their line of lenses for full frame. It is a very subjective thing but I would recommend that you buy the best lenses that you can for your C sensor body now because you can sell the dedicated ones with it when you upgrade to a full frame. The non-dedicated ones can be used on your full frame body but also consider that the manufacturers are coming out with better lenses for DSLRs at a break neck pace and by the time you get that 5D there will be better lenses for less money available. Also consider that tons of amateur and pro photographers are turning out awesome images with C sensor cameras. However, I would bet the family farm that they are hanging the best possible glass on the front of those bodies that they can.
I hope this all helps but let me tell you an old fart story that may ease your small/large format stress. Back in the old days of film (60's, 70's, 80's) nobody shot a wedding with a large format view camera for obvious reasons but that same camera was a natural in the studio or to shoot large landscapes or cityscapes. There were exceptions, like fashion photography was all medium format and tons of people were producing great landscape images with 35mm. And the standard event camera was medium format except maybe sports where 35mm often dominated. My point is that if you fill a room with old farts like me they can rationally explain the above but if you ask them which format produced the best quality image the population would go down rapidly. Get my drift??? Or...what works best for you is what you need.