-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Full frame query. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter senatore
- Start date
Seems to me that if you have good naturalist skills, possibility of a hide and lots of time then full frame will give best quality. After all there were bird pictures before digital!
For most of us that extra apparent magnification of smaller sensors is a good aid!
Everything in life is a compromise!
For most of us that extra apparent magnification of smaller sensors is a good aid!
Everything in life is a compromise!
MJN
Well-known member
Full frame is actually superior Max, you just need to understand that you will have a noticeable perceived loss of focal length. This can be overcome by getting closer or using a longer lens.
I am in the process of upgrading my 7D to a 5Diii and have got no compunction in doing so. The 5Diii excels in all areas other than reach (I'm discounting the FPS)
About two years ago I bought a mkiv and was concerned that I would have a problem with the "lack of reach" the bottom line was that I never used the 7D again!
Take a look at Richard steels blog, he shoots full frame......Obviously no good for birds lol.
I am in the process of upgrading my 7D to a 5Diii and have got no compunction in doing so. The 5Diii excels in all areas other than reach (I'm discounting the FPS)
About two years ago I bought a mkiv and was concerned that I would have a problem with the "lack of reach" the bottom line was that I never used the 7D again!
Take a look at Richard steels blog, he shoots full frame......Obviously no good for birds lol.
Last edited:
pimpelmees
Well-known member
until a full frame canon camera has more or around 28 Mp so i can crop enough to match the loss in mm's , i will keep shooting with a crop sensor.
Actually, it works the other way round. Lenses designed for full-frame cameras perform particularly well on cropped-sensor cameras since only the center of the lens– normally the best corrected part – comes into play in their case.
Telephoto Paul
Well-known member
Look at the kit that elite wildlife photographers are using, and you'll see it's nearly all Canon 1DX or Nikon D4. Both of which are full frame cameras. So the idea that the sensor immediately disqualifies the 5D3 from being anymore more than poor is nonsense.
Now of course, those pros are probably shooting 500F4/600F4/800F5.6 (plus optional extender) compared to the more affordable lenses of us mere mortals, but if reach was everything, they could use those lenses with an APS-C camera.
You might be trading in a bit of reach, but you’re getting a better sensor and the top line autofocus system it shares with the 1DX. (Even the 6fps isn’t that bad a trade.) Which is the better trade-off depends on what you’re doing. Skomer puffins at six feet is bird photography too, and the 5D3 would blow away the 7D I used for that last year.
Now of course, those pros are probably shooting 500F4/600F4/800F5.6 (plus optional extender) compared to the more affordable lenses of us mere mortals, but if reach was everything, they could use those lenses with an APS-C camera.
You might be trading in a bit of reach, but you’re getting a better sensor and the top line autofocus system it shares with the 1DX. (Even the 6fps isn’t that bad a trade.) Which is the better trade-off depends on what you’re doing. Skomer puffins at six feet is bird photography too, and the 5D3 would blow away the 7D I used for that last year.
Don't ask that person for advice again!
The only advantage that I know of, on a 1.6/1.5 sensor, is the narrower field of view which makes lenses look longer. This does not translate into 1.6 times the reach sadly. There are other factors to consider such as ISO performance, for example earlier today a photographer was bemoaning having to use ISO 2000 and mediocre shutter speeds whilst trying to get shots of a Kingfisher. I was happily snapping away at ISO 6400 and 1/1000 sec and getting cleaner images. The longer perceived reach is nice but it is not everything - far from it!
The 5D3 is an excellent all round camera with very good high ISO performance - you would not be disappointed with one! You will have to get a bit closer (not as much as you may think) but you would be rewarded with better images.
Another camera to look at is a used Canon 1D Mk4 (I am not just saying this because I am trying to sell mine!). In the 1D4 you have a faster more responsive camera that has nice big batteries and you can bang in nails with it 3
There is also the 1.3 crop 16mp sensor which has many of the advantages of crop and FF sensors + they are now reasonably priced. Note a well used 1D4 probably has as much, if not more, life in it than most new cameras (150,000 vs 300,000 shutter actuation design life).
Roy C
Occasional bird snapper
I agree with John here, I am the 7D's biggest fan having shot one for several years but I now shoot a 5D3 and it is in a different league IMHO - apart from nicer saturation and contrast it is at least 2 stops better when it comes to high ISO noise levels (easily useable at ISO 6400 and even higher with a bit of PP work). Another thing to remember is that it also AF's at f8. So with a lens like the 400/5.6 for instance you can shoot with a 1.4x tc attached and still Double your shutter speed.
On top of that the AF system is also better, apart from more AF options I have found it top be far more consistent, it seems to nail the focus just about every time.
Just my 2p's worth
senatore
Well-known member
Thanks all for your replies.
I will now certainly consider buying a 5D mk 3 when my 7D gives up the ghost (It's currently in for repair with the "cannot communicate with the battery" error).
I will also hold my own now if if "full frame" comes up in a conversation.
Max.
I will now certainly consider buying a 5D mk 3 when my 7D gives up the ghost (It's currently in for repair with the "cannot communicate with the battery" error).
I will also hold my own now if if "full frame" comes up in a conversation.
Max.
Don't forget to try out a 1D4 before you decide - it would be my vote over a 5D3 for wildlife. If my primary interests were outside the sports/wildlife arena then I think the 5D3 is a better camera.
Just my 2p
MJN
Well-known member
Good point.
The 5D that I'm buying will not be my primary bird camera, The 1D mkiv will still be the first choice.
There have been numerous occasions over the last few years where point blank opportunities have been there for the taking, in future I will take these with the 5Diii.
robinsslee
Well-known member
I've been using 5D3 as my primary camera for all albeit using it more for wildlife photography. I would say its limitation is the FPS that it offers. Although at times I wish I had faster FPS which is the major downside for 5D3, however I have use this limitation as my learning curve of understanding the birds better and how to maximise the limitation. All in all I am happy with the purchase and it has never let me down on raining/snow and under 0c conditions.
My only wish for the next 5D is better FPS and has similar battery performance to 1D. Perhaps better weather proof as well.
My only wish for the next 5D is better FPS and has similar battery performance to 1D. Perhaps better weather proof as well.
Chris Upson
Well-known member
I have had a full frame camera (1dx) now for just over 2 months and have not touched my 1.6 (50d) or 1.3 (1d1v) sensor camera since.
It took me some time to get a full frame camera and my only regret is that
i never got it sooner.
It took me some time to get a full frame camera and my only regret is that
i never got it sooner.
pimpelmees
Well-known member
Than you sure have lost a few mm's opposed to the crop sensor camera's when using your lenses . The 1dx has the same amount of MP as the 1d mark 4 so i can not crop the image more with the 1dx to get the same image as my 1d mark 4.
So i wiat until a full frame with let say around 30MP.
pimpelmees
Well-known member
With 1.3 crop (1d ) and 400mm together with a 1.4 tc you have 728 mm .
With a 7D an alone a 400mm you have 640mm .
so look out for a used 1d mark 4.
Like Chris Upson I have moved to the 1DX (still have my 1D4) the loss of "Reach" is not much and certainly not as much as the difference in sensor size would suggest. On my 300 and 800mm lenses I don't notice much difference, on my shorter lenses the difference seems more pronounced - but that is just my observation.
I personally prefer the 1D4 to any non 1 series Canon camera for wildlife, however there are those who prefer the 5D3 - it is all down to personal preferences and requirements.
Roy C
Occasional bird snapper
If you think that MP is the only thing that matters than why have you got the 1D4 (16.1MP) and 1.3 crop when you could have a 7D (18MP and 1.6 crop)????
(BTW the 1DX has 18.1 mp and the 1D4 16.1 so not the same amount of MP).
At the end of the day MP's and crop factor is not the only thing that matters, to a lot of us IQ and noise levels are more important still. Buying a full frame Camera just to be able to crop the image heavily is completely counterproductive IMO but each to their own I guess :t:
