Does a full frame give better bokeh than a 1.6x crop sensor using same lens and same magnification (subject size in frame) ?
I know a longer focal length gives lesser distracting bokeh coz the field of view is lesser...but does FF sensor has a part to play in this ?
Full Frame vs Cropped Sensor Compromises, etc.
Printable View
-
18th April 2009, 09:00 AMhellfraggerFull Frame vs Cropped Sensor Compromises, etc.
-
18th April 2009, 09:34 AMColin SouthernRe: Effective Aperture for Macro
I don't know about "better bokah", but FF has about a 1 stop tighter depth of field over a 1.6x crop-factor camera (which can work for or against you). (eg DoF at F2.8 on a 1.6x crop could be achieved (approx) by using F4 on a FF camera).
-
18th April 2009, 12:56 PMhellfraggerRe: Effective Aperture for Macro
FF it is then !
-
18th April 2009, 08:33 PMColin SouthernRe: Effective Aperture for MacroGood idea if it works for you, but for macro work, FF generally works against you as generally the DoF is already severely limited, and FF just makes it worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by hellfragger
There's definately a "mantra" in photography circles about FF being the "utopia" of formats, but honestly, it can work for you - against you - or have no relevance either way.
Good case in point ...
... a 50D and a 5D2 shooter share a 600mm lens to get a shot of the moon. With all other things being equal, who will capture the most detail? 50D with it's 1.6x crop-factor will win hands down. -
18th April 2009, 09:07 PMhellfraggerRe: Effective Aperture for Macrohmm, i seem to be trying two opposite things here - landscape ( yess FF for wide angle ) and Macro ( limiting DoF )Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin Southern
photography is turning out to be a huge compromise ! i hate compromises !
thnx a lot Colin for that example, I think that removed the last traces of the FF vs Crop Sensor fight in my brain ! All i am to concentrate now is on good glass ! really good glass ! -
18th April 2009, 09:16 PMColin SouthernRe: Effective Aperture for MacroI hate compromises too - but anyway, back to photography!Quote:
Originally Posted by hellfragger
FF = yes for landscape? Well ... maybe! Question for you ... FF shooter mounts a EF16-35 F2.8L USM II, Crop shooter mounts a EF-S 10-22 F3.5-4.5 ... who has the widest field of view? (hint: they're the same) :)
Basically, it comes down to an old saying "there's no problem that money can't solve". Personally, my philosophy is to stick with L-Series lenses only (which gives you FF capability), whereas if you invest in EF-S lenses for crop cameras then you're sunk if you ever do go FF. If you're after good glass then the standard "trilogy" of general purpose glass that I usually recommend is the EF16-35mm F2.8L USM II, EF24-70mm F2.8L USM, and EF70-200mm F2.8L IS USM.Quote:
thnx a lot Colin for that example, I think that removed the last traces of the FF vs Crop Sensor fight in my brain ! All i am to concentrate now is on good glass ! really good glass !
-
18th April 2009, 09:25 PMhellfraggerRe: Effective Aperture for Macro
Thanks to one of my friend, EF-S glass is beyond my reach ! he will absolutely tar-de-feather me if I buy one ! He says its cr*p since it's not compatible with FF. I concur !
the EF16-35mm F2.8L USM II is on the top of my list !(pricey but it's there )
EF L glass lenses are good investment in the long run !
I think your policy of sticking to L glass lenses is awesome ! Must follow !
Thnx again ! -
18th April 2009, 09:38 PMColin SouthernRe: Effective Aperture for MacroHorses for courses really; unfortunately photography is full of compromises and lens selection is just one of them :)Quote:
Originally Posted by hellfragger
-
18th April 2009, 11:31 PMBill44Re: Effective Aperture for MacroMoney is another one.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Colin Southern
-
19th April 2009, 04:54 AMhellfraggerRe: Effective Aperture for Macro
Hey, its easier now, you can read reviews over the internet, if several are consistent about a particular lens, you have a winner ! ( although the probability that you'll land up with a faulty piece still remains )
I wonder how some of you chose lenses in the nineties.....if its not sharp enough or droops under own weight, there's money wasted ! -
19th April 2009, 05:18 AMColin SouthernRe: Effective Aperture for MacroIt's a great theory, unfortunately ...Quote:
Originally Posted by hellfragger
... most of the reviews can be very contradictory. One person will say that "lack of sharpness" is a serious drawback, whilst another will say "the sharpness of this lens is it's greatest assett" *** bangs head against nearest wall ***
For me, that's one of the advantages of buying only Canon L-Series lenses; The "L" stands for "Luxury", not "Lemon", so one doesn't have to worry too much about "bad reviews". All of the ones I've ever owned have been flawless (same goes for cameras). -
19th April 2009, 05:26 AMhellfraggerRe: Effective Aperture for Macro
hmm, the L theory rocks ! I know ( and have ) read those contradictory reviews, but what I meant was, if 8/10 are in favor, its a good lens ( unless Murphy plays his part and its a 5:5 tug-o-war of reviewers )
Eg: Canon EF 100mm f2.8 USM II Macro
Another comparable lens from Nikon, the 105mm AF-S VR Macro ED is double the price of the EF 100mm Macro, but its not Internal Focus, and i read on quite a few review-sites that there is some flaw in movement of the Nikon under it's own weight ! Now i dont know what to believe here as you said !
Does Leica make lenses that are compatible with EF mount ? -
19th April 2009, 05:38 AMColin SouthernRe: Effective Aperture for MacroSorry, no idea. I read of people coming up with all kinds of adaptors that let them connect all kinds of lens -- and give them all kinds of compromises in return (eg lack of AF, severely restricted aperture options etc).Quote:
Originally Posted by hellfragger
Speaking personally, I''ve just never understood why they go to all the bother when Canon make fantastic lenses for any occasion, and any (so called) image quality advantage is usually in the realm of 200% crops, not real worlds stuff.