Full frame worth it?
Discussion
rich888 said:
JustinP1 said:
I read that too. However, my personal experience is mine was perfect. I don't know how much that issue was of a particular original batch, but it does seem to be overplayed.
Mine came from a proper retailer who would have allowed a return in the unlikely event it was a dodgy one, and Tamron give a 5 year warranty.
That's very reassuring to read and you're not the only one that sings the praises of the Tamron. How do you find it?Mine came from a proper retailer who would have allowed a return in the unlikely event it was a dodgy one, and Tamron give a 5 year warranty.
I did actually get to the point of ordering one from Amazon for £662 only to note that they had ramped the price up not once but twice in a matter of a few days to £740 so I'm hanging back for the time being until the price settles down to more reasonable levels, or until I get bored and go buy from one of their rivals like WEX
Online there's some very in depth comparisons between the Tamron and the Canon 24-70 f2.8 mkii. They are very 'pixel-peeper'ish and they compare photos of a cityscape and focus on tiny differences in sharpness when you zoom into the very edge of the picture.
Yes, if you go to that detail, it is possible to tell the difference at f2.8. However, from memory the sharpness at the centre is very similar, and stopped down to f4 it's difficult to tell the difference between the two lenses.
That was my experience too. At f2.8 the shots are fine, but stopped down a bit to f4 as you'd expect sharpness improves, and it's difficult to go wrong with it and it's very consistent between 30ish and 65ish mm. Like pretty much all zooms at the extremes the performance drops off a bit, but that's being picky.
There is of course the pretty big bonus with the Tamron which is the image stabilisation, which works very well. Half-press the shutter and you'll hear a tiny whirring sound and the view in the viewfinder just stops still, and you don't realise how shaky your hand is in comparison until you take your finger off the shutter and your shaky hands return.
Personally I think it's a genuine alternative to the Canon mkii.
JustinP1 said:
rich888 said:
JustinP1 said:
I read that too. However, my personal experience is mine was perfect. I don't know how much that issue was of a particular original batch, but it does seem to be overplayed.
Mine came from a proper retailer who would have allowed a return in the unlikely event it was a dodgy one, and Tamron give a 5 year warranty.
That's very reassuring to read and you're not the only one that sings the praises of the Tamron. How do you find it?Mine came from a proper retailer who would have allowed a return in the unlikely event it was a dodgy one, and Tamron give a 5 year warranty.
I did actually get to the point of ordering one from Amazon for £662 only to note that they had ramped the price up not once but twice in a matter of a few days to £740 so I'm hanging back for the time being until the price settles down to more reasonable levels, or until I get bored and go buy from one of their rivals like WEX
Online there's some very in depth comparisons between the Tamron and the Canon 24-70 f2.8 mkii. They are very 'pixel-peeper'ish and they compare photos of a cityscape and focus on tiny differences in sharpness when you zoom into the very edge of the picture.
Yes, if you go to that detail, it is possible to tell the difference at f2.8. However, from memory the sharpness at the centre is very similar, and stopped down to f4 it's difficult to tell the difference between the two lenses.
That was my experience too. At f2.8 the shots are fine, but stopped down a bit to f4 as you'd expect sharpness improves, and it's difficult to go wrong with it and it's very consistent between 30ish and 65ish mm. Like pretty much all zooms at the extremes the performance drops off a bit, but that's being picky.
There is of course the pretty big bonus with the Tamron which is the image stabilisation, which works very well. Half-press the shutter and you'll hear a tiny whirring sound and the view in the viewfinder just stops still, and you don't realise how shaky your hand is in comparison until you take your finger off the shutter and your shaky hands return.
Personally I think it's a genuine alternative to the Canon mkii.
Am watching the www.camerapricebuster.co.uk website like a hawk
ukaskew said:
Many people (even pros) shooting long stuff such as birds and aircraft actually use APS-C/crop bodies for the extra reach.
Do you actually get that though for a given pixel pitch?I have a 30D (with a crop sensor) and a 5D Mk2 (Full frame). The 30D is 8 megapixels and the 5D is around 21 - in both cases the pixel pitch of the sensor is 6.4um.
Photos taken on the 5D at full resolution and then cropped to 8mp look pretty much identical to those on the 30D because the image projected by the lens onto the sensor is sampled at the same resolution due to the similar pixel pitch. The only difference is - you are chopping the outer edges of that image off.
Rather than actually getting more reach with the crop sensor - what you get is less wide angle opportunity.
Of course with an APS-C crop sensor - you don't have to manually crop since the sensor is doing that for you (which could save time for example if you are shooting sports events and printing on site) - but you don't actually gain reach in absolute terms for any given pixel pitch.
I tried an experiment, using the same 70-200 lens I took two pictures of the same subject, one with a full frame camera with lots of megapixels and the other a crop sensor. In Photoshop I put the two results side by side and zoomed the FF pic until it showed the same scene. FF was better. Not much better, but every little bit counts I reckon.
singlecoil said:
I tried an experiment, using the same 70-200 lens I took two pictures of the same subject, one with a full frame camera with lots of megapixels and the other a crop sensor. In Photoshop I put the two results side by side and zoomed the FF pic until it showed the same scene. FF was better. Not much better, but every little bit counts I reckon.
If you are going to do those kind of tests then was the pixel density on the two sensors the same?? If the pixel density on the APS-C sensor was higher then you could still be looking at lens resolving powerDavidY said:
singlecoil said:
I tried an experiment, using the same 70-200 lens I took two pictures of the same subject, one with a full frame camera with lots of megapixels and the other a crop sensor. In Photoshop I put the two results side by side and zoomed the FF pic until it showed the same scene. FF was better. Not much better, but every little bit counts I reckon.
If you are going to do those kind of tests then was the pixel density on the two sensors the same?? If the pixel density on the APS-C sensor was higher then you could still be looking at lens resolving powerI went in 'balls deep' as a total novice buying a FF DSLR last year and don't regret it. I didn't appreciate it at the time, but I have since spent most of my time taking photos of my kids in various surroundings, and the shallower depth of field afforded by FF and overall increased light gathering has given some of my photos a certain quality which wouldn't have been attainable with a crop sensor unless I were using faster still lenses.
I have to say, I feared it would prove to be a monumental waste of money but on the contrary, by 'accidentally' taking photos as a total beginner which have blown me away in terms of image quality and the DoF effect, my interest in photography has been propelled much further than I feel it would if I had ended up buying something less.
I have to say, I feared it would prove to be a monumental waste of money but on the contrary, by 'accidentally' taking photos as a total beginner which have blown me away in terms of image quality and the DoF effect, my interest in photography has been propelled much further than I feel it would if I had ended up buying something less.
Edited by theboss on Saturday 17th December 01:24
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff