Why insist on FF format?

Started Sep 22, 2012 | Discussions thread
Forum ProPosts: 18,133
In reply to tgutgu, Sep 23, 2012

tgutgu wrote:

Where do the shown images "pop"?

Notice that the subjects are sharp, but the background is nicely blurred. Visually, the subject doesn't have to compete with the background. If you don't understand how DOF can allow a subject to stand out more, then I think you might be beyond help. But it's really not a concept that is difficult to understand. Those photographers who value this capability generally prefer to use larger formats because they allow a higher degree of DOF control.

As a wedding photographer, FF is a very valuable format because of this DOF control that allows you to isolate certain details with DOF that just can't be accomplished as well with smaller formats. And it isn't just wedding photographers who value this capability. Anyone who values maximum image control can appreciate this capability.

As you can see here, I've used shallow DOF to isolate the point of focus, allowing it to "pop" or stand out from what would otherwise be distracting, cluttered background elements. Obviously, you don't want every shot to look like this, but it's great to have when you need it, or want greater variety in your images.

T3 wrote:

kelly15 wrote:

Which is the reason to click at 12800 ISO?

No comparison.




I shoot APS-C, FF, and m4/3. m4/3 is great to have if you want a compact system, but it still can't outsmart the rules of physics when it comes to rendering shallower DOF. The same limitation applies to APS-C. That's why I'll still always have a FF body in my camera collection.

Just go look at Scott Schuman "The Sartorialist" blog, http://www.thesartorialist.com/ , where he uses a Canon 5D and a 50mm f/1.4 to shoot people on the street. Thanks to the shallow depth of field and excellent background blur that a full frame sensor can provide, he is able to achieve subject isolation quite easily, even on the busy, cluttered streets of New York...something that you just can't match with the equivalent focal length on smaller formats.

A few of Scott Shuman's on-the-street shots, done with a 5D MKI and 50/1.4, on the busy and cluttered streets of NYC, and yet with a FF camera in hand, he has no problem giving his subjects the "pop" that they deserve:

You have to pick the right tool...or the optimum tool...for the job. Picking the right format is no different. So whether you're a studio pro, or a wedding photographer, or just want to shoot your kids with great subject isolation and great background blur, the format you choose can certainly make an impact. There is no "one-size-fits-all", and that applies to sensor formats, too.

With FF cameras getting smaller, and less expensive, I think more people will be using FF in the future, not fewer . A Canon 5D MKII can be bought for $1900. Buy this time next year, I expect FF DSLRs to be available for even less than that. If you really think that in 3 or 4 years, FF will "will disappear or limited to studio professional work only," you are a complete, utter fool.

There's room for all of these formats. Why limit yourself to just one format?

-- hide signature --


Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow