Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I would beg to differ, it really depends on what your photography asperations are. If you are shooting nature be it macro or BIF or just wildlife in general I think that the crop camera offers a great advantage, the same can be said for sporting events. What many people don't realize is that the smaller sensor at 24mp is much more pixel dense than the larger sensors which means not only do you get the crop sensor advantage of being closer at any given focal length but you also get a cropping advantage in that most full frames will begin to pixelate as you try to crop tightly. Both Canon and Nikon have come out with 50mp class full frames cameras that are similar in pixel density of the crop cameras but they are expensive.

If you are wanting a camera with less noise and better Dynamic range, then the full frame foots that bill, but simply moving from a crop to full frame without knowing why you are making that decision can be a costly mistake for many people. I did not make the move until the 30mp 5DIV and even then because of my particular subject interest I purchased a 5DSR because I missed the higher pixel density of my crop cameras.

Jerry1940 Loc: Born in OH live in CA

Go full frame and enjoy it.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

If your present camera is doing the job my advise is to keep it. For full frame you need lenses that will cover the whole sensor otherwise you will loose pixels.
Today a full frame is not as convenient as it was in the past. The noise advantage is not as it was in the past and the use of wide angles not as dramatic as it was. Today there are excellent wide angle lenses for the cropped sensor.
When using a tele the cropped sensor has the advantage.

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

The truth of the matter is, in order to reap the benefits of the full frame camera, you will have to buy new lenses.

RichJ207 Loc: Sammamish, WA

He says he has EF lenses.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

As you'll see over the next 24ish hours of responses, you're going to wish these relevant details had been included in the original post. Most will respond to that post with no reading of anything more ...

Given your investments in lighting, you should be able to shoot at lower or even base ISO. At the low ISOs, the difference between the cropped and full-frame sensors is negligible / immaterial when used with Canon's best (full-frame) lenses where the lens is the deciding factor, not the sensor size. Canon has indicated they'll have another model release of DSLRs of only select models, and then only EOS-R releases. Given the advanced capabilities of your near-current 70D, you're positioned to 'watch' the EOS-R develop beyond the first full-frame model and make the full-frame move to DSLR or mirrorless when resale prices on top models like the 5DS/r, 6DII, 5DIV, 1DX fall to the level of the new EOS-R (v-I or whatever is next).

royden Loc: Decatur, GA

What a kitchen zooms? The OP mentioned them. He has 2 EF lens, a 50 and 70 -200.

SteveG Loc: Norh Carolina

I'll tell you from someone who has run tge gambit. I have been a hobbyist photographer my whole life abd a professional for a short time. I started with a cropped sensor, moved to full frame abd then, moved to micro 4/3rds! It's really not about the sensor unless your specifically shooting something that would benefit from full frame. From the questions that you are asking, it would seem to me that you don't yet. I agree that you should get to know about the equipment you already have and what type of photography you like doing before you start changing equipment that will cost you a bundle. You can also find You Tube videos by many great shooters that have left full frame as their everyday shooters. You can find great glass in the smaller formats that unless you are printing your work extremely large, that you just can't tell the difference between the formats. Happy New Year!

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

Happy New year!

So glad the issue of lenses works out in your favor. The FF camera is enough of an expense without having to purchase new lenses. As for seeing camera specifications side-by-side, you can go to B&H's website, select models you are interested in, and use the "compare" feature. It does not always contain every detail, but usually is sufficient to see the differences between the cameras. Since so many have a lot of features in common, it is the differences that really matter!

My first DSLR was a crop-sensor because that was in the price range I could afford. It is a great camera, and even though now outdated, I still keep it as a back-up and second camera. For me, the biggest reason for going FF was getting more resolution for my images. Doing portrait work and sports, that ought to benefit your work. I did not have any FF lenses at first, but eventually realized I would want to eventually go FF. For the next couple of years I traded in my lenses for better ones, got a good tripod, and acquired other peripherals like filters. Then in the fall of 2016 I took advantage of Black Friday/Cyber Monday sales and bought the FF. LOVE it.

Good luck with your selection!

Susan

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Thanks for getting back with more info... It was pretty much impossible to answer your previous question without that.

Your 50mm f/1.8 and 70-200mm would work fine on a full frame Canon camera. Both of those are "EF" lenses, which indicates they are full frame capable.

You didn't specify the other lenses you have, but if they are Canon "EF-S" they will not even fit onto a Canon full frame camera. Canon uses a modified mount on the EF-S lenses that physically prevents them from even being attached to the camera. If they did fit, they would strongly vignette and might even interfere with the mirror in the camera, which is much larger in a FF camera than in your 70D.

If those "kitchen" zooms are third party such as Sigma, Tokina or Tamron, they might be usable on full frame. Tamron "Di", Tokina "FX" and Sigma "DG" lenses are all full frame capable. And, unlike Canon, the third party manufacturers do not install anything on the mount to prevent a "crop only" lens from being fitted to a full frame camera. They use the same mount regardless, so Tamron's "Di II", Tokina's "DX" and Sigma's "DC" lenses.... which are all designed for use on APS-C cameras like your 70D... can actually be mounted to Canon full frame cameras, might be partially usable, but will tend to vignette heavily at many settings. Just for example, the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 DX lens for crop cameras can actually be used on full frame at 16mm... but not any wider. Tokina's 12-24mm f/4 DX lens also can be fitted to full frame, but only zoomed to about 18mm before the vignetting gets to the point where the image is pretty much unusable. It will vary with other lenses from Tokina and the other third party manufacturers.

If you use a lens designed for APS-C camera on a full frame camera, or even take a shot with a full frame capable lens and then crop the image down to APS-C size... you'll actually be worse off. Your APS-C 70D is a 20MP camera. If you were to take an image with a 30MP 5D Mark IV instead, then crop it down in post-processing to match the angle of view of the APS-C camera, you'll actually only have about 12MP of that image remaining! You get "more reach" with the 70D... "more pixels on target" for telephoto work. Full frame, on the other hand, excels at wide angle work. A 16mm lens that's only moderately wide on your 70D would be an ultrawide on full frame (but you don't mention having or using any truly wide lenses... the two you mention behave as short to relatively long telephotos on a 70D).

For some of what you say you shoot, there may be some advantage to full frame. It would be good for the studio work, for the large part. Whether it would be any better than your 70D... who knows? HOWEVER, it REALLY depends upon what you need to do with the images. If you (or your clients) don't make big prints from them, you're unlikely to see much or any difference.

Another thing... you mention doing studio work with strobes, etc. Your 70D has a flash sync of 1/250 and probably syncs with your strobes at 1/200. With most of the full frame cameras the flash sync is 1/200 and it's recommended to use 1/125 with studio strobes. Faster shutter speeds might not fully sync. There's some variation, depending upon the particular camera model and strobes... but basically with a FF camera you would need to use slower shutter speeds with your strobes and need to be able to work with that.

For the sports photography you mention, I bet you are using your 70-200mm f/2.8 a lot. While that's a full frame capable lens, it will behave considerably "shorter" on full frame (see above about cropping full frame images). To use full frame cameras for sports and other things that require telephoto, you will need longer telephotos which are typically bigger, heavier and more expensive. For example, Sigma makes a 120-300mm f/2.8 zoom... it weighs more than double your 70-200 and is much larger... and it cost around $3500, last time I looked. Canon doesn't make a zoom like that, but they do make excellent 300mm f/2.8 and 400mm f/2.8 lenses... figure $8000 to $10,000 for one of those. There are one or two stop slower and more practically sized alternatives in the $1300 range: Canon 300mm f/4 and 400mm f/5.6. Or, if you are mostly only shooting day games, Canon's 100-400mm IS "II" is excellent and costs around $2000. There are also Tamron and Sigma 100-400s that are considerably less expensive (around $800), but are also around a stop slower than the Canon zoom through much of their focal length range, so require even better lighting conditions. All these are "EF"/full frame capable lenses.

Finally, if you think a full frame camera will somehow "take your photography to a new level".... it usually won't. Lens quality actually makes more difference than the camera they are used upon. And there are some fine lenses for APS-C cameras, which are often smaller, lighter and less expensive than FF lenses. Plus crop cameras can use full frame capable lenses and when that's done the APS-C cameras only use the central area of the image, which has the highest resolving power in most lenses. In other words, they "crop away" the weaker corners and edges of full frame lenses.

And a "good" photographer can make great images with an APS-C, pretty much just as well as they can make them with full frame. OTOH, if you have clients who are paying you to make images they can use very large, a full frame camera might be good to add to your kit (just don't get rid of that 70D... you'll probably still want it for the sports photos). Full frame are popular with wedding photographers, for example, because of their better high ISO, low light shooting capabilities. It's not uncommon for a FF camera to be able to make usable images a couple stops higher ISO than a crop sensor camera (but more recent APS-C such as 7D Mark II and 80D are also able to use higher ISO than your 70D... about one stop). Full frame cameras also give somewhat more control over depth of field... can render stronger background blur with big apertures for portraits, or can be stopped down to smaller apertures for greater depth of field in landscape shots. Actually both formats render images the same... the reason large apertures seem to blur more strongly on FF is because you either need to use a longer focal length or move closer, to fill your viewfinder the same as you did with the crop camera. And at the other extreme, a FF camera can be stopped down a little more before diffraction becomes an issue, only because to make any given size of print the FF image is less magnified than one from an APS-C camera.

In general, a full frame camera kit is bigger, heavier and more expensive. You also have somewhat fewer lenses to choose among (though to be fair, the Canon system is pretty large and comprehensive, even for full frame). But while your 70D can use both EF and EF-S lenses, one of the full frame Canon cameras would be limited to the EF lenses. (Note: There are now also some Canon "EF-M" lenses for the APS-C mirrorless M-series cameras and some "RF" lenses for the new full frame, mirrorless EOS R camera. Neither of these series are compatible with any of the DSLRs. But both these mirrorless systems can use EF and EF-S lenses via adapters. The latter are cropped on the full frame mirrorless, though.)

There are advantages to both APS-C and FF... as well as disadvantages to each of them. And only you can truly say if adding a FF to your kit would be worthwhile or not. I suspect a lot of people spend a lot of money for "full frame goodness" actually get pretty little benefit from it... They may well be the only person who ever sees their images in all their FF glory, while viewing them on their computer monitor at 100% during post-processing. By the time they've resized their images for display on Facebook and Instagram... or attach to an email or even make a 13x19" print... other people viewing those will have no clue camera was used, it makes little difference whether it was FF or not. Ultimately, what you shoot, the end use of your images and your budget really should be your guide... whether or not you "need" full frame.

Barbcity Loc: Berkeley, California

I had a Nikon D7000(crop sensor)....I switched to a Nikon D610(fullframe) because I wanted less noise and better resolution when printing big. I use older prime lenses to shoot landscapes and the sharpness really shows in full frame. The noise is very much less in the shadows of the night photography shots as well.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

It seems you know the advantages and disadvantages of full frame so I won't comment on that.

EF is Canon full frame mount which is also fully compatible with APS-C (crop camera). I believe both lenses are EF and fine for a full frame body. I can't say about the "kitchen zoom lenses". EF-S is intended for APS-C only, and if made by Canon can damage a full frame camera. Other brands do mount without damage but will not fill the frame of the photo, but will vignette the image as previous post showed.

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

A costly conundrum indeed. Having said this, what is your desire/need for FF? If that one extra stop of light is critical for your work, perhaps a good if not expensive move. Happy NY!

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

I agree. Now manufacturers are producing lenses in the 10MM focal length that are easily the match for FF 14MM. The difference between bodies is now so close there is not much between them. It is becoming so much, simply, a personal choice often related to pricing and size/weight. Unless specified for a unique purpose, either format will work quite well and final product for the vast majority of users is undetectable when using the latest and best of both worlds.

Happy NY!

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

Perhaps, however, I suspect that many FF users are in fact adding cropped bodies to their arsenal based up the burgeoning cropped body sales reports. It’s hard to say what the majority of folks are doing, however, one thing I can say for certain is, that I have a full arsenal fo Nikon FF that remains in a cupboard like an old anchor while my smaller and high tech freedom-loving Fuji X series bodies/lenses are getting the nod with weekly if not daily workouts. Happy NY!