Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
My beef with FF
Page <<first <prev 4 of 11 next> last>>
Jan 12, 2018 07:03:07   #
rstipe Loc: S. Florida
 
But, what if I use crop mode on a D600?

Reply
Jan 12, 2018 07:10:41   #
bedouin Loc: Big Bend area, Texas
 
How many angels can sit on the head of a pin?I say 4. Anybody want to say 5?

Reply
Jan 12, 2018 07:16:43   #
blackest Loc: Ireland
 
maybe its not the camera but the lens that is designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format.

However repeatedly saying the lens is designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format soon gets tedious and shortened to full frame or FF or FX. A lens designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format is useful for any sensor that size or smaller, but not much use for a medium format or MF camera. Same thing applies, you can get an adapter to switch a Pentax MF lens to K mount cameras and I guess that includes the Pentax Q cameras which has a tiny sensor. Full frame or ff is an abbreviation for designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format.

You might think my post is overworded with my constant use of designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format but without writing designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format Ron will get annoyed until perhaps he will realise saying designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format is extremely tedious and accept full frame or FF or FX as a substitute.

As for focal length a 80mm lens is an 80mm lens no matter what camera its on it has no relationship to the sensor other than the image circle it projects. If I mount an 80mm MF (medium format lens) on my camera I know its going to be a reasonable focal length for a portrait being telephoto to some extent on my camera even though its more of a normal lens field of view for medium format. Much more of a telephoto field of view on my m43 body too. Anyway thats pretty much all I have to say about designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format lenses.

I had to get one more in there :)

Reply
 
 
Jan 12, 2018 07:36:30   #
BebuLamar
 
blackest wrote:
maybe its not the camera but the lens that is designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format.

However repeatedly saying the lens is designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format soon gets tedious and shortened to full frame or FF or FX. A lens designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format is useful for any sensor that size or smaller, but not much use for a medium format or MF camera. Same thing applies, you can get an adapter to switch a Pentax MF lens to K mount cameras and I guess that includes the Pentax Q cameras which has a tiny sensor. Full frame or ff is an abbreviation for designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format.

You might think my post is overworded with my constant use of designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format but without writing designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format Ron will get annoyed until perhaps he will realise saying designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format is extremely tedious and accept full frame or FF or FX as a substitute.

As for focal length a 80mm lens is an 80mm lens no matter what camera its on it has no relationship to the sensor other than the image circle it projects. If I mount an 80mm MF (medium format lens) on my camera I know its going to be a reasonable focal length for a portrait being telephoto to some extent on my camera even though its more of a normal lens field of view for medium format. Much more of a telephoto field of view on my m43 body too. Anyway thats pretty much all I have to say about designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format lenses.

I had to get one more in there :)
maybe its not the camera but the lens that is desi... (show quote)


The 24x36mm format was originally "35mm double frame" then it became just "35mm" and then now it's FF or FX.

Reply
Jan 12, 2018 07:43:38   #
Peter Boyd Loc: Blyth nr. Newcastle U.K.
 
The term full frame pre-dates digital photography. It was applied to 35mm. film cameras after the introduction of half frame cameras which also used 35mm. film, but the negative size was 24mm. x 18mm. Olympus manufactured some very compact cameras that used this format.

Reply
Jan 12, 2018 07:52:38   #
Morning Star Loc: West coast, North of the 49th N.
 
So, when I first encountered these terms for the sensor sizes, plus a whole lot of arguments about them, I decided "the heck with all of them."
I look through the viewfinder, and when I like what I see there, I press the shutter release button. Ready for the next shot? Look through the viewfinder, and when I like what I see, I press the shutter release button.
I don't worry about the size of my sensor, I've learned to use the buttons and wheels on my camera to make the image in the viewfinder look different, and Ha! I've even taught that camera to make sure an image is sharp.
I am asked occasionally what the sensor size of my camera is. Or I'm told from time to time that I should really move up to a FF-camera... I shrug my shoulders and ignore the question or comment. Why? I'm happy with (most of) the photos I take, my grandkids love them (and they are the important ones!!!). And praise be: They don't know a FF-sensor camera from a camera obscura!

Reply
Jan 12, 2018 07:55:58   #
chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY
 
Rongnongno wrote:
FF = Full frame. FF is NOT 24x36. In Nikon jargon 24x36 is FX. 'Cropped sensors' are DX cameras*.

FF confusion started long ago when folks compared not the sensor but the field of view and came with 'Oh! It is a cropped view of a regular 24x36 camera'.

Blame this on folks who did the explanation for not clearing up the conceptual mistake.

Every camera, regardless of what the heck it is, from an old cell phone to the most advanced medium format, is a FF camera. Meaning the full sensor array is used.

Unlike ACA and Obama care being the same (but perceived as different) FF and 24x36 are not the same at all (but perceived as identical).

Yet FF is used left and right, referring to the wrong thing 99% of the time.

----
Call me a fool for bringing this up time and time again but I just do not understand why folks are not getting it.


-----
* Among other smaller formats.
FF = Full frame. FF is NOT 24x36. In Nikon jargo... (show quote)


This "full frame vs crop" BS has crept into our lingo only in the digital age in the last dozen years or so, as digital sensors started to equal the 35mm classic frame. One person's full frame is another person's crop...I think the camera manufacturers (and their salespeople) have done a marketing con job on us by referring to 35mm as "full frame" and APSC as "crop sensor" - all smaller sensors will "crop" the image as compared to a larger sensor - hence for a "medium" format camera a so called full frame sensor is a crop sensor. "Crop" has a negative connotation so someone shopping for an APSC camera may feel somewhat inadequate when they hear a salesperson or peer saying "well it's not FULL frame - it's CROPPING out the larger image - you will have to apply a CROP factor to your lenses...- you will get better IQ with FF ...blah blah blah...." While although that's all true, to a smaller extent in some cases, MOST photographers don't NEED FF to take quality digital photos, ESPECIALLY these days with improved sensor and processor technologies in modern DSLRs and MILC cameras to mitigate noise especially. I always viewed APSC as superior for my purposes - higher pixel density and longer "reach" with telephoto lenses. But for some, FF is a must for low light church or interior uses where flash is forbidden - but I don't consider shooting at ISO 12,000 normal photography.

So my upshot here is that the marketing lingo makes (or attempts to make) APSC photographers feel "inadequate", that they are missing out on the "full frame experience". That some magical experience will occur once they plunk down high 4 or 5 figures for FF cameras and lenses, as they are convinced by the salesperson behind the B&H counter.

I think the lingo should be revised to reflect the actual size of the sensor (or ISO name) rather than any editorial biases like "full frame" and "crop" as we did in the film days (no one referred to a 35mm camera as a crop or full frame camera back then, eh, but also 110, 126, disc, half frame, etc., were considered "consumer" film formats - "real pros" only shot MF 4x5, 120/220 roll or larger) ...so

FF = 35mm or 24x36mm
Crop = APSC or 24x12mm or 25.1×16.7 mm I think
Medium format = whatever the dimension of the sensor is ???? 45mmx36mm??? ..or 4.5cmx3.6cm
Large format = ??? 8x10in equivalent ... if they ever come up with a large format sensor perhaps someday...LOL

I think it's best to describe our camera sensors that way....in the display world we don't think of a 42" class UHD tv as a crop of a 65" equivalent tv now do we?

Reply
 
 
Jan 12, 2018 08:00:27   #
cval52
 
I am still wondering how, when a uterus is removed, it is a hysterectomy. I didn’t know there was an anatomical feature called a hyster.

Reply
Jan 12, 2018 08:11:23   #
Bill_de Loc: US
 
Peter Boyd wrote:
The term full frame pre-dates digital photography. It was applied to 35mm. film cameras after the introduction of half frame cameras which also used 35mm. film, but the negative size was 24mm. x 18mm. Olympus manufactured some very compact cameras that used this format.


I forgot all about that. I even owned one of those cameras.

From Wiki:

The Pen series is a family of half-frame cameras made by Olympus from 1959 to the beginning of the 1980s. Aside from the Pen F series of half-frame SLRs, they are fixed-lens viewfinder cameras.

--

Reply
Jan 12, 2018 08:12:35   #
jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY
 
Rongnongno wrote:
FF = Full frame. FF is NOT 24x36. In Nikon jargon 24x36 is FX. 'Cropped sensors' are DX cameras*.

FF confusion started long ago when folks compared not the sensor but the field of view and came with 'Oh! It is a cropped view of a regular 24x36 camera'.

Blame this on folks who did the explanation for not clearing up the conceptual mistake.

Every camera, regardless of what the heck it is, from an old cell phone to the most advanced medium format, is a FF camera. Meaning the full sensor array is used.

Unlike ACA and Obama care being the same (but perceived as different) FF and 24x36 are not the same at all (but perceived as identical).

Yet FF is used left and right, referring to the wrong thing 99% of the time.

----
Call me a fool for bringing this up time and time again but I just do not understand why folks are not getting it.


-----
* Among other smaller formats.
FF = Full frame. FF is NOT 24x36. In Nikon jargo... (show quote)


You mean we need another term, rather than FF?

And what are the dimensions of a FF sensor, if not 24 X 36?

https://newatlas.com/camera-sensor-size-guide/26684/

Reply
Jan 12, 2018 08:13:55   #
ELNikkor
 
Looks like you hit a nerve, from all the passionate replies! Just chill and live with it, the general populace could care less about exactness. My son said the other day he wanted to ride "shotgun" in my car. I didn't remind him he was being inaccurate, but I did tell him the context of the term, since he didn't know even why it was called "shotgun". Did you ever "dial" someone on your phone? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say you "punched" them? Or "pressed" them? Used to be when you wanted a photocopy, you'd "xerox" the page, even though it was on a Savin photocopy machine etc. etc.

Reply
 
 
Jan 12, 2018 08:16:06   #
blackest Loc: Ireland
 
BebuLamar wrote:
The 24x36mm format was originally "35mm double frame" then it became just "35mm" and then now it's FF or FX.


True enough but i think we all know what it means today.
I guess in the 30's someone might have been described as a very gay fellow, these days... its not the same.

Ron has got an almost autistic/ aspergers view on things, he gets unsettled by rule breakers it disturbs the order of things. I come from a culture renowned for disturbing the order of things. He has a good sense of humor too and insightful too but I doubt he uses a hoover or a xerox machine or owns a fridge.

I think English is a second language for ron so when we start using english 'creatively' it annoys him after learning the rules and we tear up the rule book. Idiom and a dry sense of humor are hard to learn for people who have learnt English as a second language.

So yes Full frame technically not correct, do we understand what it means as we use it, of course we do. If we don't use FF and use fx and dx well those are nikon terms almost as bad as EF and EF-s which are canon terms for the same thing.

We need something because "designed to cover the full frame of the 35 mm format" is just too long for such a simple point.

Reply
Jan 12, 2018 08:17:40   #
jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY
 
ELNikkor wrote:
My son said the other day he wanted to ride "shotgun" in my car. I didn't remind him he was being inaccurate, but I did tell him the context of the term, since he didn't know even why it was called "shotgun".


You mean because the guy with the shotgun was usually on the left side?

Reply
Jan 12, 2018 08:18:12   #
Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida
 
Four pages!

Reply
Jan 12, 2018 08:23:32   #
ELNikkor
 
@Joe Blow - Nice summary, except the part about the first movie film being 36mm wide. Since it was on vertically running reels, it was actually 24mm wide, and around 16mm tall. When still cameras started winding it horizontally, the natural thing to do was to extend it to 36mm wide.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 4 of 11 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.