Full frame or aps: Hi there again, I am shooting with a canon 3ti, 18mp aps sensor. I am wanting to move to a full frame but do not have the money for a new body. Is there much of a...

MCoomber Loc: Hamilton ontario

Hi there again,

I am shooting with a canon 3ti, 18mp aps sensor. I am wanting to move to a full frame but do not have the money for a new body. Is there much of a difference between a 5d,mark1 -13mp, and the 3ti? Would it be a step down?

Michael

singleviking Loc: Lake Sebu Eco Park, Philippines

MCoomber wrote:

Hi there again,

I am shooting with a canon 3ti, 18mp aps sensor. I am wanting to move to a full frame but do not have the money for a new body. Is there much of a difference between a 5d,mark1 -13mp, and the 3ti? Would it be a step down?

Michael

Most sensible members here would be hesitant to give you advice like that since you have not stated what you use this camera for. You might do research in the comparison tables available at Adorama and B&H website or go to website from magazines and equipment reviewers.
You leave your question too nebulous to make a considered and rational answer.

Also any conversion to full frame is an expansive one since your old lens must be replaces as well. Any use of a 5D mark I with your old APS-C lens is like reverting from walking back to crawling. The menus and options are different and the DSP is older technology on the 5D but it's low light ability may be an improvement. Just remember, using an APS-C lens on a full frame will yield less than 6 MP of usable pixels on the sensor due to the reduced optical field of the lens on the larger sensor.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

MC, welcome to the Hog.
MC, it might be a wash.
The only thing abut the 5dmkl is that it had the biggest pixels of any Canon ever made. Whether that's enough to overcome its other age shortcomings, who knows. But it IS a semi-pro body.
Maybe also look at an old 1Ds, some are very cheap. Good luck. ;-)
SS

Edit: MC, don't confuse good photography with the size of the sensor. The big sensors are better, but not enough so, to offset your budget.

amehta Loc: Boston

MCoomber wrote:

Hi there again,

I am shooting with a canon 3ti, 18mp aps sensor. I am wanting to move to a full frame but do not have the money for a new body. Is there much of a difference between a 5d,mark1 -13mp, and the 3ti? Would it be a step down?

Michael

Why do you "want to move to a full frame"? I think most of the advantages are negated by the age of the 5D Mark I. Camera sensor technology has simply advanced too much. It may not be a step down, but I don't think it would be a significant step up.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

MCoomber - I keep the bookmark below handy for comparison of Canon DSLR technology. I also use http://www.the-digital-picture.com/ for reviews of Canon cameras and lenses, which is particularly useful when reading-up on discontinued models. After looking at the sensor shared between the 5DmI and the 1DsII, I'd following SS's suggestion and see if I could find a 1DsII at KEH in my budget ...

You need to consider too how many EF-S lenses you have and use and realize these will no longer work with a full frame body. That could be a not so minor detail.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Canon_EOS_digital_cameras

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

there's a simple reason I leave FF to the pros that get paid to take photos..MONEY. FF ain't cheap.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

MCoomber wrote:

Hi there again,

I am shooting with a canon 3ti, 18mp aps sensor. I am wanting to move to a full frame but do not have the money for a new body. Is there much of a difference between a 5d,mark1 -13mp, and the 3ti? Would it be a step down?

Michael

Simple answer is yes. 5D is better.

bweber Loc: Newton, MA

I traded a eos 5 mark 1 for a used 1DS III a couple of years ago. I love the 1DS, but it heavy, so I just purcahsed a used 5 Mark 1 at a very good price. The picture quality almost meets the 1DS. It focuses a little slower and is missing a coulple of features I like, but it still takes great pictures.

You will have to replace your lenses only if the lenses to have are designed solely for APS cameras.

tradergeorge Loc: Newport, Kentucky

The camera body is going to be the least of your considerations. If you upgrade to an FX sensor, but keep using you DX designed lenses, you will still be faced with a choice of either having a crop factor, thereby lowering your effective pixel count, or accepting some serious aberration at the outside of your shots. In fact, most Nikon bodies detect a DX lens and automatically revert to a DX mode, that negates the advantage of having an FX sensor....So, if you are not prepared to replace all your glass, at least scope out all the ramifications before jumping...

amehta Loc: Boston

tradergeorge wrote:

The camera body is going to be the least of your c... (show quote)

With Canon, EF-S lenses cannot be used with a full frame camera. Third-party "EF-S" lenses may mount on the camera, but the mirror may hit the lens.

All Nikon FX bodies give you the option to have Auto DX Crop mode on or off. The DX lens will work, but if DX crop mode is off, there may be vignetting.

Kingmapix Loc: Mesa, Arizona

I own both a full frame and C-sized frame cameras.
If you are not trying to get into low light or night sky photography, I would stick with the c-sized sensor. The newer C-sensors of today do a very credible job for general photography.

tradergeorge Loc: Newport, Kentucky

amehta wrote:

With Canon, EF-S lenses cannot be used with a full frame camera. Third-party "EF-S" lenses may mount on the camera, but the mirror may hit the lens.

All Nikon FX bodies give you the option to have Auto DX Crop mode on or off. The DX lens will work, but if DX crop mode is off, there may be vignetting.

I am sorry... I have not shot Canon in so long I forgot that they change lenses often with bodies....I am used to the Nikon concept of everything fits, everything works (to an extent). Your statement about Nikons makes my point. You either wind up negating the purpose of the full frame sensor, or you get aberration that few want...thus, new glass if you want it to be worth the upgrade.

Bob Boner

I have both full-frame and apc Canon bodies. The full-frame are a big advantage when using wide angle lenses. The apc are an advantage using telephoto lenses. I find the full-frame bodies most useful for landscapes and the apc body most useful for wildlife (where telephoto lenses are pretty much a necessity). If you don't need 24mm (and wider) then you probably don't need a full-frame body. I have not bought any EF-S lenses because I don't want lenses that can't be used on my full-frame body. The kind of photography you want to do should decide whether or not you want a full-frame body.

I realize that you can get wide angle EF-S lenses, but if you get a full-frame body, they won't attach. I won't spend money on lenses that I can't use on all my bodies.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

MCoomber wrote:

Hi there again,

I am shooting with a canon 3ti, 18mp aps sensor. I am wanting to move to a full frame but do not have the money for a new body. Is there much of a difference between a 5d,mark1 -13mp, and the 3ti? Would it be a step down?

Michael

It would most certainly be a step down. A 5D classic is one dino of a camera!

Why do you want to change to FF anyway?

OonlyBonly

Gene51 wrote:

Simple answer is yes. 5D is better.

:thumbup: