So are you ready for the future?

Nikon D3 can use both types

I have premonition that in the future, all dSLR will be FF....

Maybe in 5 years time.

i don't know how to answer. currently i have 2 FF lenses and 1 APS-C lens.

I believe using FF lens with your APS-C camera will have reduced distortion. That's why your picture
all come out not bad...

If not mistaken, 5D + 40D + 580EX II still cheaper than one D3...

2 cameras better than one....

lol go FF so wat..u can get award winning shot if u have one?

Better IQ.
Can go Wider.
Better noise control.

---

Added on February 15, 2008, 3:58 pm
I believe your APS-C lens is kit lens. So when you invest, you actually bought FF lens

can go wider field of view or more bokeh (less DOF)

example.... let say u have APS-C with 1.5x crop (Nikon, Sony) with 10-20mm lens (Sigma). Actual viewing angle at the widest side is equal to 15mm. or a Canon APS-C with 1.6x crop with Canon 10-22 lens...actual viewing angle at the widest side is equal to 16mm.

when u have FF DSLR or a 35mm film SLR... u can use Sigma 12-24mm (which supports full frame) at the widest 12mm

at the same distance and same exposure value, let say with f5.6, FF will have deep bokeh compare to crop sensor

the wider part interest me..

You have your point here...

FF is wider with today solution.

Some more I found it is about 1.5 stops blurer background with the same lense and aperture. It is good thing to show off bokeh for female potrait... but on the other hand, a bit headache when you actually need DoF like group pictures... always need to stop 1.5 stops more down.... It is where I still love my EFS17-55 when I need the DoF, and not background blur...

can add camera phone to make it three.. kekekekek

i still blur (not bokeh) about FF lense and the other..kekeke

u saying that using with FF DSLR the crop multiplier is 1.
so a 12mm lens will act as it is 12 mm lens

so it should be a benefit for 1.6 factor or 2x (4/3 system) if using the long tele lense.. 300mm can easily be 600mm m'i correct??

*i'm only familiar with 12x eqv to 420mm on 35mm..

Yo... Basically you got it all right...

It is why I like the 100-400 IS on my 40D... Make the long lense even loooooonger... Anyone longer than mine?

yes. I think ppl should start consider to save more cash for FF lens just for the future.

For me i bought the tokina 12-24 f4 as a start. And yes it does work on a FF camera once you set your zoom to 16mm(without filter) and 18mm with no vignetting at all. Next lens is gonna be the 24-70mm f2.8 by sigma

Sure boh... Do you mean if I have the rather cheap Tokina, I can sell off my almost-no-chance-use 17-40 f4 L?

just go google it and you shall know the answer it really works.
here's a link http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00It2h

1. how do u know it is a FF or otherwise lense? it is started isn't?
2. u say 12-24 f4 is a FF lense.. so when u used on APC-s with 1.6x it going to to be 19.2 - 38.4 ..
3. but let say if i bought 12-24 f* but digital lense and used it with DSLR with 1.6x crop factor .. it will be 12-24 or on 19.2 - 38.4 .. .. that the confusion start.. .. so what the different?

1. I know because i went looking into the internet and found various proof that the tokkie 12-24 f4 works on a FF such as the 5D at 16mm - 18mm

2. Yeah you are right. And your point is?

3. on a 1.6x crop factor it'll definitely be 19.2 on a FF 12mm means 12mm, no crop factor. The reason why i say it works on 16mm onwards is because from 12mm - 15mm there's an obvious vignetting on your photo. That's why setting the zoom to 16-18mm will remove the vignetting.

1. Usually manufacturer will mention whether the lens is APS-C only or otherwise. Compatible lenses from the film SLR era are of course FF capable.

2. When used on APS-C with 1.6x, a 12-24m viewing angle is equal to 19.2-38.4mm ... but it still retains the same focal length.

3. Focal length remains the same, but field of view is equal to 19.2-38.4mm because image is cropped....not because it's 'zoomed in'.

k.. now a bit understand.. eps when go to the url.. vignette..

thanks

Hmmm... Thanks for the links..

It is kind of mixed feeling after reading it... Well, because brother me already has one 17-40 L so cannot see the point for me to get that tokina liao... I mean no added advantages la...

But on second though, maybe those using 1D series can have wider solution than 17-40 L...

what to future proof la? cropped sensors have their advantage, the multiplication means longer tele.

even if you go FF body, I'm not surprised if you still keep a backup body which usually is a non-FF.

You can use FF lens with your backup body if its APS-C. Less distortion.

You can do cropping with FF sensor. So tele is not an issue.

Can you do wider with APS-C? Nope.

Yo... Exactly...

Both got its pro and cons... So if you want both, get both system.

It is why I intended to get 5D replacement and use along with my 40D where I will have best of both worlds!

I guess Nikon users can do the same with both D3 and D300?

Oooh no wonder that is your plan lar. Our friend should have waited a little longer than getting the 5D then.

No problem for that either...

When the replacement 5D come, he can sell his 5D cheap cheap to me...

As you can see, I am very helpful when it come to friendship...

ok you didn't get my point.

my point is that you can always get non-FF lens now and later on keep it for your backup body OR you could just sell them off later.

you can say all good things you want with FF cameras and being "future-proof" by getting FF lens but ultimately it depends on the photography and his / her area of photography.

and sometimes no choice also, let's say you using APS-C camera and like in Canon, the widest you can go is on the EF-S 10-22. so you really have no choice. sure you can future proof with stuff like Sigma's 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 EX DG if you're willing to settle with lesser width in view.

my POV - get the lens that suit your situation best. you'll find ways to deal with it when you don't need them anymore.

I think so far the only lense that worth what you mention is the Canon EFS17-55 f2.8 IS non-L.

I really feel damn hard to let this lense go.... There are just no alternative in full frame compare to what it does.

Are you sure? Some say length but some say thickness is better wor

supposedly the "hidden L", no? nice lens, i agree.

If want looooong, I got 100-400 to show..

If you want THICK... I got 85L to show... the lense is so thick and fat....

Yo... I have the best of both worlds... Looooong and Faaaaat... Yo...

---

Added on February 15, 2008, 5:44 pm
Yooo.... It is really "Hidden L" as outside completely no L looks... a bit cheap looks...

Is that why she is smiling in your avatar?

---

Added on February 15, 2008, 6:05 pm
I guess it varies with various situations. Some people who go birding and all would prefer to have a cropped sensor so that their long telephoto lenses have a longer reach as compared to FF cameras.

gogo2, if every reply is going to be countered with advantages of FF then what's the point of debating?

see, there's are reasons why various lens are available. not everyone needs the advantage provided by FF.

not everyone needs the better IQ. not everyone needs the wide (if we argue based on how wide it can go, then obviously FF no contest. so why bother?) blablablablbala.......

your poll option is also rather funny.
- I've bought FF lens or will buy FF lens
- I've bought digital lens or will buy digital lens

i believe all of us have bought FF lens, have bought lens for digital and many would still be doing so unless they're already on FF body or unless they (FF owners) buy for their backup bodies.



this i'd like you to explain. thank you.



exactly my point Mavik. however gogo2 mentioned the above which I have no idea what he's talking about. if FF can be adjust to APS-C crop factor then you (Mavik) wouldn't be posting that. and neither would many other places mention of the crop-factor advantage.

while FF has advantage on wide, APS-C has advantage on tele.

She was shocked at first...

I guess she never see so looooong and faaaat one

the options provided are not clear

i'm not sure which category does the canon 17-40 F4 falls under it is a digital lens, and can be used on FF



good point, end of day it's the end result, FF has it's advantages, but also disadvantages.

apparently the only reason i bought FF lenses, in my case which are Minolta lenses, is that they're originally produced during the film SLR era - referring to my 50mm f1.7 and 70-210mm f3.5-4.5 Minolta

...or in other means... coincidence lol

That's why,

I bought it.



Wide view.



Isn't it sweeeeeeeeeeeet?

Took with Nikon D200

all my lenses r FF lens..

4 lenses. Only 1 is DX format.

i guess what the TS want to see is how many has foreseen this crop sensor camera future. and it affect your next lens purchase. i feel u, brother, it's gonna die off crop sensor is a vehicle camera manufacturer use to jump into digital world and still manage to keep the cost down. after the cost is low enough, dawn of mass FF arrives

it could be harder to sell off a crop sensor lenses when mass FF era arrived..

some of my lenses are dx,some ff, personally i don't really care. the way i see it, i'm still gonna use a dx format cam for the next 10 years or so, and the format is goin to stay.

EF17-40 f4 USM L is a FF lense la. I used that with a 5D and results seems ok... and more than acceptable la


All my lenses are also FF, except EFS17-55 f2.8 IS that I feel so hard to let go... because I just cannot find flaw with it...


Althought I am not a fortune teller, but I gurantee FF will rule in less than 10 years time. Canon EOS 5D already so cheap. I think within 5 years should have major changes and crop factor should dissapearing... Crop factor just have limitation in high ISO noise perfomance and megapixel count.

With either brand of FF, you can get real quality ISO3200 laio...

not really, the dx format has it's pros mainly the crop factor which would give birding and nature photographers a hell of an advantage. it's really hard to say how it'll be like in ten years.

I never thot about this issue until now, better check all my future lens for future usability

i am planning to get the 24-70 2.8 rather than the 17-55 2.8
but this is not because of the FX or DX lens issue.
it is because of the 70 2.8 issue. 55mm is too short for my liking.

can consider i purchase FX lens for the future? though i am still using the AP-S format camera

It is not hard to say. Just ask yourselve if FF is only between RM3k to RM4k, which one will you buy? Still insist on crop factor that is RM1k cheaper?


I always believe 24-70 f2.8 is the smarter choice. It is always better to have lenses that work for all

10-22 + 24-70 = nice combo

Yes I agree.

hahha ! i want a ef 12mm-200mm f2.8L IS ! heheheh !

of course it's no more hard to say la if we keep on bringing in "IF" situations where one keeps setting conditions in favor of FF la. aiyoh.



it's a nice lens but on cropped sensors, 24mm comes to like what, 40mm already? arrghh. go ahead if anyone is fine with lacking the ability to go wider.

from my POV, buy what suits your body + photography style best. IF or WHEN conditions come that you are going totally FF, surely there will be buyers for your digital lenses. in fact the price may even go up due to the lack of production.