Except the focus length x wide angle with sensor details, anything else.

Full frame was expensive, especially on lens.
Others than that, do you really print it out for each photos are you taken?

So far mine only post in FB, others than that just happy for own.

Cause FX or DX dose not feels that diff.

But I found that Nikon D7200 has going limitation of sensor and produce better in image quality of detailed.

For normal landscape was fine, if you are micro shooter or close up photos, there was limit, unlike D600 can see much clearly of fine detail on each objects.

http://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/full-frame...-really-matter/

Better low light and bokehliciousness on FF, even for FB post only. And stop using "was". It still "is".

I shoot mainly family photos. If there's a reason to go FF it would be the ISO advantage alone, so I can shoot comfortably at 6,400 to 12,800 (if there is a need to). Old people don't like the flash.

From 6400-12,800 the only recent body.
D600 & D800 don't have that capable

What is your max "comfortable" (not technical maximum) iso you can shoot with your apsc? I can "comfortably" go up to iso 6400 on FF. It can comfortably go further up to 12000 on newer body.

Not really sure what is your real question about? Are you thinking of buying D600/D800 and just need good reason to buy one?

Urm really? I remember seeing D700 shooting at ISO 6400 before.

Canon 6D as well is almost 4 years old with the capability to shoot 12800 and above. No idea which planet he's talking about that only recent bodies have that capability...

FF DSLR if u need
1. Highest level of image resolution
2. Low light performance
3. Good bokeh
4. Wide angle needs
5.

D600/800 shoots from 3,600 ISO and beyond really have lot of noise, depend your acceptable level.
For me I would prefer cleaned background as well.

Have no argument with older bodied.

Ok ok after my trip, I will going for FF

If you're going to FF, do make sure to splurge on lens as well. It's equally important.

Spending for finding happy
24mm f1.8G with D7200

errr.....no.1 is not necessary true depending on the res on the FF.

FF has its own place depending on what you plan to shoot. Portrait & landscape looks better on FF due to its easier to isolate subject and less distortion cause you can use longer focal lens. If you primarily shoot wildlife and sports, apsc is preferable to get that extra reach and megapixel per sensor area resolution count.

what was the point of this thread? /:

I think TS just want some justification why need to buy FF before he decides to buy one.

Bingo... Otherwise throwing for money and never get the right end result

Actually I got my right answer already.

Thank you guys for clarify as well.
Next step, know that, what should be do.

of course depending on the resolution on the FF....can u get 36MP from APS sensor?

you can get similar image using APS with shorter focal length lens with less distortion as well..but bokeh will not be as good as FF.

36MP on APSC sensor can be done. They already did it with 41MP on Nokia phone (much smaller than APSC). Just that I haven't seen anything above 28Mp APSC (samsung NX1) yet.

Actually somebody did some test and true enough shorter focal tend to give more distortion so even if field of view is the same. But that really depends on lens quality which may offset the distortion.

This post has been edited by DaddyO: Aug 31 2016, 09:23 AM

Buy before your trip ma. Can test 99
Boss where you been lately? No posting at reno forum?
Btw which FF camera you going for?

Reno & audio forum getting boring day & days.

But recently quite happy with my DX setup.
Yes I can do with D810 FX before my tip, just really necessary.

For holiday photo i would recommend smaller sensor like apsc and m43, even down to 1''. Partly because light weight and you want to get everything in focus. Of course, FF still better if you know what you doing at what setting but bear in mind the shallow depth of field can be annoying. Already heard complaint from some amateurs owning FF that background blur so much when taking shots at their gf/family in front.

Actually not new to me.
In before I'm bring 2 FF bodied to HK trip
http://vintagephotograph.weebly.com/my-hk-...okina-17mm.html

This post has been edited by kimsim: Aug 31 2016, 02:07 PM

Judging from your photos in HK....ya, would really recommend apsc or m43 camera first or at least learn a bit of composition, white balancing, and exposure settings. And as suspected, you didn't control the shallow depth of field much on the FF, like at all. Did you just go full aperture the entire trip? In contrast, your cameron highland trip with LX3 looks so much better.

Thanks for your commented.
Maybe on that time, I am more prefer higher contrast, is edited from NX capture 2.


This post has been edited by kimsim: Aug 31 2016, 04:46 PM

2 FF body on a trip? Wow you must have a lot of strength to carry both like that. Yeah as what DaddyO says, the WB and the exposure is way off but maybe you like warmer colors. I know some people do that on purpose.

But really begs the question, if you already have 2 FF bodies why this thread?

Already be a passed.

I am stopped around 4 yrs already, time is back now

Very nice pics bro
Actually a lot better than most here...lol

Lol... anyway thanks your word

bro... ur HK photos... somehow i feel like alot overexpose, not that its a crime but... to bright for me.

Fine dining restaurant allow u to take photo with flash? (err usually i just pump ISO) haha.

but generally, some nice photos there

just my comment bro... dont take it seriously

Yes i like ppls were comments, otherwise can't improve as much.

Bright is purposely drag up from the Nikon NX capture 2 edited software.

Maybe at that time I'm more prefer dynamic feels.

some photos... when looking at it i feel pening hahaha

Haha that's ok, when I was young.
Dunno how to take the right photos at all.

This thing should take more and learn more right.

But maybe you love more natural picture from camera output

maybe you are right...

About high ISO right, it's also important to consider that ISO 3200 on one camera might not be ISO 3200 on another.

Take for instance fuji. I used to rave about how, as an APS-C sensor, they can pull off ISO 6400 that looks nearly like a D600/A7 at ISO6400. The problem: For the exact same exposure, the sony a7 would be like 1/60 f2.0 ISO 6400 while the fuji would be 1/30 f2.0 ISO 6400.

Even when compared to the D7200, this effect can be observed. So no, I'm not sure if I've seen any crop sensors rival the modern full frame sensors in terms of noise performance.

Haha it never will. But modern crop can outperform a much older full frame

Nowadays the noise control argument don't hold that much water already, especially APS-C like Nikon D500 or even the Fuji cameras with APS-C sensor can shoot ISO and being quite clear, you can't even tell the difference.

Currently the best sensor in the market is APS-C, the Sigma Foveon sensors though APS-C but can rival even medium format.

Also to say FF is costly? LOL think again, FF camera body you can acquire for under RM 6k easily. And if you think APS-C sensor cameras are cheap? Check out Nikon D500, Sony A6300, Fuji X-T2 and so on.

A good FF like D610 (used) can get for below 4k. Gone are the days 5 years ago when the cheapest digital FF is 6k and above.
Oh yesh, the mini D5 (D500) card is out.

This post has been edited by Icehart: Sep 4 2016, 08:28 AM

Yes but iso performance and af is rather meh on older model at that price point. If you do plan to get one, mainly for bokehliciousness.