Lenses for full frame vs aps-c cameras.

101 question here- how does one differentiate the lenses between the full frame sensor cameras and the others? I come from the cinematography side, picked up a 6D for starters and am trying to figure out what the lens options are. Thanks

There are two sensor sizes in Canon digital cameras sold today (there was a third, but that's no longer offered.)
A "full frame" camera (like a 1D X, 5D III, or 6D) are so named because the physical size of the sensor is roughly the same size as a single frame of 35mm film. That's about 36mm wide by about 24mm tall.
An "APS-C" camera (all Rebel series, midrange bodies like 60D, and 70D, as well as the 7D) are so named because the physical size of the sensor is roughly the same size as a single frame of APS-C film (APS-C = Advanced Photo System - Classic size). This film was a little smaller than 35mm... the frame measures roughly 22mm wide by about 15mm tall. It has a 60% (1.6x) crop factor.
The EF-S lenses project an image circle into the camera body which is large enough to fill the size of an APS-C sensor, but will not quite fill the frame of a "full frame" sensor. You'd get vignetting and the image quality would degrade substantially near the edges and corners. But possibly even more important that that... a "full frame" mirror is physically larger and requires more clearance to swing clear of the light path when taking an exposure. The EF-S lenses have a shorter back-focus distance and the rear-most lens element is so close that the mirror would strike the rear-element. As such, Canon designed the mount of the full-frame bodies such that the EF-S lenses wont even mount flush to the body.
In short, Canon "EF-S" lenses will only work with Canon cameras that have APS-C size sensors (well.. with the single exception of the old EOS 10D which hasn't been made in ages.)
Canon "EF" lenses will work on every Canon EOS camera... film or digital... regardless of sensor size.
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

Similar Messages

Wide Angle Lenses - Full Frame vs APS-C

I'm shooting on a crop sensor (30D) and using a Tamron 10-24 Di (poor quality, I must say) to cover my wide angle needs. I'm looking to upgrade my body and lens soon, but I need little help. I shoot real estate and to be honest the 10mm just isn't wide enough at times. Here are two issues I'm stuggling with:
Do I wait to get better glass until I upgrade to possibly a full frame body
How do the focal lengths of the Canon wide zooms compare to my 10-24
See, if I get a new lens now (Canon 10-22) then I'm essentially forcing myself to stay in the crop sensor body market. However, if I decided I will go with a full frame body, then I cannot use the 10-22, and should get something like the 16-35, which would not cover my current wide angle needs on my 30D. Dilemma.
Has anyone else fought this battle who can offer some advice & insight?
http://www.phoblography.org/

If you're serious about real estate photography, then you would be best served by getting a 17TS-E lens. This isn't as wide as 10mm on your existing sensor size, but you can shift-pano two or three shots together and get even wider if need be.
This way you would be spending your money on the glass which is most important here.
Then, if you like, you can pick up a cheap 5Dc or 5D2 and have the ideal FF/TS set up.
Unique Night Time Photography | Twilightscapes.com

Profiles created for Full Frame on APSC?

Does CameraRaw account for the crop factor when applying a full frame profile to an APSC camera? Example - there is an a900 (full frame) + Sony 50mm 1.4 included with CameraRaw, will it account for the crop if I apply it to my a700 images? I know the simple answer is to try the profile and see how it looks, but it makes me more comfortable to know how its actually applying.
Thanks!
Greg

Hi Greg, yes, Photoshop, Camera Raw, and Lightroom all do this automatically. They recognize the crop sensor of the A700 and hence will "scale" the correction level appropriately. Same goes for other makes and models (e.g., Canon 1.3x and 1.6x crop bodies, Nikon 1.5x crop bodies, etc.).

T3i sensor size vs. full frame and how does that effect lens measurements?

I am new to both photography and the T3i camera. I have been reading Jeff Revell's book "Canon EOS Rebel T3i / 600D: From Snapshots to Great Shots". In chapter two he talks about "Lenses and Focal Lengths". In discussing wide-angle lenses he says
"As for which lenses would be considered wide angle, anything 35mm or smaller could be considered as wide."
Latter he discusses normal lenses and says
"The normal lens for full-frame and 35mm cameras is the 50mm lens, but for the T3i it is more in the neighborhood of a 35mm lens."
I understand that there is a 1 / 1.6 ratio between the T3i and a Full Frame camera. In the first quote does the 35mm refer to the T3i measurement or a full frame measurement?
Is there a standard nomenclature to indicate if you are specifying a "full frame" value verses the T3i value? If so, what is it?
When I look at one of my lenses, say the 18-55mm lens, is this the T3i measurement or the standard full frame?
Thanks in advance for your assistance.
--Jesse
P.S. I could not find a publisher’s forum for this book or I would have asked the question there.

Jesse-T3i wrote:
"As for which lenses would be considered wide angle, anything 35mm or smaller could be considered as wide."
In the first quote does the 35mm refer to the T3i measurement or a full frame measurement?
Is there a standard nomenclature to indicate if you are specifying a "full frame" value verses the T3i value? If so, what is it?
When I look at one of my lenses, say the 18-55mm lens, is this the T3i measurement or the standard full frame?
The fast answers are:
When he mentions the 35mm as the basis for determining what's "wide" he is referring to the APS-C crop-frame size sensor.
There is no nomenclature to indicate if you are "full frame" vs. "crop frame" on a lens because all lenses are reported in true focal lengths. There is a nomenclature to indicate if the lens was designed to only project an image circle onto the sensor which is large enough for "crop frame" ... which is what the "EF-S" lens is. If the lens is for "full frame" (which also works on all crop-frame) then it will have the designation "EF" for most lenses, but Canon also has a few specialty lenses such as the "TS-E" (tilt shift) and "MP-E" (macro photo) lenses which also provide full-frame sensor coverage. Incidentally... this is just Canon's way of tagging a lens... Nikon uses the terms "FX" and "DX" (for full frame and crop frame respectively). Everyone has their own tag. Just remember that focal lengths reported are true (well... there's a TINY bit of round-off allowed) and ignore the sensor size.
Here's the background which may help you understand why this is.
The "normal" focal length is based on the human eye, and to understand it, it's easier to think in terms of "angle of view" rather than "focal length."
If you sit and stare straight ahead without moving your eyes or head to "look around", there is an area of vision that the average person can see (and it does vary), but the "angle of view" for that area is about 40 degrees (horizontally). Of course our vision doesn't present our brain with a nice little rectangular image... it fades and is irregular, but it's generally accepted that the angle of view covers about 40 degrees.
The LENS that provides 40 degree angle of view coverage on a "full frame" camera turns out to be a 50mm lens. Images taken with such a lens will seem neither stretched out nor compressed... they'll seem "normal" to your brain. Also, if you can see an object without having to look around to take in the view, then your camera can "see" it with that lens.
A "full frame" camera is one which has a sensor size which is approximately the same as a single frame of 35mm film. The dimensions are roughly 36mm x 24mm.
There are many different crop frame sizes, but for DSLR cameras, the most popular (by far) is the APS-C size. This means the sensor is roughly the same size as a single frame for the "Advanced Photo System - Classic" film. You can think of this as being roughly 21mm x 14mm (although it varies by a just a few millimeters -- on your camera it's really 22.3 x 14.9mm).
If you were to use a movie projector and movie screen and you projected an image so that it fit perfectly on a 12' x 8' screen and called that "full frame", then a "crop frame" would be derived by shriking the movie screen down to about 8' wide by about 5-1/3' tall but (and here's the key) without doing ANYTHING to the movie projector. Essentially that means you're projecting an image intended to fit ona 12x8' screen... but the real screen is smaller. What happens to the part of the image that doesn't fit on the screen? It just spills off the sides and is lost. That is EXACTLY what happens inside a crop-frame camera.
Canon EOS "EF" lenses are designed to project an image large enough to fill a full-frame sensor ... so when used on a crop-frame camera some of that image just spills off the sides. This means that if your lens was providing a 40 degree angle of view (measured horizontally) then the crop-frame is only capturing the 26 degrees in the middle of it. If you want a 40 degree angle of view again... you'll need to change lenses.
And this is where your author suggests a 35mm lens is "normal" for a camera with an APS-C body. The math actually works out in the neighborhood of a 31mm lens, but nobody actually makes a 31mm lens... and a 35mm focal length (commonly available) is pretty close. Also 28mm lenses are commonly available and are ALSO pretty close. It's my personal opinion that 28mm is probably a bit more normal than 35mm, but that's because as an avid amateur astronomer, I am fairly used to looking through Plossl design eyepieces which provide a 50 degree apparent angle of view and my eye actually can see the edges of the frame, but if I go a bit wider... I can no longer see the edges of the field without "looking around" (regardless... 40 degrees seems to be the established norm and THAT is the value that everything is based on.)
For purposes of buying lenses, the focal lengths are NOT converted or adjusted in any way. For example, Canon makes "EF-S" lenses designed specifically to work with their crop-frame bodies. So when the kit lens that comes with the camera says it is a zoom with an 18-55mm focal length range... it really is 18-55mm regardless of sensor size. (Canon isn't multiplying or dividing focal lengths and putting a different value on the box just because it's intended for a crop-sensor camera.)
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Tim
Tim Campbell
5D II, 5D III, 60Da

Time to upgrade to Full Frame

Team,  I currenlty own a 70D and a T3i with a bunch of EF-s lenses. My question is wether to upgrade to a couple of L lenses or upgrade to a full frame camera. Ideally I love to have a Mark III but a 6D is more realistic.   My budget is about $3500 I do real estate photography with some portrait side gigs on the side, no weddings or big projects.  Will it make sense to keep my 70D with some prime lenses for portrait photograpy? or go full frame is there much of a difference if i used a 70-200 2.8L lens on a 70D then a 6D?  your help and expertise is greatly appreciated.

Unless you want to get into really high end real estate photography, I'd suggest you stick with your 70D for now and start gradually changing your lens line-up, with a goal to build a system that will eventually allow you to add a full frame camera to use alongside the crop sensor camera. There are advantages and limitations with both sensor formats. I use both crop sensor and full frame cameras (a pair of 7D and a 5DII in my case, right now). I prefer the crop camera for sports/action and anything requiring longer telephoto lenses. And I like the full frame for landscape, architecture, portraiture and sometimes for macro work. One of the reasons I choose the full frame for portraiture is control over depth of field. Now, DoF is governed by lens focal length, working distance and lens aperture.... it doesn't actually change due to different sensor formats. However, in order to frame a subject the same way with a full frame camera, it's either necessary to use a longer focal length or move closer to the subject, or a little of both. Changing either distance or focal length will tend to render shallower depth of field. Conversely, full frame cameras can use smaller apertures before diffraction becomes an issue, so a FF also has some advantage for macro work or for landscape/architecture where great DoF is often wanted.  In generaly, there's a bit less lens selection for FF, though it's still quite extensive in the Canon system. This is because a FF camera can only use EF lenses, while your crop sensor 70D and my 7Ds can use both EF-S/crop-only and EF/full-frame-capable lenses. Also in general lenses for FF cameras will be larger, heavier and more expensive. It's most noticeable with telephotos, of course, but to some extent is true even with wide angle. IMO, on 70D a 70-200mm is a bit long for a lot of portraiture work. My most prefered lenses for portraits with a crop sensor camera are 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and 24-70/2.8. On full frame, my most frequently used portrait lenses are 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-200/4 and 70-200/2.8. Sure, there are times that wider and longer lenses can be useful for certain types of portraits. But these are what I use most often and feel are the most basic or "traditional" focal lengths for the purpose. Short telephotos generally render the most ideal perspective for portraits. Also, I mostly shoot candid portraits, not posed. Because that often means working with less than desirable backgrounds, I prefer larger aperture lenses that allow me the option to blur down distractions behind (and sometimes in front of) the subject. If shooting in studio or more posed at a planned location, with more control over the background and other elements, it would be different and large aperture lenses would be less necessary. Real estate photography work often calls for a wide angle and a lot of depth of field. With your crop camera, the EF-S 10-18mm you've got probably sees a lot of use. If you were shooting full frame, you'd probably want EF 16-35/2.8 or EF 16-35/4... or EF 11-24/2.8 (but that would use up most of your budget and not leave room to buy a camera to use it on). Tilt shift lenses such as the TS-E 17/4 and TS-E 24/3.5 II are also top choices for architectural photography. Compare size, weight and prices. Also, if you use filters a lot, some require larger (16-35/2.8 II uses 82mm) and the TS-E 17/4 and EF 11-24/2.8 both have stongly convex front elements that won't allow standard screw-in filters to be used at all. There aren't many truly wide lenses for crop cameras that are also FF compatible. The EF 11-24/2.8 is one of very few. The EF 14/2.8 II is another. So, to use the crop camera for wide angle shots, you'll probably want to keep at least one or two EF-S/crop only lenses. The EF-S 10-22mm is an older lens than the EF-S 10-18mm, but is a little better built and with more edge-to-edge image sharpness... it's one of the best ultrawides made by anyone... but costs about 2X as much. If it were me, I'd prefer the Canon EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS USM over the Sigma 17-70... but once again this is a "crop only" lens. For dual format purpose, one of the 16-35mm or the EF 17-40/4 might replace it better and be able to serve on both camera formats. I use a little longer 24-70 and 28-135 as my "walk around" or mid-range zooms.    6D is a nice camera and, compared to 70D, would be desirable for very large prints or for low light/high ISO shooting situations. That's because full frame images need less magnification for enlargement and use bigger pixel sites that capture more fine detail, both of which allow for bigger prints. Not that you'd notice much difference with 13x19 or smaller prints. And certainly you wouldn't be able to tell any difference at Internet resolutions if a lot of your stuff ends up on websites. Because the FF camera's 20MP sensor is so much less crowded than the 20MP crop sensor, there is less heat and less cross talk, making for cleaning or less noise in very high ISO images. The difference would be most noticealbe at ISO 1600 and above.   The 70D has a more sophisticated and versatile AF system, except that the 6D's can still manage to focus in one or two stops lower light (center point only). 70D has 19-point AF that's similar to original 7D, active matrix focus screen, and zone focus in addition to the all points/auto and single point/manual focus patterns offered by all Canon DSLRs. The 6D only offers the last to focus patterns, doesn't have zone, and it has a fixed (but interchangeable with a few types) focus screen. 70D's active matrix focus screen makes possible the camera's "grid on demand" feature that can be turned on or off via the menu, and which can be quite handy when shooting architecture inside or out. With 6D you can get similar grid in the viewfinder, but to do so would need need to swap out with a separately sold, accessory "D" type focus screen. In 70D all nineteen AF points are the more sensitive dual axis/cross type, with the center one enhanced for f2.8 and faster lenses. 6D's eleven AF points have only one dual axis/cross type... the center point... while all the others are single axis type. Either camera's AF system is probably more than adequate for what you say you shoot primarily. If you were shooting sports/action/wildlife/birds, the 70D's AF system would likely be more ideal, though... so I'd rate it as more versatile. The 6D's would be a better choice for low light work, though. 70D also has articulated LCD screen and built-in flash, while 6D has neither of those features. The 70D and 6D share batteries, chargers, memory and have mostly similar control layouts, always nice when using two different cameras interchangeably for various purposes. So, if it were me, I'd probably keep shooting with the 70D and work on lens upgrades first, then add the FF camera later. But that's just me. Your needs might be different and call for another approach. ***********
Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & EXPOSUREMANAGER

Any advantages from trading up to a Canon 6d full frame from a 60d for horse photography?

Hi, I am considering upgrading from my Canon 60d to a full frame (6d), I generally shoot horses in action and head profiles using a Canon 70-200L non IS lens. I would be interested in feedback as to whether the cost would benefit me with this type of photography. Also any additional lens suggestions would be appreciated.
Solved!
Go to Solution.

I do a ton of equestrian photography.
I use a pair of 7D's for the vast majority of it (90% or more). Those have essentially the same sensor and high ISO capability as your 60D, just a slightly more sophisticated (but no more sensitive) auto focus system and higher frame rate. I do also have a 5D Mark II that's proven useful at times in lower light situations, but I use it far less than the crop cameras. The 5DII can do about one stop higher ISO than 7D (a 6D offers slightly higher ISO than 5DII, as well as extra low light focusing capability).
Primarily, I'd rather have the "extra reach" of crop cameras than the high ISO capabilities of full frame. My most used lenses are 70-200/2.8 IS, 70-200/4 IS, 300/2.8 IS and 300/4 IS. I also carry and sometimes use 28-135 IS, 10-22mm, 24-70/2.8 and a number of shorter primes (portrait, macro, tilt-shift).
In order to have the "reach" of a 300mm lens on crop camera, with a full frame camera I'd have to lug around a 500mm. No thanks!
But in general it's more down to lenses than the camera they are used upon...
What lenses and cameras I use depends on the type of event I'm shooting, whether or not I can be or want to be mobile, whether or not an arena is covered, if I'm not working outdoors.
For dressage, I often have to work in covered arenas. But I am not mobile at dressage events, so I can set up a 300/2.8 on a tripod to reach the other end of the arena and use a 70-200/2.8 for closer shots. I prefer to to stop down a bit for adequate depth of field when I can, but like to have f2.8 available if needed to get shots in darker areas of the arena. Generally speaking, unless at a very high level, dressage cannot and should not be photographed with flash. Most junior and amateur dressage riders and horses are not accustomed to flash. Dressage is slower moving than some other events, so I can get by with a slower shutter speed in many cases... 1/250 and 1/320 is sometimes possible.
Hunter/jumper, stock competition, gymkhana and English/Western are types of events where I need to be more mobile and tend to use 300/4 IS and 70-200/4 IS for mostly handheld shooting. These types of events are sometimes in covered arenas, but often are in open, uncovered venues. Even if the arena is covered, it's quite likely to be well lit. It is possible to use fill flash judiciously, but I try to avoid it as much as possible, and never use it too close.
Hunter/jumper, arena jumping, gymkhana and all sorts of stock competition tend to be moving, so I need to use 1/640 or faster shutter speeds, if I want to freeze the action.
For trail trials I try to carry minimal gear because I'm walking the trail with the horses and riders (not the entire 6 to 10 miles of most TT courses), but it's entirely outdoors in good light. I mostly use 28-135 on one camera and 300/4 IS on another. I have had trouble with the noise of 5DII in the quieter settings of trail trials, but not with 7D or even using 5DII in noiser arenas (I know the 6D and 5DIII have "quiet" modes, but haven't used them, so can't be certain how effective they are or if there are other issues using them.)
Cross country is one type of event where I always struggle to figure out what to carry. If I working close to home or have a ride out onto the course, I might take larger lenses and tripods. But if I'm hiking, I'll opt for the lighter stuff.
I sometimes use the full frame 5DII for planned, stationary portraits (after testing to see if the horse reacts to the shutter noise). I also will occasionally use it in particularly dark venues. But generally even those I can find brighter spots and work those with my 7D's instead. So I might only be limited from shooting in particular portions of the arena.
If I could only carry one, it would probably be a crop sensor camera... on a budget 60D or 70D, 7Ds have been working well for me for over 4 years and upwards of 100,000 clicks apiece, and probably will get replaced with 7D Mark II's when those come available. (In the past I extensively used 50D, 30D and 10D, too.) A crop camera gives the most versatility and flexibility, IMO. It offers the "extra reach" that allows smaller, ligher, less expensive lenses to serve, plus all lenses both EF and EF-S can be used (a full frame camera is slightly limited, to EF only).
But, sure, 6D's low light capabilities could be nice at times. It's probably a good two stops higher ISO capable than your 60D or my 7Ds... and it's AF is able to focus in about two stops lower light, too (-3EV, compared to -1EV). Note that the 6D would be limited largely to center AF point only, for any AI Servo/action shooting and low light. (That woudl be fine by me... smae is true of my 5DII and even with 7Ds and 50Ds, which have much more capable peripheral AF points, I still only use the center one most of the time.)
Hope this helps!
Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & PRINTROOM

I own a t2i and am will be going to Switzerland, is it worth it to get a full frame camera,opinions?

I am a novice photographer in training, I am planning a once in a life-time trip to switzerland and want to get the most out of the landscape/mountain shots that I can.
Any opinions on whether my t2i will suffice, or how to make the most of this camera, a certain lens mm etc. (ofcourse I do not want to buy a lens that is above the t2i's paygrade)
or
get a full-frame camera with a high caliber lens, L-wide angle stuff etc.
Thanks for your consideration.
Randal

If you have to ask the question, then the biggest thing you can do to improve your photography is to practice with what you have. You most certainly do not need to move to full frame to get great trip photos, especially if you’re talking about landscape photography. If you really feel the need to buy some stuff then I’d recommend a decent lens. But honestly, and not to be critical, but based off the jargon in your post you don’t know your way around a camera all that well. You can’t just buy a fancy lens and expect it to produce award winning photographs. At this stage in the game technique will do far more than technology.
Make sure you have a decent range covered (e.g. 18 mm to 250 mm) and just go have fun. Shoot in RAW so you can fix (some of) your mistakes after Practice as much as you can before hand and learn to use the semi-auto functions like Av. Make sure to not only take practice pictures, but review and edit them… you learn the most from your mistakes. Try to make the mistakes before the trip. As someone who bought his first dSLR before a year long backpacking trip around the world, I wish I had the time to follow this advice beforehand.

If I'm in Lightroom 5, and try to Edit in Photoshop CS6, I always get the following message: "This version of Lightroom may require the Photoshop Camera Raw plug-in version 8.6 for full compatibility." But I have updated to 8.6 and have no remaining updat

If I'm in LIghtroom 5, and try to Edit in Photoshop CS6, I always get the following message: "This version of Lightroom may require the Photoshop Camera Raw plug-in version 8.6 for full compatibility." But I have updated to 8.6 and have no remaining updates. How can I fix this?
If I click "Open Anyway" or "Render using Lightroom", I get the following message:
"Adobe Photoshop CS6 cannot be opened because of a problem.
Check with the developer to make sure Adobe Photoshop CS6 works with this version of OS X. You may need to reinstall the application. Be sure to install any available updates for the application and OS X."
Please tell me what to do so I can edit from Lightroom to Photoshop.

In Photoshop, if you choose Help - About Plug-in... - Camera Raw, does it say 8.6?
Seems to me there was some hiccup they found in the update process, which prompted this:
Camera Raw updates cannot be applied
I honestly don't know if the problem could apply to 8.6 as well, which is why I asked you to check to make very sure you really got it.
-Noel

Error Message -may need to download Photoshop camera raw plug in version 7.3 for full compatibility

I have been working in Lightroom 4.3 for MAC. From there I open 2 files to edit in Photoshop as layers so I can add a layer mask to the bottom layer and use the paint brush tool to make certain areas of the image darker or lighter. I have been doing this with no problem and now it doesn't seem to work. I can see the brushes' strokes on the layer mask but can not see the results on the image.
I keep getting a message from Lightroom saying I may need to download Photoshop camera raw plug in version 7.3 for full compatibility whener I try to edit on Photohsop thru Lightroom, but I have already added this plug in and it asks for it. It happens with raw, jpegs and tiffs from my 1D Mark II or my 5D Mark III and with other people's camera. It used to work fine. Now it dosen't I feel like it is something so simple. Please help. This si crucial to my business.

The wording of the message about ACR 7.3 is a bit misleading: What it means is that ACR 7.3 is required for Photoshop. Lr 4.3 has got it.
Which version of Photoshop are you using?
I suspect it's not CS6 but a prior version. If it is a version prior to CS6 you cannot install ACR (Adobe Camera Raw) 7.3.
You may have downloaded it but you cannot install it. It doesn't install.
On the other hand Lr 4.3 is based on ACR 7.3. So you have an incompatibility of ACR versions: 7.3 in Lr 4.3 and an earlier-version-ACR in Photoshop.
With this situation Lr an dPhotoshop are not fully compatible, i.e. you cannot open images as layers. You can only open one image at a time, either by letting Lr 4.3 render the PSD (or TIFF) and sending it to Photoshop (by selecting <Render using Lightroom>), or you let Photoshop open the Raw file with its earlier version ACR (by selecting <Open Anyway>).
In this situation you have two choices: Either upgrade to CS6, or open images in Photoshop one at a time and vonvert to layers in Photoshop.

Firewire camera full frame

I want to get the output of a firewire camera (domestic Sony camcorder) to be a full frame thing on my mac powerbook G4. I can get it's output in a window in periscope and ichat even photobooth(although that is reversed?!) does anyone know how I can get the video cam full frame?
G4 1GHz powerbook Mac OS X (10.4.9) firewire400

Try Vidi <http://www.mitzpettel.com/software/vidi.php>

Black horizontal bands across top & bottom of photos using a full frame camera

I'm using a full frame camera with a 17-35mm lens. When I import my photos to iPhoto they appear with a black horizontal band across the top and bottom of the photos. Is this normal?

What camera are you using?
Where are you seeing these black bands? in the iPhoto library event view or somewhere else?
LN

Which full frame body - EOS 6d or Mark III

Hi
I am graduating as a cinematographer soon and considering a new camera kit. Since I am also a hard core still photography lover, I have thought of investing a full frame sensor body.
I will be using my new camera equally for both still and motion picture photography.
I would like to know the reviews on the Canon EOS 6D and how it compares to the EOS 5D MARK III.
I was thinking I should go for the cheaper full frame body ( EOS 6D) and invest on the lens range - where I'm thinking of investing in the L series IS USM category lenses.
I would like to know from users their honest opinion from experience.

This query has come up before and again, as 5D user, there is really no comparison with the two except price.
The 5D is your choice if you can afford it.
I have read, do not own, a 6D is not weather proof. Despite what Canon may claim about it.
The 5D Mk III and the "kit" lens 24-105mm f4 is a fantastic combo. Remember the old adage, buy the best and cry once.
There is a reason the price is so different.
EOS 1Ds Mk III, EOS 1D Mk IV EF 50mm f1.2 L, EF 24-70mm f2.8 L,
EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II, Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 EX APO
Photoshop CS6, ACR 8.7, Lightroom 5.7

Which full frame body? EOS 6D or 5D Mark III

Hi
I am graduating as a cinematographer soon and considering a new camera kit. Since I am also a hard core still photography lover, I have thought of investing a full frame sensor body.
I will be using my new camera equally for both still and motion picture photography.
I would like to know the reviews on the Canon EOS 6D and how it compares to the EOS 5D MARK III.
I was thinking I should go for the cheaper full frame body ( EOS 6D) and invest on the lens range - where I'm thinking of investing in the L series IS USM category lenses.
I would like to know from users their honest opinion from experience.

"Since I am also a hard core still photography lover ..."
To me this says it all. There is no choice except to get the 5D Mk III. The 5D is simply head and shoulders above the 6D, hence the lower model number. Don't kid yourself with the 6D is just as good. It is not.
That is, of course, if the budget allows. You must consider the whole!
EOS 1Ds Mk III, EOS 1D Mk IV EF 50mm f1.2 L, EF 24-70mm f2.8 L,
EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II, Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 EX APO
Photoshop CS6, ACR 8.7, Lightroom 5.7

Full frame Recomendation

I am new here and I don't really want to upset other Canon devotes. So don’t be offended.
I have been a Canon DSLR user since about 2003. Before that I shot with a (Loved) Nikon FM and a Cambo 4X5. I went with the Canon EOS 10D because I was told that it was more reliable than the equivalent Nikon. I had two 10D bodies die early. (The one I bought new and one used). Both Bodies had the same problem; they stopped communicating exposure information between lens and body. I have also read several on line reviews that listed other common defects.
I have now had a 7D about 2 ½ years. I have experienced a couple of aging problems. I am needing to replace that camera with a full frame model. I am seeing on this site several defects in recently produced canon models.
I am considering getting a 5D III. This will be a considerable investment considering new glass. Are there systemic problems in Canon design / manufacturing? …. Would a Nikon D810 be a better investment? I can not afford to stop work and send a body back to be worked on....

And here is the real scoop.
In the beginning brand N was so poor, most all pro's switched to Canon. The gap has since been reduced and in some areas brand N has better specs. But a single spec, a camera does not make! Nor lens for that matter.
I worked for a large company based in Kansas City that was 100% brand N, in the beginning, that switched to Canon when it also switched to digital.
Listed in order:
EOS 1Dx is the top of the line, as good as it gets.
EOS 5D Mk III is the intermediate model and the choice for a lot of FF shooters.
EOS 6D is the "Rebel" of Canon's FF line. The 5D was just too expensive for the masses that wanted to get into FF.
If you are a serious pro wantabe than the 1Dx is your choice. But if you are a semi-pro or advanced amature, you can't go wrong with the 5D. If you just want FF performace but do not want to drop the dime on a camera get the 6D.
Oh, one thing for sure, once you go 1 series you will never go back!
Now why you want Canon today vs brand N. Lenses man. It is all about the lens. Canon lenses are where it's at and you can not use a Canon lens if you get that other brand. The lens makes the photo. It is that simnple.
EOS 1Ds Mk III, EOS 1D Mk IV EF 50mm f1.2 L, EF 24-70mm f2.8 L,
EF 70-200mm f2.8 L IS II, Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 EX APO
Photoshop CS6, ACR 8.7, Lightroom 5.7

New Crop sensor vs Old Full frame

Hello all,
I'm curious if any of you can weigh in on a little predicament I am having:
I have had a Canon EOS 350D since 2008, and I am looking to get a new Camera- I do not have tooooo much money at my disposal yet, so I am looking to get something used.
I looked on KEH, and they offer an EOS 1D Mark II body, charger, and batter for only $339 at "Bargain" condition. However, only one of three lenses I have are compatible with the body (canon ef 75-300mm f/4-5.6 iii usm). Which is why I am considering getting a newer crop sensor that can take all of my lenses.
I specialize in outdoor photography, so I would think a full frame sensor would be a better option. If I get a full frame, I will likely purchase a lens that is under $200 that would work with the body. I will admit, reluctantly, that I want to look as "professional" as possible-something that I feel like a crop sensor will deprive me of. I realize that the latter sounded very pretentious ........... So, I would like to hear what you all think of this

1DMII is not a full frame unless you meant 1DsMII. But all the 1D cameras are great one even if it's a few generation older. But there is one down side of using the 1D series that is once you use it, you can never go back hehe. So the next time you upgrade, it will be even harder. I think how you look is not as important as how confident you are. If you're confident with your craft, then it doesn't matter and the clients will know this too. To normal people, if you're holding a DSLR, you're already look "pro". I say get the used 1D. The hardest part is getting a decent lens for under $200.
Weekend Travelers Blog | Eastern Sierra Fall Color Guide

Lenses for full frame vs aps-c cameras.

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for