Randy Poe wrote:
I assume "perhaps wrongly" that you use a C sensor as finances are a challenge.

Actually, I am still fairly new and when I went from borrowing a camera to shoot subjects that interest me (a steam locomotive, WWII aircraft) to getting my own I didn't want to jump in over my head. Better to go simple and learn to be a better photographer right? The T7i just seemed like the best fit. I do not know if I will go full-frame in the future, sensor size doesn't make great photographs.

Randy Poe wrote:
Go with something that is going to solve a problem. Something you cannot do with the gear you are using.

Yes, upgrading is easy, (minus the paying for it part).

Just take the problems with your current system and solve them. If it's noise in the shadows,
full frame might help. If you're a sports shooter and you hit the buffer limits too often, you have
to spring for a journalist oriented body.If you want 4K video, find that, if you need higher
dynamic range, you'll have to ditch Canon  ,I kid, I kid.

If it's just wanting a shiny new camera, then join the club, marketing is doing it's job.

Dustin_S_ wrote:
The T7i just seemed like the best fit. I do not know if I will go full-frame in the future, sensor size doesn't make great photographs.

the most important question is, what are the final uses of your images? if they are going to be all on websites and viewed on digital devices. then smaller sensor is fine. if some will end up as full size human images on a poster or a car for a sales brochure in a dealership, then you might consider going up in sensor size.

if you do lots of wide angle and need selective focus, then yes, a larger sensor will be helpful.

the final use and what you need to see is all that matters. there's nothing wrong with using what you have until you learn what you need. just don't invest in a big system until you can decide.

Randy Poe wrote:
For close up or portrait. I use mine on my Nikon for portraits almost every shoot I do.
https://www.amazon.com/Tokina-100mm-Mac … B000BZIO0M

From the Amazon page:
"2 Year Limited Tokina Warranty through the seller. Please contact the seller to claim the warranty, not the manufacturer."

Is this gray market?

GRMACK wrote:
Be careful on your purchase and not end up like this guy's $6K Canon 1DX Mark II purchase:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont … XPnOq-XJg8

I've heard of the order where a Nikon coffee cup filled with sand was placed into a Nikon 24-70mm box too, but this guy's moons are really crashing to have it happen twice: Rocks in first box, and bricks in second.

He also posted the review in Amazon too on that body.  Wonder who the 3rd party fulfillment center was?

I wonder what seller. That is the whole reason I no longer like Amazon (and use it as little as possible) and buy only new product from trusted places (used from very select and very trusted sources).

I only use my images to post online, though I would like to print a photo out from a set and display that (no bigger than a 20x30 print). As I understand it, the 24.2 megapixel count should be good enough for that size print. So for the foreseeable future my camera body should accomplish things I want to do. Glass, skill, and some equipment (like the Paul Buff White Lightning I bought) will be more helpful than a new body.

Leonard Gee Photography wrote:
the most important question is, what are the final uses of your images? if they are going to be all on websites and viewed on digital devices. then smaller sensor is fine. if some will end up as full size human images on a poster or a car for a sales brochure in a dealership, then you might consider going up in sensor size.

Actually, no. Larger prints are viewed from further away:

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/what … -distance/

And a larger sensor isn't necessarily higher resolution. Basically, fullframe is expensive and gets different advantages depending on the the sensor resolution, optics, etc. An A7s is a low light king and an A7r is a resolution god - but only is fitted with very expensive glass and shot with a lot of discipline.

A more serious reason for choosing an FF DSLR is that many apsc models have imprecise focus systems and throw off shots at very wide apertures. But a better and cheaper way of doing that is probably to buy a mirrorless with on-sensor focussing. (And some FF dslrs have imprecise focus too.)

Mark Salo wrote:
From the Amazon page:
"2 Year Limited Tokina Warranty through the seller. Please contact the seller to claim the warranty, not the manufacturer."

Is this gray market?

Good catch! when I did the search I just did the lens and canon. Prime would be a WAY better way to buy that if someone was going to do so.

thiswayup wrote:
Actually, no. Larger prints are viewed from further away:

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/what … g-distance

no, some larger images are view from further away. others are viewed from a closer distance; like the enlarged 8x10 feet prints from avedon's western series show, or my 4x6 feet prints used in venues. even then, some clients still require 8x10 chromes for billboard images. clients can be much more critical.

thiswayup wrote:
And a larger sensor isn't necessarily higher resolution.

you know, i hear that a lot - and every time it astounds me. it may not be about resolution - but it's absolutely about smooth gradation and enlargement. and the more you enlarge a small sensor, the much higher resolution and better lens you require. nikon used to try selling the cropped sensor (before it had a full frame), by explaining that is used the sharper center part of the lens; completely ignoring that the image had to be magnified over 4 times more and therefore, required much more quality of a lens to match the less critical full frame sensor's lower magnification to get the same size print. it's very poor logic.

and the gotcha that everyone always miss - the smaller sensor requires much better camera technique to get the same quality as a larger sensor. the rule-of-thumb limit for the average person to handhold a 50mm lens on a full frame is 1/50th sec. but for a 1.6 crop sensor, it's 1/80 sec. if you've ever had to deal with a minox c camera, you would understand how much more care you need to get a sharper image from a smaller frame.

you can hear from people who previously always used a cropped senor when they finally use a full frame or medium format - they can't believe how much better the image looks.

Dustin_S_ wrote:
I have a Canon T7i with kit lens and I am thinking about upgrading. I do a mix of portrait type work (pin-up, fetish, bondage) and landscape/action (not sure what else to classify photos of aircraft and such that are stationary and moving). So far with the 18-55mm kit lens the only limitation I have had was being stuck in a spot where I could not get closer and wanting a close up shot and not having enough focal length.

Should I stay with an APS-C specific lens since they are designed to work best with my camera (and currently do not have plans to go full-frame)? Go with a full-frame lens for better glass I might be able to use later on with a full-frame body? Or wait a little longer and see what else besides the focal length is limiting me?

And what do you think of the Sigma DC, Tamron Di II, and Canon EF-S lenses? Quality-wise it seems they are about on-par (for instance I think it was the Sigma lens I looked at that had weather seal, yet the Canon of similar focal and aperture did not). Right now Sigma is what I am leaning to for a lens choice (a 18-250mm f/3.5-5.6).

I am a long time C sensor guy, but upgraded, last year, to a Nikon D750, and don't regret it.
Since you shoot both portrait, and landscape, it's good to have options. I use my ff camera for portraits, and the crop sensor for landscape. I was told that is the way to go. In regards to lenses, I am a big fan of Tamron equipment.

63fotos wrote:
I am a long time C sensor guy, but upgraded, last year, to a Nikon D750, and don't regret it.
Since you shoot both portrait, and landscape, it's good to have options. I use my ff camera for portraits, and the crop sensor for landscape. I was told that is the way to go. In regards to lenses, I am a big fan of Tamron equipment.

If I still had both at my disposal, yes the FF would be my resolution choice IF my final output was always to be printwork.
Online work it really doesn't matter but I would dare say that Landscape and Nature photography would benefit from the larger print output than portraits due to the Massive amounts of detail landscapes offer in one shot. Of course with all things, Lens selection is the key.
As for portraits, the best combo I have ever used to this day (aside from MF and LF) is my Fujifilm X-Pro2 with the XF56mm f/1.2, an 85mm equivalent, and using the correct RAW conversion... Wow! I call it Butter Good... and That is an APS-C.