Full-frame cameras have faced recent criticism, deemed unnecessary by advocates of smaller formats. This article aims to counterbalance the discussion, presenting arguments for why full-frame cameras may indeed hold the top spot for photographers.
Full-frame cameras are a popular choice among many photographers, but it’s crucial to emphasize that selecting a camera should primarily be based on individual needs and preferences. Essentially, there are no universally right or wrong answers when it comes to choosing between sensor sizes. If you find that a smaller or larger sensor camera aligns more with your shooting style and the results you aim to achieve, then that choice is valid. In this article, we will discuss some reasons why I think full-frame cameras Are the best format overall.
Best Autofocus
Full-frame cameras, particularly from established brands such as Sony, Nikon, and Canon, have substantially influenced the autofocus dynamics in contemporary photography and videography. These devices are now integrated with advanced autofocus systems that excel remarkably in delivering high-quality still photography and also demonstrate significant prowess in high-end video work. This signifies an impressive stride in the evolution of imaging technology.
The incorporation of eye-detect autofocus was a transformative development, pushing full-frame cameras further ahead in the autofocus spectrum. But that wasn’t the end of the road. Full-frame cameras have continued on a trajectory of innovation, incorporating artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance autofocus capabilities extensively. These refined, AI-enhanced autofocus systems show a remarkable capability in identifying, tracking, and focusing on a variety of subjects such as animals, birds, cars, planes, and bikes with precise accuracy.
Furthermore, the technological enhancement is seen in its ability to maintain a consistent focus on people, even when they are not directly positioned toward the camera. This sophistication in autofocus technology is a defining feature of full-frame cameras. While some advancements do make their way to smaller sensor cameras eventually, they are primarily introduced and refined in full-frame models, reinforcing their influential role in driving autofocus technology innovation within the industry.
The Best Lenses
This isn’t debatable: full-frame cameras unequivocally reign when it comes to lens selection. There's no other format on the market that matches the sheer variety and quality of lenses available for full-frame systems. I want to make it absolutely clear, in this discussion, I won’t be throwing around specific brand or format names negatively. This isn’t about bashing or diminishing any particular brand or format. Instead, this is about delivering a balanced, straightforward discussion highlighting the superiority and benefits of full-frame systems when it comes to lens selection.
Also, I’d like to mention that more often than not, upgrading your camera body won’t bring improvements in image quality as profoundly as a lens upgrade will. And this is why the argument for lens selection is important.
Prime Lenses
When diving into the realm of prime lenses, full-frame cameras are unparalleled in options and performance. Let’s start with the smaller primes; even here, full-frame cameras showcase their superiority. An f/2.0 prime lens, for instance, when paired with a full-frame camera, tends to be compact, cost-effective and often yields better results compared to the same aperture lens from a smaller format. This aspect bolsters the flexibility and convenience of shooting with prime lenses on full-frame cameras, making them a go-to choice for photographers valuing both quality and portability.
Moving on to larger apertures, finding an f/1.4 lens for a full-frame camera is relatively commonplace. These lenses, without commanding an incredible amount of money, allow photographers the creative freedom to capture images with stunning background blur and exceptional performance in low-light conditions. On the contrary, when we look at other formats, getting a lens with an f/1.4 aperture equivalent becomes a tougher and more expensive endeavor. Such lenses, if available, are often bulkier, heavier, and come with a higher price tag. It wouldn’t be a huge leap to say that full-frame cameras have the best range of prime lenses among any current digital camera format.
Zoom Lenses
Moving on to zoom lenses, full-frame cameras offer the absolute best options. For instance, the trio of lenses often referred to as the "holy trinity" of zoom lenses, covering wide-angle to telephoto ranges: 16-35mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm, all maintaining a constant aperture of f/2.8. These lenses stand out by providing versatility, speed, and exceptional image quality that is quintessential for various photography styles and professional photography.
But the innovation doesn’t stop there. Full-frame systems have pushed the boundaries even further, introducing zoom lenses with an even wider f/2.0 aperture. These pioneering lenses are exceptional, as they almost encompass the utility of several prime lenses, enabling photographers to work with remarkable speed and flexibility. They are currently exclusive to full-frame cameras, lacking any equivalents in other formats. The presence of these f/2.0 zoom lenses reiterates the unmatched superiority of full-frame cameras, underscoring their position in the realm of photography. Thus, in the zoom lens category, full-frame cameras have no equal.
Niche Lenses
Specialty lenses, such as tilt-shift lenses, find their true companions in full-frame cameras. This combination is particularly useful in specialized fields such as architectural photography, where the adaptability and precision of tilt-shift lenses are crucial. Full-frame cameras also stand uniquely supreme in allowing photographers to explore ultra-wide perspectives, offering lenses that provide up to a 135-degree field of view, which remains unmatched by other formats. While medium format cameras present themselves as potential contenders, especially when considering brands like Fujifilm with their latest tilt-shift lens, they come with a significant cost, and their overall lens offerings don’t quite topple the full-frame dominance.
In wrapping up this segment, the formidable array of lenses compatible with full-frame cameras—from prime to zoom and specialized lenses—underlines their extraordinary standing in the photography market. It's not merely about variety; it’s about the quality, performance, and creative possibilities that these lenses unlock for most creative professionals.
Best Camera Features
Full-frame cameras really bring a lot to the table, especially when it comes to standout features that professionals appreciate. First off, they offer some of the best internal sensor stabilization, a really crucial feature. It’s all about keeping your shots clear and steady, minimizing the blur you might get from camera shake. This is a huge help in making sure your images are consistently sharp, regardless of some inevitable movement during shooting.
Speed is another major benefit of full-frame camera. The frames per second (fps) are some of the highest available from any system so far, helping you nail those action shots without missing a beat. It’s particularly useful when fast-moving subjects are your focus, ensuring that you capture every crucial moment with precision.
Build quality is another major benefit of Full-frame cameras. These cameras tend to boast the most durable and resilient design. They’re constructed to handle a multitude of environments, whether you find yourself in a windy desert or a misty, rugged landscape. Their adaptability makes them a reliable companion for professional shooting tasks in varied conditions.
Additionally, they are generally the most user-friendly cameras on the market. They’re designed with intuitive controls like custom buttons and dedicated record buttons, as well as navigational features like D-pads and joysticks. All these add up to a smoother, more efficient user experience, aligning well with what professional photographers actually need.
Finally, let’s talk video. Full-frame cameras don’t mess around. With some of the highest resolutions currently available, the highest frame rates, and the flexibility of raw video - they bring everything to the table. These features aren’t just specs; they translate into real-world, on-screen excellence, giving your videos a professional edge. In the video arena, full-frame cameras unquestionably hold their ground, proving to be an indispensable tool for creators who are serious about their craft. This is especially useful now more than ever due to the number of creatives working as hybrid shooters.
Ultimately, there’s always debate surrounding the necessity of full-frame cameras. However, for enthusiasts dedicated to mastering both photography and videography, full-frame cameras emerge as a compelling choice. They come loaded with essential features, aligning well with the demands of hybrid shooting. These cameras hold significant practical value, and remain the best option for most professional creatives.
What About Image Quality?
Shot on a 6 year old iPhone X
Shot on the Vivo V25 a Budget Smartphone
Image quality seems to be the one thing that everyone is obsessed with when it comes to discussing different formats. But these days, even smartphones are giving professional cameras a run for their money. The differences in image quality between various formats have shrunk to a point where it is effectively negligible. It’s not the thing you should worry about when picking a camera. There isn't a single pro-level camera currently on the market that has poor image quality.
Marketing folks will tell you that bigger sensors like the 645 medium format systems offer a massive leap in quality. But honestly, the improvements are small, and once again, effectively negligible.
Smartphones competing with professional cameras are a reality now. And it tells us something important – a slightly larger sensor isn’t going to revolutionize your photos.
So, what should influence your choice? Look at other factors like usability and how well the camera has been put together. Consider how developed the format is, the kind of accessories that are available, and the lens selection. And in this competition, full-frame cameras are winning by a significant margin. They bring a good balance of usability, features, and a well-rounded selection of lenses. They’re not just about image quality – they’re about giving you a reliable, versatile tool for your photography.
Then again, it's also important to note that full-frame cameras offer some of the best in image quality. So, even if image quality is a factor for you then full-frame cameras are mostly unrivaled.
Final Thoughts
Full-frame cameras have emerged as undeniable champions in the realm of photography and videography. Their balance in features, lens selection, and overall performance means that they are quintessential tools for professionals.
The array of lenses available for full-frame cameras is unparalleled, offering diverse creative possibilities to produce extraordinary and distinctive imagery. These lenses, ranging from the versatile to the specialized, enable artists to fully realize their vision.
In terms of development, full-frame cameras boast a robust infrastructure of features, support, and compatibility. A wealth of accessories and third-party offerings augment their usability, allowing for a customizable and comprehensive photographic experience.
The hallmark of the full-frame camera lies in its professional effectiveness. Their innate capability to meet and exceed the multifaceted demands of the photographic and videographic domains underscores their superiority. Full-frame cameras don’t merely perform; they excel, embodying an unmatched synergy of innovation and practical applicability.
I mean sure, other formats have their place in the industry too, but let's face it full-frame is undeniably the best.
"MFT Eye-AF was so shitty"
It wasn't.
"Eye-AF is synonymous to Sony because they revolutionized it"
LOL. Sony was late to the party. Olympus even let you select which eye before Sony was even taking its first baby steps.
"Then stop trying to brag about your laughable f2's"
You're talking to the wrong guy.
You're also full of vitriol, hate and arrogance. Fuck off.
Yes, MFT Eye-AF was very shitty. No one took Eye-AF seriously until Sony came along.
--- "Sony was late to the party. Olympus even let you select which eye before Sony was even taking its first baby steps."
To select which eye, first, the system has to find the eyes. Which apparently, MFT systems did such a shit job. Psssst...just because there's a box around the eye, it doesn't mean it'll accurately shoot that eye. MFT users should be experienced with this.
--- "You're also full of vitriol, hate and arrogance. Fuck off."
LOL! Oh, the irony and hypocrisy.
"Apparently"
Pretty much says it all.
Yep, apparently, many of you can't handle the truth.
Not everyone is obsessed with getting the most shallow DoF possible.
In all fairness a lot of technological advancements can be traced back to smartphones. The problem with MFT is that it just doesn't have the support and infrastructure that other formats do.
Lenses are also incredibly expensive without offering a great deal that's unique. And for the most part, the lenses a format has can make or break the system.
Don't get me wrong, the format is great and I'm a fan, unfortunately, it's more of a curiosity for many people as opposed to a real alternative.
It's the longest-running mirrorless system, so not bad for a "curiosity."
Being longest running means nothing if they are crappy. Somebody had to do it right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirrorless_camera#History
Just because you think a certain type of camera is "crappy" doesn't mean that the things they developed, innovated, and introduced, can be credited to another company that just copied them later.
Of course it can. Think EV cars, mobile phones, etc, etc.
You're too hung up on being "first". That means nothing if you ended up being last.
Let's be honest. Maybe full frame cameras may be the best format for Some people but not the best for ALL people.
That depends on what 'best' means to someone. Each format has advantages and disadvantages as I'm sure you are aware. Every camera choice comes with some sort of compromise in some area. This type of article always seems to me to be argument for the sake of argument.
More like an argument for the sake of getting paid for an opinion piece. There's no "best" camera, no "best" format. Depends on the needs of the person and what amount of money he wants to spend.
More of the same tired content. The best camera system is the one that suits your work and, honestly, is just the most fun for you to use.
I shoot Sony FF for my professional work, and of course I love it. I also have a Panasonic GX9 (MFT) which I was using for an everyday carry camera, but found I wanted something I could really fit in my pocket, and ended up buying a Ricoh GRIIIx, despite the fact that I figured it would not be my kind of camera at all.
Turns out, I freaking love the Ricoh simply because I can have it with me everywhere (and I hate taking pics with a smartphone, it just doesn't feel right). Yes, it doesn't have the versatility or professional look or features of my Sony FF, but it allowed me to take random, mostly bad but sometimes great photos that I may have gotten none of if I hadn't had a camera with me.
I have several favorite systems that are the best for different scenarios.
Lets be honest, this is all about bias confirmation and the shameless use of clickbait for self promotion.
Exactly.
You know...we have so many complaints about videocentric stories here. Now, a fully written story, no video, and we still have complaints. Can't win.
Sigma has made f1.8 zoom lenses for crop and full frame bodies for quite some time now FYI
Due to crop factors, f1.8 on APS-C isn't the same as an f/1.8 on full-frame. It's more akin to an f/2.8 lens on a full-frame camera. In the article I mentioned there are no equivalents on different formats.
For example, you can obviously use a full-frame lens on an APS-C body so f/2.0 zoom lenses do exist for APS-C but we know that you won't get the same results.
An f/1.8 lens is an f/1.8 lens no matter what format. You wouldnt say that f/2.8 full-frame zooms arent f/2.8 because they'd be f/3.5 on medium format digital, would you?
The Hasselblad 80mm f/1.9 would be equivalent in terms of it's look to something like a 63mm f/1.5 on full-frame. You can't produce the same looking results with the same aperture on different formats. This is why we have equivalents.
It's also why it's misleading when smartphone companies claim they have a 28mm f/1.9 lens in their phone. It's not going to produce the same results despite it having an f/1.9 aperture.
It's also why lenses with the same aperture across different formats are so much larger or smaller because they need to have a much larger image circle to cover the larger sensor.
Larger optics generally produce better results if all other factors are the same due to minimising effects of diffraction and circle of confusion.
What do you mean by "same results?" Same exposure? Yes. Same DoF? No. So is it correct to say "it isnt the same" without specifying exactly what part of it isnt the same?
Yes, in dof that's true, but in at least T stop it's equivalent.
If it's the same lens, absolutely, the t/stop values remain the same. However you could then argue about ISO and noise performance on smaller vs larger sensors at which point a larger sensor generally out perform the smaller sensor. Meaning that if you want similar noise performance then you'd need to shoot with a wider aperture and a lower ISO.
This has been confirmed and discussed to death so it's not really a debatable issue.
"They are currently exclusive to full-frame cameras, lacking any equivalents in other formats."
That was your claim, and I was simply highlighting the fact that it's not really true, an F1.8 apsc zoom is a pretty close equivalent to an F2 full frame zoom, a little faster in t-stop, a little more dof, but totally comparable as a fast zoom option.
A f1.8 lens on apsc closer to an f2.8 in terms of look. So its competing with full frame “standard” zooms not f/2.0 zoom lenses.
Key word was equivalents.
This can be confirmed when you look at the size of the entrance pupils. On the apsc f/1.8 lens it will have a similar sized entrance pupil as an f2.8 lens on full frame.
It’s confirmed physically too.
Maybe!
Sometimes it is not true, i shoot Sony a7r2 which its a good camera even in 2023, but i always reach out to my Fujifilm most of the time because am so please 🙏 with the image quality i am getting from it. Fujifilm is easy for me, if i shoot with it convert it immediately from raw to jpeg instantly and do the correction in photoshop.
The world is still waiting for a mirrorless 645. Meanwhile, GFX is my go-to format.
Anyone who think that a smartphone can produce images that “compete” with a good camera is not knowledgeable enough about photography to be trusted to cross a street in or out of traffic without adult supervision. As Yogi might say, “count me out.”
Bet you couldn't tell them apart in a blind test.
You've dols your gear then? My grandmother with cataracts can tell the difference.