Ladies and gentlemen, please do not feed the troll.
I know what your saying don't get me wrong the 40D is an amazing camera, but there is SUCH a pull to go full frame and I definately will. Just figuring out either now or later
The way things seem to be heading I can see myself heading down the portrait road, I thoroughly enjoy it, I'm confident with people and want to improve on it.
I would be surprised if you could tell the difference...
WHat's the going rate for a second hand Sigma 10 - 20 these days anyway? What would you get for it?
- Image sharpness/quality (Only proof I have is my recent photos compared to my previous photos - since getting the 5D I feel my photographs are better, sharper and have more of a 'kick' to them)
- Noise handling (I can actually shoot at ISO 1600+ and get usable pictures
- Wide angle lens options (There are more, 14L, 16-35L, 17-40L, 24L - These will be wide on a crop sensor but you lose the "ultra wide" ness. I hope this makes sense, some may disagree)
- Bigger, brighter viewfiender
- Lenses actually being their stated focal length
- Debatable better dynamic range
Whether to go full frame or APS-C really comes down to individual requirements and budget.
Check out this comparison shot between the 5D Classic and the 7D.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/820707/0#7603301
I know it is an uncontrolled test by one person, but I am extremely suprised at how much sharper the 5D images are.
1) There is no reason why an APS-C sensor is less sharp than a Full frame, if the pixel density was comparable. If the pixel density was the same and the quality of the glass the same sharpenss would be the same. In the end, you can take a photo just as sharp on an APS-C sensor, but you will have to be more careful abou the lens, the lens settings, and technique.
2) Yes. But again, this depends on the pixel density. if a FX and DX sensor have the same density then they will have the same noise performance under the same technology. There is currently about 1-1.5 stops advantage in a 12MP FX compared to 12MP DX sensor. For landscape photography this has no bearing.
3) Yes I agree. But it is not as if you have no reasonable DX options.
The Canon 10-22mm is ok for most.
4) Yes, bigger viewfinder is great, but wont change the quality of a photo (but maybe the probability of a well composed photo)
5) This isn't a reason, Focal lengths are easy to adjust. And in any case you are wrong. The lens is the stated focal length on crop, just that a crop sensor does just that, crop the image.
6) Better dynamic range, again depends on pixel density. If it is low like the Nikon D3 then the full-frame sensor will outperform. But you need to know how to make use of this DR.
Then don't forget the negatives:
Heavier, more expensive, heavier lenses, more expensive lenses, heavier more expensive tripods required, more expensive insurance, larger lenses with larger front threads and making more expensive filters. A heavier camera you might not take with you. Less reach for wildlife or sports photography (compare size and cost of 70-200 2.8 and 300 2.8). DoF is relatively shallower, which is not always a good thing.
That is very dubious.