DSLR Camera (full frame vs. Crop Factor)

After much information, and the quality of pics I have seen, I am nearing the stage to get a digital SLR. The question I have what type should I purchase?

I am mostly into nature and bird/animal photography. How is either type compared to a digital camera, such as the Lumix from Panasonic?

Thx for your help... This is a superb website

For what you want, I think the 1.5x crop factor is the way to go. Also, you can get a small sensor DSLR for about 1/5 the price of a full frame one. The full frame models seem more popular with those who like landscapes or do weddings. The help with ultrawide lenses. There also might be less noise with them for high ISO/night photography, although I'm guessing about that.


Kent in SD

There's is way less noise in Canon's sensors whether it be full-frame or crop but the full-frame sensors have the lock on the low noise issues. I own a 20D 1.5x crop for wildlife and the I use the full-frame 5D for everything else. I would never give up full-frame, but it willl cost you $3000.

Hi Joe,

For wildlife and nature, I would say the cameras with the crop factor are the way to go. You never have enough reach for things like birds and the 1.5 or 1.6 times helps.

Other question: How would you justify the costs for going full frame? Do you need it? Are you making your living using your camera? For me, full frame will never be an option (unless prices drop radically) because the answers are "don't know - no - no" in that order.

Any DSLR will be more versatile and deliver better images (given subject and photographer are right ) than a non-DSLR camera. I noticed that you were asking for advice on mid-to-high-range DSLR's in that other thread. I don't want to be offensive to you, but I guess for both of us the camera is currently not the limiting factor, but we ourselves are limiting the camera's potential... at least for me & my D50 this is 100% true, you'll have to decide whether this applies in your case as well. Photography skills can be developed without a high-end multi-thousand dollar DSLR to a large extent (in my opinion). And when you finally really need that high-end DSLR in a few years because the old one limits your creativity, you'll get more camera for less bucks, as somebody else mentioned already.

Basil

I will agree with Basil. IMO an SLR IS somewhat required to develop more photographic skills (a P&S just does not give you the zoom you need, or the control). I will also agree that a lower end DSLR will do just fine.

Nathan

I agree with all that has been said. Study the system you will be buying into. Then buy the body that most matches the style you will shoot ie. if nature frame rate is important and buffer size is also important. I am most familiar with Canon equipment. In this brand a 350 DX or 30D with some good lenses will suit you fine. As you grow this body can become your back up as you graduate to a 5D or 1D body - or what ever the newest equivalent may be at the time. Bottom line is the lenses are most important.