And the award for best marketing goes to...

Replytoken

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
3,540
Location
Puget Sound
Real Name
Ken
...the person that coined the term "full frame". I suspect that if Canon and Nikon (and possibly Sony) are not paying this person a prince's ransom, they should be. Twice this weekend I had unsolicited conversations with acquaintances who shoot casually, and it seems that all roads lead to "FF". The first person, who shoots with a consumer grade Nikon DSLR asked my thoughts on the new D750, of which he expressed interest in purchasing. I gave an honest answer, citing many pros and cons about moving up to a larger and (possibly) denser sensor. When I asked if he was actively shooting, he responded that he was usually using his phone because that was what he carried with him.

The second person was a former Nikon shooter who is now using a Sony APS-C camera body. He, too, was interested in a FF camera. When asked how he was displaying and sharing his images, he mentioned Flicker and an occasional 8x10. Now, as a person who shoots with several formats, and may eventually add a FF camera to the stable, I realize there are many valid reasons to use any format, as each (and each particular body) offers distinct advantages as well as disadvantages. And, I would never tell somebody what they can and cannot buy based on how they use their images (although I would be remiss if I did not point out any pros/cons that a person might want to consider in their decision-making process). But, I do sense a bit of effective marketing hype that seems to be influencing their desires as much as, if not more than,common sense.

If you do not presently carry a small APS-C DSLR with you because of size, how will buying a FF DSLR in a larger body help remedy that problem? And, can the advantages that a FF camera offers over APS-C shine through in an image posted on Flickr? Perhaps, but that seems like a very high price to pay for a marginal gain, given the subject matter that he was shooting.

I suspect that this quote posted at TOP sums it up best: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2014/09/quote-o-the-day-bill-tyler.html .

Please note, I posted the above observations not to debate the merits of any particular format, as there are already way too many of those posts that one can join. I mostly posted because I was amazed at personally seeing the changes in the idea of what an amateur photographer "needs" to be in the game. Several years ago, it seemed that APS-C was the "it" format. Now that the price of FF sensors is dropping, FF seems to be in vogue, regardless of weather it is the most appropriate format for many folks. I once knew an audio salesman that used to sell under the philosophy that some is good, more is better, and too much is just enough! It seems that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

--Ken
 

tosvus

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
654
I agree 100%. Marketing/Hype/Buzzwords - stuff that even people with short attention span can remember is a reason for a lot of misguided purchases. I am currently all in with m43, but at some point I may get a full frame camera, but that will only be if I feel it is justified for my real needs, not just because "bigger is better".
 

yakky

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jul 1, 2013
Messages
661
Hey, people love their detailed 36mp images of randomness. I like it, it means the used market will be filled with great cameras soon.
 

WT21

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
6,489
Location
Boston
Why assume that full frame was coined by a marketing department? Rather, back in the film days, APS came out, and it was a crop. A crop off of then-widely adopted 135 film format (though there was also advantix and 110 film among other consumer options).

It would be interesting to see when the term "full frame" showed up, but I wouldn't be surprised if it showed up on a discussion board first, or maybe even back before discussion boards, but amongst enthusiasts at photography clubs.
 

Markb

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
532
Location
Kent, UK
Real Name
Mark
"Miniature format" just doesn't have the same ring does it? :rolleyes:
 

tornado

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
281
I recall hearing FullFrame for the first time back in 2001, when the first pro-sumer dslr appeared (Canon D30...which I still have).

Not sure why FF is the "gold standard" by which we must all be measured. The term is used to refer to the full 35mm frames, not those of Medium or larger frames...so it's a misnomer at best.

By that convention, m4/3 can be considered full frame comared to most point & shoot digicams (and maybe 110 or smaller film ?)
 

tosvus

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jan 4, 2014
Messages
654
Small Format would probably be a better Description. MICRO four thirds already has a fairly appropriate Name then, and maybe call APS-C Mini (Large, Medium, Small, Mini, Micro)
 

humzai

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Apr 17, 2012
Messages
410
The term actually refers to the imaging circle being used by the sensor. Hence we have crop bodies and dull frame bodies. Since m4/3 sensors are matched to their lenses they are full frame in the technical sense.
 

WT21

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
6,489
Location
Boston
I recall hearing FullFrame for the first time back in 2001, when the first pro-sumer dslr appeared (Canon D30...which I still have).

Not sure why FF is the "gold standard" by which we must all be measured. The term is used to refer to the full 35mm frames, not those of Medium or larger frames...so it's a misnomer at best.

By that convention, m4/3 can be considered full frame comared to most point & shoot digicams (and maybe 110 or smaller film ?)
Interesting. The D30 was called APS type C sized sensor, but in the DPR write-up, it refers to 35mm negative as comparison (not full frame) http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canond30

Sensor / Camera Effective pixels
(millions) Effective ** resolution Imager size (mm) Pixel (unit) size
(�m)
Sony 1/1.8" CCD *
3.12 2,048 x 1,536 5.52 x 4.14 3.45
Nikon D1 CCD 2.62 2,000 x 1,312 23.6 x 15.5 11.8
Canon EOS-D30 CMOS 3.11 2,160 x 1,440 22.0 x 14.9 10.1
APS negative (C type) n/a n/a 30.2 x 16.7 n/a
35mm negative n/a n/a 35.0 x 23.3 n/a
 

WT21

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
6,489
Location
Boston
The term actually refers to the imaging circle being used by the sensor. Hence we have crop bodies and dull frame bodies. Since m4/3 sensors are matched to their lenses they are full frame in the technical sense.
Too true. If you are using the full image circle, you are "full frame" :)

m43 is now Full Frame! So is Fuji. But Sony APS-C, whose best lenses are coming out in FE, is still a crop when using the a6000, etc. :(
 

tornado

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
281
Too true. If you are using the full image circle, you are "full frame" :)

m43 is now Full Frame! So is Fuji. But Sony APS-C, whose best lenses are coming out in FE, is still a crop when using the a6000, etc. :(
And when I use a legacy 35mm lens on my m43 body, am I bigger than full frame?
 

Replytoken

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 7, 2012
Messages
3,540
Location
Puget Sound
Real Name
Ken
Why assume that full frame was coined by a marketing department? Rather, back in the film days, APS came out, and it was a crop. A crop off of then-widely adopted 135 film format (though there was also advantix and 110 film among other consumer options).

It would be interesting to see when the term "full frame" showed up, but I wouldn't be surprised if it showed up on a discussion board first, or maybe even back before discussion boards, but amongst enthusiasts at photography clubs.
I was being a bit tongue in cheek in my OP, as I am sure that the phrase did not originate in a marketing department, but rather as a descriptive reference to a common standard - 35mm film. Nonetheless, it has taken on a life of its own as to what it now "means", but I suspect that FF manufacturers are none too happy to feed the fire.

With the advent of 1" sensors, perhaps m4/3rd's will go the way of the compact car or fast food beverage sizes? Today's Honda Civic is about the same size as an early model Accord, and compact cars seem to have a better reputation than they did in the late 70's. And a small drink today is usually 12-16oz, a size that was considered large when I was a kid.

--Ken
 

sokar

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Nov 30, 2011
Messages
395
The award for the best marketing goes to Apple.

Since the release of the iPhone 6, my son has talked of nothing else. No rational argument will counter his illogical reasons for "needing" this phone. One can sit down, go through the specs and clearly show that other manufacturers were further advanced more than 1 year ago. That means Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing.

The emotional attachment and desire for many to have this product is incredible. Regardless of the specs (or lack thereof) millions will be sold.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom