Do we have a need for Full Frame?
 

Just read this interesting article:

http://www.digitalrev.com/en/do-we-s...s-6677-article

Any thoughts? Is FF worth the price difference with these new cameras coming out with high quality APS-C sensors? (like the 7D)?

If only for the improvement in DOF, yes


That and I can barely stand the viewfinder in my crop bodies, FF has spoiled me!

You can't really see it with APS-C vs. FF sensors in a small print or on the web, but tonality is also improved with the larger sensor. Of course, the FF medium format backs are on another level.

FF sensors also have less noise, generally speaking. The 7D is never noiseless, whereas the 5DmkII is smooth up to 200 ISO. The problem with the 5DmkII is you cannot get rid of the noise banding when you try and bring out the shadows. The 7D has a much more uniform noise structure.

It's just the A900 that's the exception right? hehehe

Is a 4x6 better than a 35mm frame?

Bigger is always better, from a purely quality perspective. The tradeoffs are in cost, size, weight, etc.

That's why I put the 'generally speaking' part. :p

Well, yes and no. Up to 400 ISO, the A900 has stellar image quality, then the other FF cameras kill it. But if you compare the noise of a medium format back, the 35mm FF cameras absolutely destroy them. Even though 645 medium format backs are are a bit more than twice that of 35mm FF sensors, the pixel density is roughly the same as a 5DmkII. Those are only usable up to about 200 ISO, then they just fall into a black hole of noise. The Phase One P45+ & P65+ have a special high ISO setting, but they reduce the MP by quite a lot. The MF backs are optimized for maximum sharpness, as they are made for studio use, more so than everyday street shooting.