Full frame sensors are better?
Do you think pictures taken with a full frame cameras seem to have more life in them compared to those taken with a cropped-sensor camera?
I own a cropped sensor camera (Canon 700D) and often compare my pictures with FF, I'm not satisfied.
Full frame sensors have picture elements (pixels) which are much larger than those found on f cropped sensor
If you look on DXOmark.com, you can see how well full frame sensors perform in low light.
That should answer your question to your satisfaction.
In the link below, I have picked the Canon 700D, the newest Nikon cropped sensor camera and my Nikon Full Frame D800E
As you can see, there's a substantial difference between the D7200 and D810E in low light (and other performance factors).
What you will also see, the similar size sensors, different brands provide different sensor performance Yes FF sensors can deliver better images - at a higher cost. If you got the dollars, go for it.
But a FF sensor will not fix bad lighting or composition. Study those and your images will be better with ANY camera.
If you are just shooting family photos a FF camera may be overkill. Full frame has some advantages, but so do cropped sensors.
For example, having a cropped sensor allows telephoto lenses to have more reach. And you can use a 50mm lens as a portrait lens.
As for having "more life in them" the answer would be no. I think what you might be seeing is more to do with post processing. Your 700d is more than capable of producing excellent images, especially if you take advantage of shooting RAW, and processing the images yourself using something like Adobe Lightroom. Most people can't tell a photo taken with a full frame sensor from one taken with a crop sensor.
Give your crop sensor camera to a good photographer and you'll get good pictures. Give a full frame camera to a novice and you'll get rubbish.
Just from this picture, can you confidently state whether it was taken by a full frame sensor or not (it's not my picture, btw)
Before you commit a lot of money to changing camera body and lenses, you should borrow a full-frame camera, preferably the 700D, and see what sort of improvement it offers over your present set-up for the sort of photography that you do.
Somehow I doubt that you will see the huge difference that you are hoping for. Always remember that good photographs are made by photographers - cameras are simply the tools.
Yes FF sensors can deliver better images - at a higher cost. If you got the dollars, go for it.
But a FF sensor will not fix bad lighting or composition. Study those and your images will be better with ANY camera.
If you are just shooting family photos a FF camera may be overkill.
Full frame has some advantages, but so do cropped sensors.
For example, having a cropped sensor allows telephoto lenses to have more reach. And you can use a 50mm lens as a portrait lens.
As for having "more life in them" the answer would be no. I think what you might be seeing is more to do with post processing. Your 700d is more than capable of producing excellent images, especially if you take advantage of shooting RAW, and processing the images yourself using something like Adobe Lightroom.
Most people can't tell a photo taken with a full frame sensor from one taken with a crop sensor.
Give your crop sensor camera to a good photographer and you'll get good pictures. Give a full frame camera to a novice and you'll get rubbish.
Just from this picture, can you confidently state whether it was taken by a full frame sensor or not (it's not my picture, btw)
Before you commit a lot of money to changing camera body and lenses, you should borrow a full-frame camera, preferably the 700D, and see what sort of improvement it offers over your present set-up for the sort of photography that you do.
Somehow I doubt that you will see the huge difference that you are hoping for. Always remember that good photographs are made by photographers - cameras are simply the tools.