Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Leonard Whistler

What's the difference? Crop sensor versus full frame ......

Recommended Posts

I pay no attention to that. speed is #1 and so is widest Opening and barrel distortion and pincusion effects.. I look through the viewfinder. and make it work.This is Overthinking. I test 3/4 New lenses a week Because I love doing it. Im a total optics fanatic. I started a group 11 years ago called the "LA Camera Group" a Offshoot of NPS. we meet one fri a Month to drink and discuss gear especially lenses. All are hard core Veterans that wouldn't do Penny stock if it was the last Output on the Planet. Im the Only Idiot still doing it because I came up doing it. when $400 commission was normal.And BTW $400 back then is $2400 in todays money for a Image. you could buy a car when you sold a Picture. Now it's not even a coke.

Push come to shove. I preferred Crop sensors. much More bang for My Buck. But.......I'll make do with whatever. Nikon D2h,D2X and D3 were Nikons best Cameras. Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Leonard Whistler said:

What's the difference?

 

  • 300mm with full frame sensor.
  • 300mm with 1.6 crop sensor.
  • Both shot at f4.
  • Use entire image from the 1.6 crop sensor and crop the full frame to match.

A 20MP crop sensor camera will have a higher pixel density than a 24 or 30MP full frame sensor.  The difference is that a 20MP crop sensor camera and a 24MP FF sensor camera - using the same lens from the same distance - will not yield the same image.  The crop sensor camera will have more pixels on the subject and will yield a larger image. Many pro wildlife photographers actually prefer a crop sensor camera for this reason.  Now, if Canon would only come out with the 7D MkIII, I might be able to get fully back to Canon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Jim. yes there is real Life away from SS. I was posting on Photo forums when this was called Usenet. it was all out war. everyday.This one is like children playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Phil Lowe said:

A 20MP crop sensor camera will have a higher pixel density than a 24 or 30MP full frame sensor.  

Yea and the full frame sensor will have much larger pixel sensors allowing for much more light and ultimately a much better image. That is why the ultimate wild life cameras that Canon (and Nikon) produce all have full frame sensors. They allow for higher ISOs without noise resulting in more speed. Wildlife (and sport) photography is about speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Leonard Whistler said:

What's the difference?

 

  • 300mm with full frame sensor.
  • 300mm with 1.6 crop sensor.
  • Both shot at f4.
  • Use entire image from the 1.6 crop sensor and crop the full frame to match.

Based strictly on those parameters (i.e. not speaking about resolution etc) there will be no difference assuming that both images are taken at the same distance to the subject.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, chris kolaczan said:

Based strictly on those parameters (i.e. not speaking about resolution etc) there will be no difference assuming that both images are taken at the same distance to the subject.

 

Not really. As mentioned above, the DoF is shallower for FF.

@KeremGogus, why so pessimistic? These technical discussions are the most useful part of this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, cpaulfell said:

That is why the ultimate wild life cameras that Canon (and Nikon) produce all have full frame sensors. They allow for higher ISOs without noise resulting in more speed. Wildlife (and sport) photography is about speed.

Yes, they will have better image quality until you have to start cropping, and then the lower pixel density on a 20MP 1DX2 versus a 7DMkII will begin to show.  I loved shooting the 1DX when I rented it, but I had to throw so many pixels away to highlight the subject, it just wasn't worth it.  In good light, the crop sensor camera (Nikon D500 + 200-500 Nikkor for me now) is my preferred wildlife camera.  In poor light, I use my 5DMkIV and Sigma 150-600 Sports.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, KeremGogus said:

Later we all will wish that this topic never started in the first place ^_^ 

Couldn't agree More. wildlife and sports guys are great Photographers. they did fine when crop was here and will continue to do fine they also did fine when 4MP was IT.. they don't care. Trust Me. A few that I know who are world class Loved crop cameras for the extra lens reach. All these guys shoot at 1250 ISO and above. they don't do penny stock and they have No issues with Noise...there Output is 8 x 12..The difference???? experience and Talent. Thats about all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Laurin Rinder said:

for the extra lens reach.

And that is why I prefer crop cameras for wildlife.  They simply put more usable pixels on the subject.  Does that mean full frame cameras are bad?  Nope.  It just means that - in some situations - crop cameras have a decided advantage over FF cameras.  It's why I continue to shoot both. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I was writing I was thinking Of you as a devotee of wildlife etc. But it's same for sports guys also. The manager Of Worldwide Nikon Pro services NPS told me straight Up when digital Hit "Nikon will not be doing FF Cameras."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, mandritoiu said:

Not really. As mentioned above, the DoF is shallower for FF.

Only if you are changing distance to subject to get the same framing. As presented that isn't happening. DOF difference will be negligible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, chris kolaczan said:

Only if you are changing distance to subject to get the same framing. As presented that isn't happening. DOF difference will be negligible.

No, even if you maintain exactly the same distance, there is a visible DoF difference. This is also why smartphones have almost everything in focus.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The smaller the sensor, the greater the Depth of Field. This is because the diagonal distance of the sensor determines the Normal Focal Length lens for the sensor/camera. With a full size sensor a Normal Focal Length lens will be between 40mm and 58mm with 50mm being used the most. A crop sensor Normal Focal Length lens would be approximately 2/3 smaller or between 29mm and 38mm with 33mm being in the middle. The 33mm crop sensor lens and the 50mm full size sensor lens will both see approximately the same part of the universe. For them to see the same part of the universe there will have to be a different camera to subject distance for each sensor/camera. The crop sensor camera will require a shorter distance. The diameter of the aperture opening at F11 on a 50mm lens, on a full frame camera will be 4.55mm. The diameter of the aperture opening for F11 on a 33mm lens, on a crop sensor camera will be 3mm. Since a smaller aperture will yield more Depth of Field the Depth of Field will be greater on a crop sensor camera. If both lenses are used at the same camera to subject distance the 33mm lens will see more of the universe than the 50mm lens. Seeing more of the universe will yield more Depth of Field for the 33mm lens and crop sensor camera.

You can check it on a Depth of Field calculator if you like. I already have. http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, mikenorton said:

The smaller the sensor, the greater the Depth of Field. This is because the diagonal distance of the sensor determines the Normal Focal Length lens for the sensor/camera. With a full size sensor a Normal Focal Length lens will be between 40mm and 58mm with 50mm being used the most. A crop sensor Normal Focal Length lens would be approximately 2/3 smaller or between 29mm and 38mm with 33mm being in the middle. The 33mm crop sensor lens and the 50mm full size sensor lens will both see approximately the same part of the universe. For them to see the same part of the universe there will have to be a different camera to subject distance for each sensor/camera. The crop sensor camera will require a shorter distance. The diameter of the aperture opening at F11 on a 50mm lens, on a full frame camera will be 4.55mm. The diameter of the aperture opening for F11 on a 33mm lens, on a crop sensor camera will be 3mm. Since a smaller aperture will yield more Depth of Field the Depth of Field will be greater on a crop sensor camera. If both lenses are used at the same camera to subject distance the 33mm lens will see more of the universe than the 50mm lens. Seeing more of the universe will yield more Depth of Field for the 33mm lens and crop sensor camera.

You can check it on a Depth of Field calculator if you like. I already have. http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

If you look at the original comment and the one I was actually referring to you can see that the same lens/aperture is used and camera to subject distance is not changing. Given that the lens settings and distances aren't changing then there is nothing the sensor can really do to change the optical image projected by the lens.

I suspect that if you compare cameras with similar pixel density the differences would disappear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, mandritoiu said:

This is also why smartphones have almost everything in focus.

 

Smartphones have a combination of very small sensor AND an extremely short focal length lens. The latter is more important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chris kolaczan said:

Smartphones have a combination of very small sensor AND an extremely short focal length lens. The latter is more important.

You are probably referring at the flange focal distance.

Yes, that matters a lot, indeed. In general, the goal is to come as close at possible to the sensor, to be able to use the linear part of the lens, for better IQ or to open up the diaphragm without increasing distortions. That's not possible on DSLRs, because of the flipping mirror.

Otherwise, we are both wrong.

There is a DoF difference, when using OP conditions. But in my answer, I mixed up the DoF obtained when using an equivalent 480mm lens on FF, instead of croping (enlarging) the resulted image.

My bad for superficially reading the question.

However, when focusing at, let's say 10m, using OP settings on my two DSLRs, we end up with a DoF of:

- 10mm for APS-C

- 17mm for FF.

See the attached screenshots from a DoF calculator. This is a sigificant difference.

When using a 480mm lens on FF to cover the same angle as a 300mm lens on an APS-C, the DoF is shallower for FF: 7mm.

Screenshot_20181008-130449_Photo Tools Full.jpg

Screenshot_20181008-130357_Photo Tools Full.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calculators aside, you guys can tell me which of these was obviously shot with FF and which was APS-c.

Same lens, same settings, same distance to subject. Simple crop to get the same framing (not perfect, but close enough to make the point).

Personally, I don't see a significant difference in DOF.

Tell me what you think.

 

compare.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot make a direct comparison with the same focal length for FF and APS-C. That is apples and oranges. What is important is the angel of view, the distance,  and camera angle. If all that is the same, than the Dof is theoretically the same with the same F-stop, but there might be a slight difference because the circle of confusion (the point where dots get blurry) might behave  slightly different in each, but, as Chris points out, I doubt that the average Joe or Jane will notice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chris kolaczan said:

Calculators aside, you guys can tell me which of these was obviously shot with FF and which was APS-c.

Same lens, same settings, same distance to subject. Simple crop to get the same framing (not perfect, but close enough to make the point).

Personally, I don't see a significant difference in DOF.

Tell me what you think.

 

compare.jpg

 

I don't think you used the conditions presented by OP, in your experiment. Because when using your extreme macro conditions, the calculator will tell you the same thing: there is no difference between FF and APS-C, therefore confirming your findings.

For example: for a 50mm lens at f/4, near and far DoF limits are both at 20cm for APS-C AND for FF cameras. In other words, the DoF is under 1cm for both types of cameras, something the "average Joe or Jane" (as put it by @Rudy Umans) will not notice, indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×