« on: October 23, 2014, 09:43:44 PM »
To get that crop reach advantage, you need a GREAT lens. A lens like the 100-400 or the Tamron 150-600 is not sharp enough. My tests between a 5D2 and a 60D using those two lenses showed minimal differences in resolving power of distant objects between crop and FF. Using a 100L, crop definitely resolved distance objects better than FF, but it most certainly was not twice as good... maybe 20 or 30 percent better. (no scientific measurements taken, the percentage is a guess)In the real world, with the cameras Canon makes now, FF wins the IQ contest in all but one scenario... and that scenario is when you are focal length limited, can't move any closer, have a GREAT lens, and good lighting. Under those conditions (happens a lot with small birds) the quality of your crop pixels is fairly close to your FF pixels, but you have more crop pixels on target so you end up with a better image from the crop camera. Everywhere else, FF wins.
No, there's another one - when you're magnification (as in macro) limited.
Only my and Pit123's crops in this thread don't actually illustrate that to be a crop camera 'advantage' either, certainly not one to base a buying decision on, price, AF fps maybe, but IQ advantage, not so much.
I am told, no personal experience, that the second generation "Big Whites" will act the same... but however you slice it, to get that crop reach advantage, you need some of the sharpest glass that Canon makes.