August 28, 2014, 07:34:06 AM

Author Topic: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here  (Read 49527 times)

yablonsky

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #75 on: January 22, 2013, 06:54:23 AM »
Nope that's not what I'm seeing comparing the same shots between a 5D3 and a 7D.  The 5D3 cropped to the same size as the 7D resolves a tad more detail in RAW comparisons.  I dont even use the 7D anymore.

Right.

I used the same lenses on the 50D and later on the 5D2 (RAW). 100% crops from the APS-C could not be used.
The image looks like scrambled pixels. Now with the 5D2 the 100% crops are great. A lot of detail and tack sharp.
5D2, 17-40 4L, 24-70 2.8L II, 70-200 4L IS,  300 4L IS

p666

  • Guest
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #76 on: January 22, 2013, 07:53:21 AM »
Images talk much better than words when you are talking about photography. I decided to test it myself, and took my 60D, and 5D Mark II, and attached the same 35mm prime lens, and took the same shot. The 5D image of 5616 x 3744 I cropped to 1.6, which gave me 3510 x 2340. I then downsampled the 60D image to the same size, and took a 100% crop of both for screen.

Look very similar to me other than the slight DOF differences, so in terms of image quality really there is no advantage whatsoever in the "crop" sensor, other than having to manually crop the image on FF to get that special "crop factor" you get by default.

The 60D:



The 5D Mk2:


« Last Edit: January 22, 2013, 08:03:14 AM by p666 »

tortilla

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #77 on: January 22, 2013, 08:54:59 AM »
I suspect that in the long term the APS-C format may disappear - but maybe not!

Canon doesn't think so, they just came up with the M mount which can only be used for APS-C. APS-C has it's advantages, like less size and weight, which is a plus for traveling or photojournalism (supposing one doesn't want to do very large prints).

But indeed, I would also not be surprised when they will stop releasing EF-S mount cameras and lenses in 10 years or so.

dtaylor

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
    • View Profile
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #78 on: January 22, 2013, 09:00:38 AM »
If we were stuck with 35mm and APS-C film, you would have a point.

We're not. We have sharpening settings in camera, and multiple sharpening options in our RAW converters and image processors (PS, Lightroom, etc).

APS-C sensors take more sharpening. Since sharpening is not an unlimited good, it's possible to equalize the two at ISOs where noise is not emphasized by the greater degree of sharpening required for APS-C. This is true through about ISO 800.

For the same reasons small differences between lenses are simply not worth worrying about any more. In the film days lens sharpness and contrast were of paramount importance because you were typically stuck with the result. Now if two lenses are close, USM and local contrast enhancement can make up the difference.

Knowing how to optimize your images in post for a particular application/print size trumps many of the equipment differences people love to obsess about.

dtaylor

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
    • View Profile
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #79 on: January 22, 2013, 09:11:32 AM »
Images talk much better than words when you are talking about photography. I decided to test it myself, and took my 60D, and 5D Mark II, and attached the same 35mm prime lens, and took the same shot. The 5D image of 5616 x 3744 I cropped to 1.6, which gave me 3510 x 2340. I then downsampled the 60D image to the same size, and took a 100% crop of both for screen.

So you threw away any detail resolved by the 60D but not by the cropped center of the 5D2. Why would you expect a different result then the one you got?

I'll be the first to say that with current bodies the crop reach advantage only comes into play if you're making large prints from files which are cropped even further than APS-C. It is there. I've got 9-10 MP, 16x20, 7D sports prints that would not have worked with the roughly 3 MP left over had I been shooting a 5D2. But if you're making 13x19's that aren't cropped any further, you'll never see a difference.

But that still doesn't excuse performing your test in a manner which purposely throws away any detail gain in the 60D file. Would you do that in real life? (Same question for the test which started this thread: would you produce prints with no sharpening? Or do you blindly apply equal sharpening to everything regardless of subject / lighting / lens / sensor / final application and view size?)

Rocky

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
    • View Profile
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #80 on: January 22, 2013, 02:16:11 PM »
The original post talks about "sharpness". A few posts are comparing DR, noise between the two formats. These are "picture quality", not sharpness only.  Some poster throw in "post production", that is not a valid arguement either. My take on this subject are:
1. For the same pixel count on both formats, both can be as sharp as each other,  assuming that the lens can out resolve both sensor in the imaging area. That will put a lot of stress on the lens for APS-C sensor. The lens need 1.6 time reolving power compare to the FF.
2. There are isolated incident that the APS-C can actually sharper than the FF if the lens use for FF have a severe problem in curvature of field or severe unsharp conrners. Since APS-C snesor only using the center part of the FOV of the lens. These problem may not exist. Therefore the APS-C is actually sharper.
3. FF will be sharper if the lens cannot out resolve the APS-C sensor but it will out resolve  the FF.
4. There is no doubt that FF will have better picture quality than thre APS-C, due to less noise, better DR.
5. The above piont is assuming that the lens is not being diffraction limited. The DOF is not affecting the sharpness either
6. In print, most of the difference will not be obvious due to the printing process.
7. How many people can tell the difference in music between  amplifier with 0.01% distotion and amplifier with 0.005 % distortion??
« Last Edit: January 23, 2013, 02:33:44 PM by Rocky »

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1788
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #81 on: January 22, 2013, 04:37:06 PM »
nr4
there are APS with the same DR as 24x36, example  D7000 and D800

And Pentax K5, K30, K-x - all Sony chip

TheSuede

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #82 on: January 22, 2013, 07:30:23 PM »
For one, I asked you what exactly you meant by "the APS-C lens has to be better than the FF lens"?

I followed that up with a clarifying question asking if you were talking about two different lenses such as one EF-S lens and one EF lens.

Sorry if I was the cause of any additional confusion... :)

-Yes, to get two images, one taken with APS and one taken with FF appear equally sharp when viewed at equal presentation size in your presentation format of choice, the lens used on the APS camera needs to be sharper, when sharpness is defined by "lines or line-pairs per mm".

-Yes, at least I am talking about two different lenses in the comparison. Why compare an 85mm on FF with an 85mm on APS? they don't "do" the same thing any more. If the shot taken with the FF camera was at a 10 feet target distance, you'd have to back of to 16 feet to get the same framing on APS. And by backing off to 16 feet, you change the perspective of the shot so much that it wouldn't even be the "same shot" any more.

Taking that into account is where the "FF is sharper than APS" starts to make sense....
Using a 135L 2.0 wide open on a 5D3 gives the same field of view, the same short DoF and the same amount of noise as using the 85L 1.2 on a 60D. But the 135 on 5D3 image will be a LOT sharper and more contrasty.

For the same reason, a bog-standard 85/1.8 on FF gives sharper images with the same short DoF as a 50L 1.2 does on APS. And a 50mm vs 35mm F1.4 on APS and so on.

Rocky

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
    • View Profile
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #83 on: January 22, 2013, 08:55:38 PM »
For one, I asked you what exactly you meant by "the APS-C lens has to be better than the FF lens"?

I followed that up with a clarifying question asking if you were talking about two different lenses such as one EF-S lens and one EF lens.

Sorry if I was the cause of any additional confusion... :)

-Yes, to get two images, one taken with APS and one taken with FF appear equally sharp when viewed at equal presentation size in your presentation format of choice, the lens used on the APS camera needs to be sharper, when sharpness is defined by "lines or line-pairs per mm".

-Yes, at least I am talking about two different lenses in the comparison. Why compare an 85mm on FF with an 85mm on APS? they don't "do" the same thing any more. If the shot taken with the FF camera was at a 10 feet target distance, you'd have to back of to 16 feet to get the same framing on APS. And by backing off to 16 feet, you change the perspective of the shot so much that it wouldn't even be the "same shot" any more.

Taking that into account is where the "FF is sharper than APS" starts to make sense....
Using a 135L 2.0 wide open on a 5D3 gives the same field of view, the same short DoF and the same amount of noise as using the 85L 1.2 on a 60D. But the 135 on 5D3 image will be a LOT sharper and more contrasty.

For the same reason, a bog-standard 85/1.8 on FF gives sharper images with the same short DoF as a 50L 1.2 does on APS. And a 50mm vs 35mm F1.4 on APS and so on.
Sharpness has got nothing to do with perspective, or DoF. You quoted all the lenses are wide open for the tests. It is not fair either. Every body knows that ALL lenses is not in their best behaviour when they are wide open ( more distortion, less resolution and less contrast ). Are you sure that the lenses can out resolve the APS-C sensor under test??? if not, then the result becomes a test of the lenses, not the sharpness of the sensor.

p666

  • Guest
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #84 on: January 23, 2013, 04:24:16 AM »
Images talk much better than words when you are talking about photography. I decided to test it myself, and took my 60D, and 5D Mark II, and attached the same 35mm prime lens, and took the same shot. The 5D image of 5616 x 3744 I cropped to 1.6, which gave me 3510 x 2340. I then downsampled the 60D image to the same size, and took a 100% crop of both for screen.

So you threw away any detail resolved by the 60D but not by the cropped center of the 5D2. Why would you expect a different result then the one you got?

I'll be the first to say that with current bodies the crop reach advantage only comes into play if you're making large prints from files which are cropped even further than APS-C. It is there. I've got 9-10 MP, 16x20, 7D sports prints that would not have worked with the roughly 3 MP left over had I been shooting a 5D2. But if you're making 13x19's that aren't cropped any further, you'll never see a difference.

But that still doesn't excuse performing your test in a manner which purposely throws away any detail gain in the 60D file. Would you do that in real life? (Same question for the test which started this thread: would you produce prints with no sharpening? Or do you blindly apply equal sharpening to everything regardless of subject / lighting / lens / sensor / final application and view size?)

Ok you do have a point, however, taken the same files, and this time taken the same 3510x2340 crop on the 5D to get the same perspective as the original crop 60D. Now I upsampled the 5D image in Photoshop to the original APS-C size of 5184x3456. Then have taken a 1:1 pixel crop of the centre to compare. Unfortunately there is a slight brightness difference due to changes in ambient light. Quality appears to be very very similar again; there is no disadvantage to simply cropping a FF shot in this instance. Well for 60D vs 5DMk2, although yes, the Mk2 is 3x the price.

5D image:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8218/8407024129_52e33f3df5_o.jpg

60D image:
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8211/8407024335_b175c2d3c9_o.jpg

I'd be interested in seeing a 7D vs 5D Mk2 under the same scenario to see the differences if any. Taking the same lens, mounting them on the other body and isolating the same area as taken by the crop sensor.

2. There are isolated incident that the APS-C can actually sharper than the FF if the lens use for FF have a severe problem in curvature of field or severe unsharp conrners. Since APS-C snesor only using the center part of the FOV of the lens. These problem may not exist. Therefore the APS-C is actually sharper.

I don't see why, because if you were taking the same lens on the full frame, even if it had bad corners, if you took a center 1.6 crop size on the FF to get the same FOV, you would be throwing away the FF bad corners. It would be same as then comparing the same image area. Nearly every lens chart I have ever looked at the lens is sharper in the middle, so unless you were comparing edge of FF to centre of APS-C (which is not really a reasonable comparison) that is not the case.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2013, 04:35:09 AM by p666 »

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1788
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #85 on: January 23, 2013, 05:40:58 AM »
@p666, I posted some examples on page 2 of this thread done by my partner in Building Panoramics between 5D mk2 and 650D. I think this is more or less the same sensor as 7D.

However we didn't do it as you describe: it was non scientific, used different lenses to get same focal length. At ISO 100. I can assure you that in this scenario there was just no difference.
Apart from DoF.

Our conclusion with modern APS is that if you're shooting low ISOs, have good lenses and don't require ultra wides there is no difference. Also this thread has highlighted that many people really don't understand what is happening when you enlarge the digital info from you camera chip - either on screen or in print.

If you choose ( new ) full frame and want to keep same focal length and speed there are huge cost implications so the thread has had relevance. For many people their choice of FF will be because of personal and not necessarily technical reasons, and there would be zero differences in their pictures if they had been shot on good APS.

Me? I use FF because I want ultra wide, I want my lenses focal length to be what I understand from 35mm, and I can't stand expensive cameras with pop up flash.

@ dtaylor, really you had the last word in your post about post processing in digital. This is so true.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2013, 07:11:31 AM by Sporgon »

Rocky

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
    • View Profile
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #86 on: January 23, 2013, 02:09:22 PM »
2. There are isolated incident that the APS-C can actually sharper than the FF if the lens use for FF have a severe problem in curvature of field or severe unsharp conrners. Since APS-C snesor only using the center part of the FOV of the lens. These problem may not exist. Therefore the APS-C is actually sharper.

I don't see why, because if you were taking the same lens on the full frame, even if it had bad corners, if you took a center 1.6 crop size on the FF to get the same FOV, you would be throwing away the FF bad corners. It would be same as then comparing the same image area. Nearly every lens chart I have ever looked at the lens is sharper in the middle, so unless you were comparing edge of FF to centre of APS-C (which is not really a reasonable comparison) that is not the case.
If you read my post carefully, I started by staying that both FFand APS-C are of the same pixel count. Also sharpness has got nothing to do with FOV or DOF. Your disussion talks about cropping the FF to APS-C size. Therefore you have already thrown away more than half of the pixel from FF. Do you expect a 10 Mp picture to be sharper than a 22 MP APS-C picture with an very sharp lens (center area only)??
« Last Edit: January 23, 2013, 02:32:24 PM by Rocky »

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1788
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #87 on: January 23, 2013, 02:22:02 PM »
@ Rocky : + 1

If nothing else this thread has shown many people don't realise that digital enlargement is all down to the number of pixels on the sensor, and not the physical dimensions of the sensor "format", unlike film format.

Rocky

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
    • View Profile
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #88 on: January 23, 2013, 02:41:21 PM »
2. There are isolated incident that the APS-C can actually sharper than the FF if the lens use for FF have a severe problem in curvature of field or severe unsharp conrners. Since APS-C snesor only using the center part of the FOV of the lens. These problem may not exist. Therefore the APS-C is actually sharper.

well, you have soon  24x36 with the same pixel density then you have both cropping and 24x36 to chose between.
as todays d800 APS crop 15,3Mp. Next will be 54Mp 24x36 if they keep  the schedule and the APS crop 24Mp
[/quote}
My discussion is based on both FF and APS-C ARE of the same pixel count. Not pixel density.

tortilla

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Re: Is Full Frame sharper than APS-C? My answer here
« Reply #89 on: January 23, 2013, 03:56:16 PM »
Sharpness has got nothing to do with perspective, or DoF.
I disagree. That's not even true when you only shoot ISO test charts. The larger DoF, the smaller the circle of confusion and the higher the resolution/sharpness (disregarding diffraction etc.).