November 25, 2017, 03:03:43 AM

Author Topic: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor  (Read 98365 times)

candc

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 1259
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #90 on: February 22, 2014, 08:14:32 PM »
Hi everybody  :)

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

I've never had the chance to shoot full frame so most of what I know is pure theory derived from reading reviews etc online.

With South Africa's economy in a bit of trouble, I can get a hardly used 5D mkii for a reasonable price so I'm considering taking that.

Just what can I expect in terms of image quality and noise performance? Is the IQ of a full frame substantially better than a crops? Will I be able to take relatively noise free images at say ISO 3200?

The reviews seem to indicate that the native system for L series glass is full frame. Does this mean that I will experience a dramatic improvement in IQ?

The more I read, it seems that crop bodies have a singular advantage over full frame and that is the increase in focal length.

Can you guys chip in and throw some opinions and facts my way please?

Thanks in advance everybody.

the op was asking about what we think he should do with his setup. i think he should get a 6d. you have a 24-70ii and 100 macro plus the 50 f/1.8 those lenses shine on the ff body, that's what they are made for. you have the 10-22 and the long lenses for your 500d so if you are okay with a 2 camera setup then get a 6d. you were asking about iso 3200? thats what the 6d does, it is the best there is at high iso.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #90 on: February 22, 2014, 08:14:32 PM »

sanj

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2901
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #91 on: February 22, 2014, 08:44:21 PM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

sanj

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2901
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #92 on: February 22, 2014, 08:47:32 PM »
The ISO capability has no connection to full frame or APS-C, it's a function of sensor age.  The 70D would have given you as big a bump in ISO capability at nearly half the price and allow you to continue using your APS-C lenses.  I could compare a 5D classic with a 7D and conclude that APs-C is superior in many ways.

Sorry, no.  The maximum ISO setting available tracks with sensor age (loosely), but having a setting available doesn't mean it produces usable images.  'High ISO capability' depends on sensor size.  The 7D is a better camera than the 5D in many ways...but at the same ISO setting, the 5D has less image noise despite being a much older sensor.

The 70D offers less than 1/2 stop improvement over the 500D, and the 5D is about 1/2-stop better than the 70D.  A current FF (6D, 5DIII) is over a stop better than the 70D.

Basic fact!

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2944
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #93 on: February 22, 2014, 09:01:20 PM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

I'm not sure about the whole jpeg issue... I shot in jpg for the first 3 or 4 years with an SLR because I didn't like the file size of raw and I didn't have a program that would read a raw file.  But in retrospect... I really like shooting in raw because of the added data and I feel as though I can bring out more of the shot than what a normal jpeg would be able to offer.  Sure over saturation is a risk or over contrasting...
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L-> 85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm -> 85mm f/1.2L mkii

mkabi

  • EOS 7D Mark II
  • *****
  • Posts: 487
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #94 on: February 22, 2014, 09:55:36 PM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

I think he said that so that you are limited to just you and the camera. Zero Post-processing. If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor, and although thats what it takes to be photographer nowadays i.e. be both photographer & editor... It wasn't like that back in the day. And you have to agree... Seldomly, do we all take good pictures anymore, we all take half-assed pictures then throw it in lightroom to correct it, then crop it so they frame it better and lastly do a bunch of touch ups to make it clean and/or artsy.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2014, 09:59:55 PM by mkabi »
Sold my Canon DSLRs waiting on my RED Raven preorder. EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L, EF 85mm f/1.8, EF 100mm L f/2.8 Macro, Custom Cine 50mm & Custom Cine 35mm.

sanj

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2901
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #95 on: February 22, 2014, 10:05:23 PM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

I think he said that so that you are limited to just you and the camera. Zero Post-processing. If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor, and although thats what it takes to be photographer nowadays i.e. be both photographer & editor... It wasn't like that back in the day. And you have to agree... Seldomly, do we all take good pictures anymore, they take half-assed pictures then throw it in lightroom to correct it, then crop it so they frame it better and lastly do a bunch of touch ups to make it clean and/or artsy.

No man. No no no.
Photography to me, in todays world means:
Knowing limits of the sensor/files and also how to enhance that. Without knowledge of proper benefits of RAW, the photographer will not be able handle exposures etc in low/extreme light situations.
Being very well versed with lenses and knowing which will work best for the story telling is a must.

And how about people who want to shoot wildlife? They MUST have proper telephoto... Landscape guys would need a proper wide... Ya?

Of course composition, lighting, and learning to see are fundamentals. Which I believe was the point being made but to disregard lenses and post is a very simplistic and limited approach.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2014, 11:52:33 PM by sanj »

sanj

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2901
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #96 on: February 22, 2014, 10:06:59 PM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

I think he said that so that you are limited to just you and the camera. Zero Post-processing. If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor, and although thats what it takes to be photographer nowadays i.e. be both photographer & editor... It wasn't like that back in the day. And you have to agree... Seldomly, do we all take good pictures anymore, we all take half-assed pictures then throw it in lightroom to correct it, then crop it so they frame it better and lastly do a bunch of touch ups to make it clean and/or artsy.

Does not apply to me for sure...

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #96 on: February 22, 2014, 10:06:59 PM »

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2944
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #97 on: February 22, 2014, 10:23:40 PM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

I think he said that so that you are limited to just you and the camera. Zero Post-processing. If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor, and although thats what it takes to be photographer nowadays i.e. be both photographer & editor... It wasn't like that back in the day. And you have to agree... Seldomly, do we all take good pictures anymore, we all take half-assed pictures then throw it in lightroom to correct it, then crop it so they frame it better and lastly do a bunch of touch ups to make it clean and/or artsy.

then why bother using auto focus.  Isn't that cheating?  How dare you allow the camera to follow your subject.  You should either find the plane at which you want to take the photo and wait for your subject to get there or try and track your quickly moving subject while turning the focus ring and then track him the old fashioned way all while getting in the proper position, finding the right angle, exposing correctly, and applying the rule of thirds.

Good lord.  This reminds me of the conversation about everyone should learn with film.  Film film film. 

Gear isn't everything... but to refuse to use the new technology to make ones job easier is just silly. 
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L-> 85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm -> 85mm f/1.2L mkii

unfocused

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3793
    • Mark Gordon Communications
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #98 on: February 22, 2014, 10:41:20 PM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.
...I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

I think he said that so that you are limited to just you and the camera. Zero Post-processing. If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor... It wasn't like that back in the day...

...Good lord.  This reminds me of the conversation about everyone should learn with film.  Film film film. 

Gear isn't everything... but to refuse to use the new technology to make ones job easier is just silly.

I'm with JD and Sanj. Some of the comments make as much sense as saying that you have to use a pencil and paper to write a great novel. Actually...it sounds more like you have to use a pencil and paper and do no editing or proofreading to write a great novel. That's just silly.

Photographers have always used the tools available to them to manipulate images after the shot was taken. Some more than others.

If you have talent and vision, it's not going to be lessened by using the tools available to you.

unfocused

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3793
    • Mark Gordon Communications
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #99 on: February 22, 2014, 11:00:34 PM »
I know that people who have spent thousands on a full frame camera want to see a difference. But at ISO 400 or below, if you are seeing additional noise in a photograph taken with an APS-C sensor, it is likely to be either (a) confirmation bias or (b) your processing skills.

Sure.  ISO 400 on APS-C is like ISO 1250 on FF...and with proper processing that looks perfectly clean.

Except that's not what you said in the earlier post (see below):

...FF is better than APS-C in terms of image noise, at both low ISO and high ISO.



And, frankly, ISO 400 on APS-C looks pretty much the same as ISO 400 on Full Frame.

The reason some of us spend thousands on a full frame camera is that we know some of our most impactful shots are taken in less than ideal light, and we're willing to pay a premium so those shots look as good as possible.

  I never took issue with the argument that full frame provides better noise control at higher ISOs, I simply pointed out that at normal ISOs the differences are marginal at best.

Sometimes people who haven't or can't spend thousands on a full frame camera want to rationalize away the benefits.   ;)

I own both a 5DIII and a 7D, so it's not a question of having to rationalize anything. Perhaps I just have a healthier perspective about the limitations of equipment.


neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 21779
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #100 on: February 22, 2014, 11:23:46 PM »
And, frankly, ISO 400 on APS-C looks pretty much the same as ISO 400 on Full Frame.

Unless you have to crop the image, and push the shadows a stop or two (after having lost a slight amount of shadow or highlight info already due to the lower DR).  FF is better, unquestionably – the noise is lower and the image is sharper...but in many situations, APS-C is good enough that the benefits of FF are rendered moot.
EOS 1D X, EOS M2, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

sagittariansrock

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1689
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #101 on: February 23, 2014, 12:05:33 AM »
What I am lacking is the ability to create compelling photography but that is a process independent of technology.

I can go on and on and on about how I learned photography with just a 55mm f/1.8 and a 135mm f/3.5 prime lens. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me to work within the limitations of the focal length, i.e. DoF and FoV. I can go on and on and on about how the 55mm taught me about angles and moments. I can go on and on and on ... but I won't. (Chorus: "Too late!")

I always challenge people, who want to really learn photography, to pick one prime lens and shoot straight to JPEG for three months. Everything, one prime lens in JPEG. Do it!

I so totally disagree.

I think he said that so that you are limited to just you and the camera. Zero Post-processing. If you can take amazing pictures, then that makes you a photographer. Post-processing makes you an editor, and although thats what it takes to be photographer nowadays i.e. be both photographer & editor... It wasn't like that back in the day. And you have to agree... Seldomly, do we all take good pictures anymore, we all take half-assed pictures then throw it in lightroom to correct it, then crop it so they frame it better and lastly do a bunch of touch ups to make it clean and/or artsy.

It shouldn't matter at which point of your workflow you create something beautiful or meaningful. It could be by being there while a significant scene unfolds before your camera, it could be when you use a photographic tool to transform something mundane, or it could be when you use a post-processing tool instead (this, of course, doesn't pertain to photojournalism). One shouldn't be a stickler for the technique as long as the end result satisfies. One shouldn't be limited to the semantics of what it means to be a photographer and what it means to be a photo editor.
The fact that unavailability of editing tools made for better photographers is the same as saying removing seat belts made for safer drivers.
EOS 5DIII, EOS 6D | Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, TS-E 17mm f/4L, EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, EF 85mm f/1.2L USM, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, EF 135mm f/2L USM, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM, 1.4x III, 2x III | 600-EX-RT x3 | EOS M + EF-M 22mm f/2

Aglet

  • EOS-1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1610
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #102 on: February 23, 2014, 02:24:06 AM »
here's my 2-bits

You've got a nice collection of glass, so I won't tell you to abandon it for a different system. (but that's what I did)

Consider a 70D or a 6D, they have more manageable noise characteristics.
if you don't like noise and banding, a used 5d2 might disappoint, depending on the individual body - take some test shots and process before committing to it. I had an early model and it was noisy and had plenty of banding and a 7D is similarly cautioned against for the same reason.

Not sure if they're offered in your area, but a refurbished 6D can be a good deal and a better option and you'll only give up your 10-22.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #102 on: February 23, 2014, 02:24:06 AM »

Hesbehindyou

  • EOS Rebel T7i
  • ****
  • Posts: 119
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #103 on: February 23, 2014, 03:16:00 AM »
The more I read, it seems that crop bodies have a singular advantage over full frame and that is the increase in focal length.

If you are 'focal length limited', i.e. need a longer lens, with FF then yes, crops have an advantage. If you're not then they don't.

The main advantage of full frame (to me) is being able to get a sharper drop off from the in focus plane to the out of focus plane. How is this achieved? To get the same framing on FF as on my crop I have to use a longer focal length... and it is the longer focal length that gives you the sharper drop off. In addition the depth of field is shallower in the first place.

Pretty much everything else can be regarded as minor or for pixel peepers only. If you're not making very large prints you can ignore lots of info :-)

(one other thing to add is that the FF bodies have better ergonomics than the Rebels and a larger, brighter, viewfinder. My 550D is only used when I'll be cropping (my FF is only 12MP) or am focal length limited, such is my preference for the ergonomics and viewfinder of the 5D)

koolman

  • EOS M5
  • ****
  • Posts: 200
    • Pictures Of Jerusalem
Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #104 on: February 23, 2014, 06:30:27 AM »
Hi everybody  :)

So as I move into my 3rd year of photography, I find my 500D isn't able to help my take my photography to the next level and its beginning to feel like my L series lenses are begging to shoot on a full frame body.

I've never had the chance to shoot full frame so most of what I know is pure theory derived from reading reviews etc online.

With South Africa's economy in a bit of trouble, I can get a hardly used 5D mkii for a reasonable price so I'm considering taking that.

Just what can I expect in terms of image quality and noise performance? Is the IQ of a full frame substantially better than a crops? Will I be able to take relatively noise free images at say ISO 3200?

The reviews seem to indicate that the native system for L series glass is full frame. Does this mean that I will experience a dramatic improvement in IQ?

The more I read, it seems that crop bodies have a singular advantage over full frame and that is the increase in focal length.

Can you guys chip in and throw some opinions and facts my way please?

Thanks in advance everybody.

Hi,

My 2 cents. I have a 550d and my friend has a 5d mark 2. We often go shooting together. He uses a 24-70 2.8 mark 1 - I use a tammy 17-50 non VC.

1) Sure FF produces higher IQ. Is it "dramatic" ? well in my opinion it very much depends on the scenario of the shot. In good light - there is a difference - but I'm not sure "dramatic" comes to mind. In low light the FF is cleaner. In my opinion the photographers skill will influence the results in a much more "dramatic" way.

2) My style of shooting is often "walk around". The FF body and lenses are heavy and I'm not sure worth the weight and added overall drag.

3) The FF body and lenses - are more expensive and for me not worth the cost - as I shoot as a hobby. I much more enjoy the composition and photo part of my hobby then admiring the electronics of the result. That's me.

J.P.
Jerusalem Photographer (canon 80d, canon 50mm 1.4, Canon 15-85, , canon 35mm 1.4L,Canon 100L Macro,Samyang 14mm MF, Canon 24mm EF-S,Canon 10-18)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Full Frame Vs Crop Sensor
« Reply #104 on: February 23, 2014, 06:30:27 AM »