October 25, 2014, 04:59:29 AM

Author Topic: How many of you would....  (Read 13598 times)

Meh

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #45 on: December 23, 2011, 09:31:34 PM »
As I understand it:

From wickedwombat
"if you get a lens that works on both FF and crop let say a 17-40 f4L then fit it to each and frame the shot exactly the same so that both images filled each cameras view to the same extents. You would be standing closer to the subject using the FF and further away using the crop. Because you are closer to the subject you will have a shallower depth of field than the same lens taking the same shot on the crop since using the crop you are further away"

Therefore the background is more OOF.

In my experience the 5DII and 1D4 give a  much smoother background than the 7D

More OOF yes, but "quality" of the bokeh is mostly a property of the lens, correct?  But then again there really isn't a formal definition of the quality of bokeh so to each his own I suppose.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2011, 09:35:45 PM by Meh »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #45 on: December 23, 2011, 09:31:34 PM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14751
    • View Profile
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #46 on: December 23, 2011, 09:32:52 PM »
Wickedwombat's statement speaks to quantity, not quality. If I shoot a subject with the 5DII and 70-200 II at ~135mm f/4.5, then stand in the same place with the same lens on a 7D, set to ~85mm and f/2.8. The amount of OOF blur will be the same, as will the perspective. 

Your statement is different, and suggests that despite the same quantity of blur, it will look 'better' on FF. am I correctly interpreting that?

We often hear that FF is better, but bokeh (which technically means quality, not quantity), isn't one of the ways I've previously heard discussed.

Thanks! 
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14751
    • View Profile
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #47 on: December 23, 2011, 09:41:21 PM »
More OOF yes, but "quality" of the bokeh is mostly a property of the lens, correct?  But then again there really isn't a definition of the quality of bokeh so to each his own I suppose.

I have always thought of it as mostly a lens property, yes.  That's why my example used the same lens, instead of for example the 135L at f/2 on FF vs. the 85L at f/1.2 on APS-C.

A crop sensor can improve bokeh in one definite way - OOF specular highlights are best if round, but with many lenses they have a cat's-eye shape at the edges of the frame when the lens is shot wide open. That's caused by vignetting, and an EF lens on APS-C has less vignetting due to the crop sensor, so the cat's-eye effect is reduced or eliminated with an APS-C sensor. 
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Meh

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #48 on: December 23, 2011, 09:59:31 PM »
More OOF yes, but "quality" of the bokeh is mostly a property of the lens, correct?  But then again there really isn't a definition of the quality of bokeh so to each his own I suppose.

I have always thought of it as mostly a lens property, yes.  That's why my example used the same lens, instead of for example the 135L at f/2 on FF vs. the 85L at f/1.2 on APS-C.

A crop sensor can improve bokeh in one definite way - OOF specular highlights are best if round, but with many lenses they have a cat's-eye shape at the edges of the frame when the lens is shot wide open. That's caused by vignetting, and an EF lens on APS-C has less vignetting due to the crop sensor, so the cat's-eye effect is reduced or eliminated with an APS-C sensor.

Good call but then good call to Brian as well since we just concluded definitively that a crop sensor can improve the quality of the bokeh (in the specific manner and circumstance you just identified).   Although, Brian stated the bokeh on an APS-C sensor would never be as good as FF which may be slightly overstated.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2011, 10:07:29 PM by Meh »

BaconBets

  • Guest
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #49 on: December 23, 2011, 10:57:35 PM »
That's caused by vignetting, and an EF lens on APS-C has less vignetting due to the crop sensor, so the cat's-eye effect is reduced or eliminated with an APS-C sensor.

Is that another way of saying that APS-C only picks up the center of the image, where lens performance is always much better anyway? I wouldn't necessarily say that means APS-C is "improving" the image
That is one of the merits of APS-H...its picks up more of the image frame than APS-C, but versus full frame it is only missing the weakest technical portion where lens vignetting and fringe focus occurs

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #50 on: December 24, 2011, 02:07:15 AM »
Wickedwombat's statement speaks to quantity, not quality. If I shoot a subject with the 5DII and 70-200 II at ~135mm f/4.5, then stand in the same place with the same lens on a 7D, set to ~85mm and f/2.8. The amount of OOF blur will be the same, as will the perspective. 

Your statement is different, and suggests that despite the same quantity of blur, it will look 'better' on FF. am I correctly interpreting that?

We often hear that FF is better, but bokeh (which technically means quality, not quantity), isn't one of the ways I've previously heard discussed.

Thanks!

That is correct  ;D

I think this is worthy of a set of pictures and a separate thread. As I said I can tell from an image whether the body was crop or FF - so there must be a difference.

I was thinking of two sets of comparisons

- same distance from object, different focal length (from zooming)
- same focal length, different distance

I would go for f/2.8 as that is a common apperture.


briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #51 on: December 24, 2011, 02:30:57 AM »

Good call but then good call to Brian as well since we just concluded definitively that a crop sensor can improve the quality of the bokeh (in the specific manner and circumstance you just identified).   Although, Brian stated the bokeh on an APS-C sensor would never be as good as FF which may be slightly overstated.

I think the difference becomes visually less apparent the wider the apperture - for example 85mm at 1.2 both will have fine 'grained' bokeh

I have found that the difference is most marked at f/2.8 and f/4.

Good to see that the benefits of APS-H have been recognised - it is a compromise sensor size, with better lens performance from the crop and closer image performance to the FF.




canon rumors FORUM

Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #51 on: December 24, 2011, 02:30:57 AM »

Viggo

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2082
    • View Profile
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #52 on: December 24, 2011, 02:58:44 AM »
I'm not quite sure I'm getting this, but if the quality is better and the quantity is less, doesn't that make the background more in focus and more cluttered, therefore the image dosen't look as soft and smooth on crop as on FF? That is my experience, so I would always prefer the LESS dof and more blurred background to the quality of the bokeh, because imo, you can't have one without the other.

For example, I use the 70-200 mkII on both 5d2 and the mk4, and I like the less dof of the 5d2, it just looks better, can't say I have thought more of it than that, if the actual highlightspeckels are a different shape it doesn't come across as more intruding than more depth I get from the mk4..

Anyway, Merry Christmas everyone!
1dx, 24-70 L II, 50 Art, 200 f2.0 L

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #53 on: December 24, 2011, 03:58:59 AM »
I'm not quite sure I'm getting this, but if the quality is better and the quantity is less, doesn't that make the background more in focus and more cluttered, therefore the image dosen't look as soft and smooth on crop as on FF? That is my experience, so I would always prefer the LESS dof and more blurred background to the quality of the bokeh, because imo, you can't have one without the other.

For example, I use the 70-200 mkII on both 5d2 and the mk4, and I like the less dof of the 5d2, it just looks better, can't say I have thought more of it than that, if the actual highlightspeckels are a different shape it doesn't come across as more intruding than more depth I get from the mk4..

Anyway, Merry Christmas everyone!

That is what I am saying  ;D

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14751
    • View Profile
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #54 on: December 24, 2011, 07:05:11 AM »
I think this is worthy of a set of pictures and a separate thread. As I said I can tell from an image whether the body was crop or FF - so there must be a difference.

I was thinking of two sets of comparisons

- same distance from object, different focal length (from zooming)
- same focal length, different distance

I would go for f/2.8 as that is a common apperture.

Sounds like a great idea, except it should be f/2.8 on the APS-C and f/4.5 on the FF.  If you use f/2.8 on both, you're going to be comparing amount of OOF blur and bokeh - two variables, with no way to isolate just the bokeh.  It's well-established that for the same framing, the FF sensor will give shallower DoF and thus more OOF blur, so that factor should be taken out of the comparison, IMO.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

KeithR

  • Guest
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #55 on: December 24, 2011, 07:13:04 AM »
Yep, that looks fairly noisy

Oh, don't be silly - 12800 ISO that good from a cropper? I've had plenty of discerning photographers guess that this was around 1600 ISO.

Quote
shot in a reasonable amount of light (presumably as a test?), which also helps.

If 1/125 at ISO 12800 and F/3.5 (50mm f/1.8 lens, handheld), is "a reasonable amount of light" to you, you must live in a cave.

Quote
Looks like a fair bit of NR, too...

Nope - chroma at default (25), luma at 12 in Lr 3, resized and selectively sharpened in PS.

Quote
reducing it to 20% of original size provides substantial NR.

Yes it does - but my request for a "blow the doors off" alternative from the Mk IV stands.

Of course the Mk IV should be better, I'm just challenging him (or anyone else) to back up his hyperbole with evidence.

Quote
The 1D IV would look that "good" at ISO 25600.

Let's see this whole extra stop then...

Quote
No, it's not, but your comment is a bloody rude thing to say, IMO

You pander to ridiculous comments if you like - I stand by what I said.

Quote
Perhaps you just have a different (i.e. lower) definition of 'high image quality'.

Ah - I was waiting for that one. No, I've got pretty high standards, and all I'm seeing here to counter my opinion is lots and lots of talk: "you're wrong because I say you are. I can't back it up, but you're wrong..."

As usual.

AprilForever

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 730
    • View Profile
    • AprilForever.com
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #56 on: December 24, 2011, 09:03:14 AM »
Shallow depth of field can at times be problematic, though... Ever taken that epic picture, only to pind the bird's eyes in focus, but the tip of his bill awkwardly oof? Sure, you can stop down the FF camera, but then you end up losing the low light advantage. Are FF cameras reallt all that much better than ASP-C? Especially ASP-H... How much better is it really? For the loss of BOTH wide angle AND tele range, there must needs ne much improved image quality. And I am not convinced there is.
What is truth?

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #57 on: December 24, 2011, 09:23:26 AM »
Shallow depth of field can at times be problematic, though... Ever taken that epic picture, only to pind the bird's eyes in focus, but the tip of his bill awkwardly oof? Sure, you can stop down the FF camera, but then you end up losing the low light advantage. Are FF cameras reallt all that much better than ASP-C? Especially ASP-H... How much better is it really? For the loss of BOTH wide angle AND tele range, there must needs ne much improved image quality. And I am not convinced there is.

Obviously you have never used a 1D4 or a 5DII.

Loss of WIDE? You are jesting then?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #57 on: December 24, 2011, 09:23:26 AM »

AprilForever

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 730
    • View Profile
    • AprilForever.com
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #58 on: December 24, 2011, 09:36:58 AM »
Mp, not jesting... loss of wide... EF-S doesn't work on ASP-H... Canon's widest for ASP-H is 14mm... the 10-22 beats this out... The point is not improved image quality, it is Vastly improved image quality...
What is truth?

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #59 on: December 24, 2011, 11:13:06 AM »
Mp, not jesting... loss of wide... EF-S doesn't work on ASP-H... Canon's widest for ASP-H is 14mm... the 10-22 beats this out... The point is not improved image quality, it is Vastly improved image quality...


Have you fogotten the 8-15 then?

1D4 is top camera in all respects except maybe the 1Ds3
« Last Edit: December 24, 2011, 11:15:14 AM by briansquibb »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: How many of you would....
« Reply #59 on: December 24, 2011, 11:13:06 AM »