Macro Photography - APS-C Vs Full Frame

[Sabaki]

Hey everybody

So for the past 6 months, I've been diligently saving towards the 6D, as I want to step into the world of full frame. I'm really excited about the better noise handling, the better IQ and all the goodness that comes with a full frame upgrade.

However. I'm now caught up in the frenzy surrounding the 7Dii. The AF system and the vast improvement it will offer over my 500D is massively appealing to me. My bird photography has progressed from bird-on-a-stick to larger, slower birds in flight. Anything smaller than a gull however and I can in 98% of cases, kiss a sharp image goodbye.

I will eventually own both cameras but cannot afford both at once.

If I go full frame now, it means stalling on incrementally improving my bird-in-flight shots.

If I go APS-C, it means not being able to take low light shots and negating much of the noise issues my 500D gives.

So macro is my deciding factor. What would be considered a better tool for macro, a 6D or a 7Dii?

Thanks guys, looking forward to some answers.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Don't confuse the advanced AF module with improved accuracy. The 7D AF is not nearly as accurate as a full frame camera. Yes, it will be great for birders due to faster AF, and hopefully more accurate.

My 7D seemed to really go well with my 100L, I preferred it for Macro use. However, in my case, macro is just incidental close focus photos. When I see something interesting, I grab my camera and shoot it handheld.

Here are some hand held photos with that combination. They are cropped, of course.

 

[Vivid Color]

I have both the 6D and the T1i/500D. I mostly shoot flowers in good light with my macro lenses. So when I'm looking at an image on my computer screen, I have to check the information on the file to tell me which camera body I used. So in my case, for the type of macro photos I take, the issue between full frame and crop body generally hasn't mattered and any of the newer crop body cameras would likely work for me. (I bought the 6D for non-macro reasons.) But maybe if you were shooting something in poor light or that moves quickly it would matter. What exactly do you plan to shoot using macro lenses, which macro lenses do you own, and under what lighting conditions do you plan to take these photos? I believe the answer to these questions will help other members on the form better answer your question.

 

[Sabaki]

Hey Vivid Colour

Very much into bug photography. I shoot with a Canon 100mm L IS and a MR-14EX.

Generally when shooting with the ringflash, I dial in ISO 400 | ss 1/200 | f/9.0. My biggest issue is the noise in the areas exposed for by ambient light.

 

[Vivid Color]

Thank you, Sabaki. As I don't shoot bugs, others on the forum are in a much better position to respond to your question.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Specifically for macro photography, APS-C has the advantage. The shallow depth of field in macro, becomes even more critical with full frame. In practice, a photo you are used to doing with F11 aperture with APS-C, will need F19 apertura to get the same depth of field with full frame. Our friend Marsus42 described this finding in a post months ago.

For use in macro, 70D and its articulated LCD seem better than 7D Mark ii.

 

[tayassu]

Specifically for macro photography, APS-C has the advantage. The shallow depth of field in macro, becomes even more critical with full frame. In practice, a photo you are used to doing with F11 aperture with APS-C, will need F19 apertura to get the same depth of field with full frame. Our friend Marsus42 described this finding in a post months ago.

For use in macro, 70D and its articulated LCD seem better than 7D Mark ii.

I agree that APS-C has the advantage with macro, but the 7DII will be better than the 70D e.g. for bird photography, so that is great for the OP. Go for the 7DII, Sabaki!
I will probably do so myself, my 7D AF does not work with some of my lenses, it is out of warranty time and I have a bad fear that this will cost... Maybe I will just get a new camera... :

 

[Sabaki]

Specifically for macro photography, APS-C has the advantage. The shallow depth of field in macro, becomes even more critical with full frame. In practice, a photo you are used to doing with F11 aperture with APS-C, will need F19 apertura to get the same depth of field with full frame. Our friend Marsus42 described this finding in a post months ago.

For use in macro, 70D and its articulated LCD seem better than 7D Mark ii.

I agree that APS-C has the advantage with macro, but the 7DII will be better than the 70D e.g. for bird photography, so that is great for the OP. Go for the 7DII, Sabaki!
I will probably do so myself, my 7D AF does not work with some of my lenses, it is out of warranty time and I have a bad fear that this will cost... Maybe I will just get a new camera... :

tayassu, I'm crazy excited about getting a new camera that I'm kind of embarassed by my own enthusiasm for it.

Would be so cool being one of the first with the 7Dii too huh

So if I go that way, then you must too ;D

 

[tayassu]

Specifically for macro photography, APS-C has the advantage. The shallow depth of field in macro, becomes even more critical with full frame. In practice, a photo you are used to doing with F11 aperture with APS-C, will need F19 apertura to get the same depth of field with full frame. Our friend Marsus42 described this finding in a post months ago.

For use in macro, 70D and its articulated LCD seem better than 7D Mark ii.

I agree that APS-C has the advantage with macro, but the 7DII will be better than the 70D e.g. for bird photography, so that is great for the OP. Go for the 7DII, Sabaki!
I will probably do so myself, my 7D AF does not work with some of my lenses, it is out of warranty time and I have a bad fear that this will cost... Maybe I will just get a new camera... :

tayassu, I'm crazy excited about getting a new camera that I'm kind of embarassed by my own enthusiasm for it.

Would be so cool being one of the first with the 7Dii too huh

So if I go that way, then you must too ;D

I don't think you can be too enthusiastic about something you know is gonna get you great stuff...
Would be cool indeed, but I'll have to save a little to be able to afford it, I'm most likely pulling the trigger around Christmas... I've never been so tempted to buy a camera just by the spec sheet and the price : :

 

[Loswr]

Specifically for macro photography, APS-C has the advantage. The shallow depth of field in macro, becomes even more critical with full frame. In practice, a photo you are used to doing with F11 aperture with APS-C, will need F19 apertura to get the same depth of field with full frame.

In fact, that's not true. It's one of those 'you can't have your cake and eat it, too' situations...

If you match framing, you do get deeper DoF with APS-C as in your f/11 vs. f/19 example. So...you stop the lens on FF down to f/19, problem solved. For the sensors under consideration, diffraction will be no different at those apertures (you'll lose a little bit of sharpness with both). If you need the same shutter speed with ambient light, you raise the ISO to compensate – there's no noise penalty with the better high ISO performance of FF, and if you don't need to raise the shutter speed you have less noise with FF.

If you match magnification (same distance to subject), the DoF with APS-C is actually shallower than FF at the same aperture. You have to stop down a bit with APS-C...and if you're at f/11, the FF image isn't being softened by diffraction, but the APS-C image is losing sharpness, and it loses more if you stop it down to match DoF.

So, APS-C really offers no advantage over FF in terms of DoF. However, there are potential advantages in other areas. If you match framing, you're further from the subject with APS-C. The greater working distance is an advantage when shooting skittish insects. If you match magnification, you get more pixels on target with APS-C (assuming your subject is smaller than the APS-C sensor).

The OP mentions an issue with noise in the ambient background of shots with the T1i/500D and ring flash; the 7DII might be slightly better in that regard, but a FF sensor will bring noticeable improvement.

Personally, I prefer FF for macro work (based on my experience having the 5DII and 7D concurrently). Here's a shot with the 100L, no way I'd have used this ISO with APS-C...


EOS 1D X, EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS, 1/160 s, f/11, ISO 6400

Given the OP's stated uses, I honestly think the 5DIII would be the ideal choice. It's the best of both worlds (great AF, great high ISO performance, costs less than the combo of 7DII and 6D). If that's out of budget, the 7DII is probably the better choice. The AF should be great for BIF, but it's worth noting that BIF requires high shutter speeds, which often means pretty high ISO, especially with an f/5.6 lens – APS-C is fine if there's ample light, but with heavy overcast or at sunset, often not so much.

 

[ecka]

Specifically for macro photography, APS-C has the advantage. The shallow depth of field in macro, becomes even more critical with full frame. In practice, a photo you are used to doing with F11 aperture with APS-C, will need F19 apertura to get the same depth of field with full frame.

In fact, that's not true. It's one of those 'you can't have your cake and eat it, too' situations...

If you match framing, you do get deeper DoF with APS-C as in your f/11 vs. f/19 example. So...you stop the lens on FF down to f/19, problem solved. For the sensors under consideration, diffraction will be no different at those apertures (you'll lose a little bit of sharpness with both). If you need the same shutter speed with ambient light, you raise the ISO to compensate – there's no noise penalty with the better high ISO performance of FF, and if you don't need to raise the shutter speed you have less noise with FF.

If you match magnification (same distance to subject), the DoF with APS-C is actually shallower than FF at the same aperture. You have to stop down a bit with APS-C...and if you're at f/11, the FF image isn't being softened by diffraction, but the APS-C image is losing sharpness, and it loses more if you stop it down to match DoF.

So, APS-C really offers no advantage over FF in terms of DoF. However, there are potential advantages in other areas. If you match framing, you're further from the subject with APS-C. The greater working distance is an advantage when shooting skittish insects. If you match magnification, you get more pixels on target with APS-C (assuming your subject is smaller than the APS-C sensor).

The OP mentions an issue with noise in the ambient background of shots with the T1i/500D and ring flash; the 7DII might be slightly better in that regard, but a FF sensor will bring noticeable improvement.

Personally, I prefer FF for macro work (based on my experience having the 5DII and 7D concurrently). Here's a shot with the 100L, no way I'd have used this ISO with APS-C...


EOS 1D X, EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS, 1/160 s, f/11, ISO 6400

Given the OP's stated uses, I honestly think the 5DIII would be the ideal choice. It's the best of both worlds (great AF, great high ISO performance, costs less than the combo of 7DII and 6D). If that's out of budget, the 7DII is probably the better choice. The AF should be great for BIF, but it's worth noting that BIF requires high shutter speeds, which often means pretty high ISO, especially with an f/5.6 lens – APS-C is fine if there's ample light, but with heavy overcast or at sunset, often not so much.

Yes, and if you are using the MP-E 65/2.8 1-5x Macro, then FF is definitely the one you want to put it on. APS-C is usually too small for a proper framing of an average size insect.

 

[Sabaki]

Specifically for macro photography, APS-C has the advantage. The shallow depth of field in macro, becomes even more critical with full frame. In practice, a photo you are used to doing with F11 aperture with APS-C, will need F19 apertura to get the same depth of field with full frame.

In fact, that's not true. It's one of those 'you can't have your cake and eat it, too' situations...

If you match framing, you do get deeper DoF with APS-C as in your f/11 vs. f/19 example. So...you stop the lens on FF down to f/19, problem solved. For the sensors under consideration, diffraction will be no different at those apertures (you'll lose a little bit of sharpness with both). If you need the same shutter speed with ambient light, you raise the ISO to compensate – there's no noise penalty with the better high ISO performance of FF, and if you don't need to raise the shutter speed you have less noise with FF.

If you match magnification (same distance to subject), the DoF with APS-C is actually shallower than FF at the same aperture. You have to stop down a bit with APS-C...and if you're at f/11, the FF image isn't being softened by diffraction, but the APS-C image is losing sharpness, and it loses more if you stop it down to match DoF.

So, APS-C really offers no advantage over FF in terms of DoF. However, there are potential advantages in other areas. If you match framing, you're further from the subject with APS-C. The greater working distance is an advantage when shooting skittish insects. If you match magnification, you get more pixels on target with APS-C (assuming your subject is smaller than the APS-C sensor).

The OP mentions an issue with noise in the ambient background of shots with the T1i/500D and ring flash; the 7DII might be slightly better in that regard, but a FF sensor will bring noticeable improvement.

Personally, I prefer FF for macro work (based on my experience having the 5DII and 7D concurrently). Here's a shot with the 100L, no way I'd have used this ISO with APS-C...


EOS 1D X, EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS, 1/160 s, f/11, ISO 6400

Given the OP's stated uses, I honestly think the 5DIII would be the ideal choice. It's the best of both worlds (great AF, great high ISO performance, costs less than the combo of 7DII and 6D). If that's out of budget, the 7DII is probably the better choice. The AF should be great for BIF, but it's worth noting that BIF requires high shutter speeds, which often means pretty high ISO, especially with an f/5.6 lens – APS-C is fine if there's ample light, but with heavy overcast or at sunset, often not so much.

Superb clarity and noise free image Neuro. It's that kind if IQ I'm looking for.

 

[Loswr]

Superb clarity and noise free image Neuro. It's that kind if IQ I'm looking for.

Sorry to say, but you're not going to find that on any current APS-C camera at ISO 6400.

 

[ecka]

Superb clarity and noise free image Neuro. It's that kind if IQ I'm looking for.

Sorry to say, but you're not going to find that on any current APS-C camera at ISO 6400.

I think they are quite noisy even at ISO 100

 

[benherman]

My 5dmii macro shots are richer in detail than my 100d macro shots with the same lens. The convenience of feeling closer to your subject when composing with the 100d is beneficial in some cases. I try to keep the iso low and through clever use of flash you can get great results from each.