Landscape Photography, Full Frame vs. Crop Sensor Advantages/Disadvantages of each
Jan 11, 2015 07:07:15 #
kayakbob
Loc: Placerville, CA
I know that a FF Sensor has larger photosites and therefore lower noise, and also for the same focal length lens, a wider FOV.
I also understand that a Crop Sensor has more DOF than the FF sensor, but not clear on how much more DOF.
Ignoring the FOV difference factor, and with maxium DOF being an important factor for Landscape, wouldn't a Crop Senor have a slight advantage over a FF Sensor, at least in theory? I realize that for portraiture it is typically the opposite, you want less DOF for background blurring, hence the preference for f2.8 and faster lenses.
I think of Landscapes as being more wide open distant vistas, and typically requiring In Camera cropping or PP cropping, which to me makes the greater FOV of the FF sensor typically a mute point.
The new Canon 7D MKII based on reviews, seems to have decent Low Light performance (Low noise at high ISO), and seems to address many issues for wildlife & action photography as well.
I would be intetested in technical references, re. formulas for sensor DOF and FOV calculations as well as lens design.
I wish that Lens Manfactures would standardize their FOV angle references to either the diagonal, or horizontal/verticaI FOV angles.
Bob
I also understand that a Crop Sensor has more DOF than the FF sensor, but not clear on how much more DOF.
Ignoring the FOV difference factor, and with maxium DOF being an important factor for Landscape, wouldn't a Crop Senor have a slight advantage over a FF Sensor, at least in theory? I realize that for portraiture it is typically the opposite, you want less DOF for background blurring, hence the preference for f2.8 and faster lenses.
I think of Landscapes as being more wide open distant vistas, and typically requiring In Camera cropping or PP cropping, which to me makes the greater FOV of the FF sensor typically a mute point.
The new Canon 7D MKII based on reviews, seems to have decent Low Light performance (Low noise at high ISO), and seems to address many issues for wildlife & action photography as well.
I would be intetested in technical references, re. formulas for sensor DOF and FOV calculations as well as lens design.
I wish that Lens Manfactures would standardize their FOV angle references to either the diagonal, or horizontal/verticaI FOV angles.
Bob
Jan 11, 2015 07:18:29 #
Here's a comparison I did a while back. Scroll down to the overlays and the difference is quite apparent. Most landscapes are shot with wide angle lenses, such as the one I used, or wider. Crop sensor takes away that advantage. Actually, serious landscape photographers often use medium format.
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-198407-1.html
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-198407-1.html
Jan 11, 2015 08:07:33 #
Cambridge in Colour has great information online about a wide variety of photography topics. They also have online calculators to calculate depth of field and the diffraction limits of digital sensors. Here's their section about sensor size and depth of field:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm
Scroll down to the calculator. It lets you compare different sensor sizes. You enter information for sensor #1 and sensor #2. It shows you what focal length lens is required for sensor #2 to maintain the same perspective as sensor #1 and the aperture required to maintain the same depth of field as sensor #1.
Here's a different Cambridge in Colour depth of field calculator for calculating the depth of field based on the focusing distance:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/dof-calculator.htm
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm
Scroll down to the calculator. It lets you compare different sensor sizes. You enter information for sensor #1 and sensor #2. It shows you what focal length lens is required for sensor #2 to maintain the same perspective as sensor #1 and the aperture required to maintain the same depth of field as sensor #1.
Here's a different Cambridge in Colour depth of field calculator for calculating the depth of field based on the focusing distance:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/dof-calculator.htm
Jan 11, 2015 15:17:34 #
kayakbob
Loc: Placerville, CA
I have been doing some light reading on sensor technology since my initial posting.
This is what I have learned so far.
As a general rule of thumb, larger senors have larger photosites, which typically have greater Dynamic Range as well as better Image Quality and less noise at the same ISO setting than smaller sensors.
They also typically are better for large prints.
The larger sensors do have less DOF and coresponding lower pixel density per unit area.
It is the increased Dynamic Range, Higher IQ, and Higher Shutter Sync Speeds (Leaf Shutters) that is fueling the interest in Medium Format Digital photography, as well as there increasing affordability (comparative to a few years ago).
Bob
This is what I have learned so far.
As a general rule of thumb, larger senors have larger photosites, which typically have greater Dynamic Range as well as better Image Quality and less noise at the same ISO setting than smaller sensors.
They also typically are better for large prints.
The larger sensors do have less DOF and coresponding lower pixel density per unit area.
It is the increased Dynamic Range, Higher IQ, and Higher Shutter Sync Speeds (Leaf Shutters) that is fueling the interest in Medium Format Digital photography, as well as there increasing affordability (comparative to a few years ago).
Bob
Jan 11, 2015 15:33:22 #
I believe you will find the slight differences in DOF would be insignificant for landscape work since your focus will be quite far out. For closer work, the difference can be more noticeable, but except for dedicated pixel-peepers, not all that significant.
Jan 11, 2015 16:30:48 #
kayakbob wrote:
I have been doing some light reading on sensor technology since my initial posting.
This is what I have learned so far....
It is the increased Dynamic Range, Higher IQ, and Higher Shutter Sync Speeds (Leaf Shutters) that is fueling the interest in Medium Format Digital photography, as well as there increasing affordability ...
This is what I have learned so far....
It is the increased Dynamic Range, Higher IQ, and Higher Shutter Sync Speeds (Leaf Shutters) that is fueling the interest in Medium Format Digital photography, as well as there increasing affordability ...
The difference in performance between the $23500 Hasselblad and my $5000 nikon is so small that i think i'll stay with 35mm for a while longer.
Jan 12, 2015 07:57:32 #
Compare the difference here:
http://us3.campaign-archive1.com/?u=95da8abf00e2423ae3431cb00&id=3de831fd10&e=eba4c38d47
Its Nikon's lens simulator site - you can choose whatever combination of camera and lens that Nikon makes and see the result; for zoom lenses you can move the focal length to whatever you want
http://us3.campaign-archive1.com/?u=95da8abf00e2423ae3431cb00&id=3de831fd10&e=eba4c38d47
Its Nikon's lens simulator site - you can choose whatever combination of camera and lens that Nikon makes and see the result; for zoom lenses you can move the focal length to whatever you want
Jan 12, 2015 10:33:02 #
Since I shoot landscapes at the lowest ISO and on a tripod with a wire release and a 2 second delay I find no difference between crop or full frame except for the angle of view of the same lens depending on the body
Jan 12, 2015 12:56:01 #
Bob, I feel the difference depends on how critical you want to be and how large you plan on making prints. With your Canon 7D II and a 10-22mm lens, you are capturing about the same as with a 5D III with a 16-35mm lens. So which is sharper ... the 16-35mm lens on a full sensor body. Which has better color ... the 16-35mm lens on a full sensor body. Which is more expensive ... the 16-35mm lens and the full sensor body. Is it worth the difference? How critical do you wish to be? I'm fortunate in that I have both set-ups, but I'm a "pro" and can justify it. If I didn't have a full sensor body and the 16-35mm lens, I'd be very pleased with my 7D II with the 10-22mm lens. Best, J. Goffe
Jan 12, 2015 13:05:05 #
mborn wrote:
Since I shoot landscapes at the lowest ISO and on a tripod with a wire release and a 2 second delay I find no difference between crop or full frame except for the angle of view of the same lens depending on the body
Ditto Ditto Ditto
Jan 12, 2015 13:19:30 #
One comparison between DX and FX format is resolution. The DX sensor is sampling a smaller portion of the image circle, and may be doing so with the same number of pixels. The resolution limits of a lens will be exceeded more by the DX sensor than by the FX sensor.
As a comparison, comparing DXOMark scores for the Nikon D610 and D7100 on the Nikon 14mm f/2.8D ED lens; the D610 has sharpness of 13P-Mpix while the D7100 has sharpness of 10P-Mpix. Thats a 30% improvement in sharpness with the FX sensor.
For long telephoto lenses, the FX will lose less than 10% sharpness with a 1.4x TC, but that TC will bring the FX up to about the reach of the DX (which loses 30%).
It is possible to achieve better or at least comparable resolution with a DX camera using DX lenses than with FX lenses, at a substantial savings (FX lenses cost 3-4 times DX lenses). Although the FX lenses also will come with faster aperture (and thus improved focus, edge sharpness, etc.).
The main thing is that using FX lenses on DX bodies is a major cost and with little or no benefit.
As a comparison, comparing DXOMark scores for the Nikon D610 and D7100 on the Nikon 14mm f/2.8D ED lens; the D610 has sharpness of 13P-Mpix while the D7100 has sharpness of 10P-Mpix. Thats a 30% improvement in sharpness with the FX sensor.
For long telephoto lenses, the FX will lose less than 10% sharpness with a 1.4x TC, but that TC will bring the FX up to about the reach of the DX (which loses 30%).
It is possible to achieve better or at least comparable resolution with a DX camera using DX lenses than with FX lenses, at a substantial savings (FX lenses cost 3-4 times DX lenses). Although the FX lenses also will come with faster aperture (and thus improved focus, edge sharpness, etc.).
The main thing is that using FX lenses on DX bodies is a major cost and with little or no benefit.
Jan 13, 2015 06:22:45 #
I own the sony a-200,a-550, and a-850. with the same lens the only difference I discern is from the different pixel counts.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.