Question Regarding Full-Frame vs APS-C Sensor
Feb 22, 2014 07:19:21 #
steve_stoneblossom
Loc: Rhode Island, USA
The issue of "pixel quality" seems a pertinent one. Not to use any one source for such a decision, but Snapsort comparison shows the Sony A99 with superior picture quality:
http://snapsort.com/compare/Sony-A77-vs-Sony-SLT-A99/specs
The only distinct advantage the A77 shows is the 12fps maximum shooting speed, versus 6fps for the A99. Otherwise, color depth, dynamic range, ISO all go to A99.
http://snapsort.com/compare/Sony-A77-vs-Sony-SLT-A99/specs
The only distinct advantage the A77 shows is the 12fps maximum shooting speed, versus 6fps for the A99. Otherwise, color depth, dynamic range, ISO all go to A99.
Feb 22, 2014 07:25:08 #
Psergel - thanks for posting - that is what I have been saying all along. There are lots of factors that provide the impression of image quality.
Feb 22, 2014 07:27:24 #
DaveHam
Loc: Reading UK
Hi Lukan
Where are you going on safari? In some places you will find a long lens an advantage, in others it is a disadvantage.
If you are on the plains, say Kalahari, Serengeti or the Masai you are in open land and here a long lens is very useful. Even so viewing of some animals, such as lion, often take place with the animals in close to you. Where there is a lot of bush and the game is close to you 400mm may be too long.
A lot of game viewing takes place at dawn and dusk, when light is a problem. A fast lens on an FX camera provides a better all round combination at these times. You may find that you will need as high an ISO level as your camera will produce acceptable results at in order to be able to shoot at the sort of aperture / speed that you will need. The A99 has a better high ISO capability than the A77 I think?
A final point, a lot of these areas are very, very dusty. Swapping lenses while out of camp can result in a lot of dust particles getting in to the body. A lot of visitors use two bodies, one set up for long, one for mid range to get over this.
Where are you going on safari? In some places you will find a long lens an advantage, in others it is a disadvantage.
If you are on the plains, say Kalahari, Serengeti or the Masai you are in open land and here a long lens is very useful. Even so viewing of some animals, such as lion, often take place with the animals in close to you. Where there is a lot of bush and the game is close to you 400mm may be too long.
A lot of game viewing takes place at dawn and dusk, when light is a problem. A fast lens on an FX camera provides a better all round combination at these times. You may find that you will need as high an ISO level as your camera will produce acceptable results at in order to be able to shoot at the sort of aperture / speed that you will need. The A99 has a better high ISO capability than the A77 I think?
A final point, a lot of these areas are very, very dusty. Swapping lenses while out of camp can result in a lot of dust particles getting in to the body. A lot of visitors use two bodies, one set up for long, one for mid range to get over this.
Check out Commercial and Industrial Photography section of our forum.
Feb 22, 2014 07:37:29 #
ole sarg
Loc: south florida
A 400 mm lens is a 400 mm lens and it does not become a 600mm lens because of the size of the sensor.
I do not believe the megapixels you lose are those which you keep in the crop from a ff camera. what you lose is what you crop out.
Lastly, will you be cropping every image? If not, you lose what you gain and gain what you lose!
I do not believe the megapixels you lose are those which you keep in the crop from a ff camera. what you lose is what you crop out.
Lastly, will you be cropping every image? If not, you lose what you gain and gain what you lose!
Feb 22, 2014 07:39:08 #
MT Shooter wrote:
If you crop the full frame 24MP images to the APS-C crop sensor size you will have images taken with a 10.8MP sensor. The A77 will give better results in this particular instance.
MT, question, wouldn't the early morning and late afternoon shots on the full frame be better, even if cropping was required? Bob.
Feb 22, 2014 07:46:02 #
lukan wrote:
Really? What I'm specifically asking about is som... (show quote)
With a full-frame sensor, the sensor's pixels will be larger, less crammed together, and able to gather more information. Noise may or may not be an issue, depending upon the light available and the quality of the sensor. Both the cameras you mentioned have first-rate sensors. I would go for the full-frame A99 or one of the newer full-frame cameras. While Photoshop and PS Essentials have average ability to deal with noise, I would choose a separate and more full-featured program like Noiseware.
Feb 22, 2014 08:06:18 #
Bob - my experience is that the FF images of wildlife taken in less than optimum light are nearly always better than anything I took with crop camera. Especially since nearly every image of wildlife gets cropped anyway. Cropping a cropped sensor image degrades the image more than cropping FF.
Check out Photo Critique Section section of our forum.
Feb 22, 2014 08:11:40 #
If you own full frame, shoot in full frame. Why compromise the quality of your gear?
Feb 22, 2014 08:18:37 #
lukan
Loc: Chicago, IL
amehta wrote:
That's more because the 6D is a current camera, and the 50D is 2 generations old. You had two variables in this experiment. :-)
Comparing the 6D and the 70D would be a better test. Or for Nikons, the D7100 and the D610.
Comparing the 6D and the 70D would be a better test. Or for Nikons, the D7100 and the D610.
In my case, it would be the A99 and the A77 (both by Sony), both comparable to the aforementioned Nikon and Canon models.
Feb 22, 2014 08:20:29 #
Gene51 wrote:
Bob - my experience is that the FF images of wildlife taken in less than optimum light are nearly always better than anything I took with crop camera. Especially since nearly every image of wildlife gets cropped anyway. Cropping a cropped sensor image degrades the image more than cropping FF.
As I expected
Feb 22, 2014 08:29:24 #
Go full frame sensor. It will handle higher ISO will less noise for other shots during your trip.
Check out Smartphone Photography section of our forum.
Feb 22, 2014 08:32:29 #
lukan
Loc: Chicago, IL
DaveHam wrote:
Hi Lukan br br Where are you going on safari? In ... (show quote)
I've heard that several people are taking two of the same bodies for exactly the reason you mentioned: DUST. I'm now seriously considering taking TWO A99s! I bought the A99 specifically for the FF effect (everything mentioned by everyone here in this thread), and I greatly appreciate everyone's input.
I never realized just how many very intelligent and photographically "smart" and experienced shooters there are out there! And this UHH is one heck of a solid resource.
Thank you, all!
Feb 22, 2014 08:47:52 #
I am an experienced wildlife photographer, hence the avatar. I have an 800mm and a 400mm Canon lens, and shoot FF. I am considering changing them for one of the new 200-400 1.4X lenses for my next safari. The decision has nothing to do with image quality, almost any lens body combination can give you enough quality to work with in post. The question is, can you get the shot you want.
As I always point out to people who ask about buying lenses, you can almost always move forwards, but often times you can't move back. In the case of wildlife photos, cropping can always take you closer, but you can't move backwards, and when an animal suddenly comes towards you giving you the great shot you wanted, finding that you have too long a lens on to get the whole of the animal in can ruin your day. Do questions at the pixel level matter if the animal's head is cut off?
Shooting with the FF and cropping gives you something of a zoom effect, which for me would be valuable.
As I always point out to people who ask about buying lenses, you can almost always move forwards, but often times you can't move back. In the case of wildlife photos, cropping can always take you closer, but you can't move backwards, and when an animal suddenly comes towards you giving you the great shot you wanted, finding that you have too long a lens on to get the whole of the animal in can ruin your day. Do questions at the pixel level matter if the animal's head is cut off?
Shooting with the FF and cropping gives you something of a zoom effect, which for me would be valuable.
Feb 22, 2014 08:54:05 #
TheDman wrote:
You would be exactly right. You're concentrating all 24 megapixels of info in the space you want, rather than only 12 or so. Thus you'll have more detail in the final image.
Correct!
Feb 22, 2014 09:00:48 #
charles brown wrote:
MT - while what you say seems logical I can't help... (show quote)
First, anytime you throw away almost 60% of your image you are sacrificing image, quality as well as printability.
Second, you have been reading too much crap from Canon used as excuses for not producing higher MP sensors.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Smartphone Photography section of our forum.