Should I consider crop factor when composing shots on DX camera? (Page 2): :sm24: :sm24: :sm24:...

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

MT Shooter wrote:

Simply.....no. What you see is exactly what you will get, either through the viewfinder, or in Live View.

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

Crop factor is really no more than a comparison of a DX to a 35 mm. The are ways to take it into account for some people, but when it comes to taking your photos, compose and shoot. For the average person (that's me) you can ignore it.

WYSIWYG...

ChrisKet wrote:

UHH Community - I'm a grandma who has been shootin... (show quote)

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

ChrisKet wrote:

UHH Community - I'm a grandma who has been shootin... (show quote)

Sounds to me like you are doing just fine. Some people do not shoot the shot as composed in the camera; these people like to take a wide shot and then move in for some portion of the scene and crop as needed. I usually favor the compose the scene and then shoot method. However, if using a full frame and I'm photographing animals I will know that I am going to crop the sides as the full frame adds too much scenic in the composed photo.

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

MT Shooter wrote:

Simply.....no. What you see is exactly what you will get, either through the viewfinder, or in Live View.

ChrisKet Loc: Orange, CA

Thank you for all your responses. This all makes much more sense to me now!

Wmetcalf Loc: Rogersville, Mo

ChrisKet wrote:

UHH Community - I'm a grandma who has been shootin... (show quote)

Don’t worry about crop factor. What you see in the viewfinder is what you get in the photo.

paulrph1 Loc: Washington, Utah

Wmetcalf wrote:

Don’t worry about crop factor. What you see in the viewfinder is what you get in the photo.

Poppycock!

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

paulrph1 wrote:

Poppycock!

The first person to reply in this thread owns a camera store, so there's a good chance he knows what he is talking about. You are stuck on aspect ratio or some other misunderstanding.

paulrph1 Loc: Washington, Utah

Linda From Maine wrote:

The first person to reply in this thread owns a camera store, so there's a good chance he knows what he is talking about. You are stuck on aspect ratio or some other misunderstanding.

I know better. If I went to camera store and he told me that I would find a new store.
If what you say is the case we would never need cropping. So why the question.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

paulrph1 wrote:

I know better. If I went to camera store and he told me that I would find a new store.
If what you say is the case we would never need cropping. So why the question.

Crop factor and aspect ratio are two different animals.

Crop factor is a term used to describe differences among digital cameras because not all digital cameras have the same sensor size. With 35 mm film a 50 mm lens is a 50 mm lens. But digital cameras aren't like that. What is seen through a 50 mm lens on a crop sensor camera is not the same as what is seen through the same lens on a full frame camera.

Aspect ratio: if you are shooting a camera that has a 3:2 aspect ratio, then you are exactly right, you can not make an 8x10 print without losing some of the original composition.

Here is more information on the terms:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_factor
https://digital-photography-school.com/aspect-ratio-what-it-is-and-why-it-matters/

.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

ChrisKet wrote:

UHH Community - I'm a grandma who has been shootin... (show quote)

If you are looking through the viewfinder on the DX camera, that is what you are going to shoot.. crop factor is what you see in the viewfinder. Don't make it more difficult than it is.

one shot Loc: Pisgah Forest NC

May I make a suggestion. Take a couple of pictures using a close-up and a shot further away. Then, using the cropping tool in your computer, see what happens when cropping to different sizes (5x5, 8x10, 4x6, 5x7, ect.). I try to leave a little "wiggle room" when shooting, especially with close -ups.

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

The only time I think about the the DX vs FX factor is when I consider buying a lens. Once you have the gear, the whole issue is settled by looking in your viewfinder or using Liveview. I used DX to advantage in Africa on Safari because it multiplied the effective range for the camera for my long lenses. The FX gave me higher IQ for the details when I needed it. 'Nuf Said.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

MT Shooter wrote:

Simply.....no. What you see is exactly what you will get, either through the viewfinder, or in Live View.

Ditto!

paulrph1 Loc: Washington, Utah

Linda From Maine wrote:

Crop factor and aspect ratio are two different animals.

Crop factor is a term used to describe differences among digital cameras because not all digital cameras have the same sensor size. With 35 mm film a 50 mm lens is a 50 mm lens. But digital cameras aren't like that. What is seen through a 50 mm lens on a crop sensor camera is not the same as what is seen through the same lens on a full frame camera.

Aspect ratio: if you are shooting a camera that has a 3:2 aspect ratio, then you are exactly right, you can not make an 8x10 print without losing some of the original composition.

Here is more information on the terms:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_factor
https://digital-photography-school.com/aspect-ratio-what-it-is-and-why-it-matters/
Since I owned a D90 and Now a D750 and have been shooting film since I was 18 and am now 71, I have had much experience. My D90 experience was FF and Dx both depending on the lens. But my FF is strictly FF lens. The D90 was 85% of field of view of the FF but it still did not give you what you saw thru the view finder. What I saw was less then what was taken.
The point is what you see in the view finder does match the results you get. They are automatically cropped in the processing. There is a difference from the 35mm and what is printed. I had go to several printers who would print the 35mm the way that it came out without cropping if I would have cropped the two people on the ends would have only been half a person with an 8x10, 16x20 and even a 16x24. The actual size of the print was 16x25.5. I just measured it. One can do what they want but I am trying to save some people some time and money.
Here is my experience and it suggests to allow for cropping on a FF camera.
That I understand. But what you are dealing with is what you have to work with originally. What happened to me is we took some photo at a family reunion and no cropping was allowed for so we could not do the 16x20 or other but I have pay extra to get a custom frame to actually fit the 35mm frame size. No big deal other than some figuring and extra expense. But then again there was actually another factor and that when it came to getting the prints made. I had to have custom lab make the photo and it was not standard.
If we would have allow for cropping that would not have been an issue either way, printing or framing. So what you just told me is that when you shoot you should allow for cropping and that is what I said.
Most labs that I visited, Costco, etc all wanted to print 16x20 and that simply would not work. I was lucky in my small town to find a printer that do what was required.
There are so many variables in photography and my experience tells me to allow. Why does it hurt to allow for cropping?
Crop factor and aspect ratio we can split hairs all day long but what matters in the end is the results that we have to deal with. I believe that is what the OP has been asking.

.

Crop b factor /b and aspect ratio are two differ... (show quote)