Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Performance Difference between APS-C and Full frame digital cameras
Page 1 of 6 next> last>>
Jul 8, 2018 23:42:15   #
Bob Locher Loc: Southwest Oregon
 
First, please, I am NOT trying to start a flame war here. This is an honest inquiry.

I use an APS-C cmaera, a Sony A-6000 camera, which incorporates a sensor that is 23.50mm x 15.60mm in size, and with 24.3 megapixels. I own three prime lens that are pixel limited in resolution.

Full Frame cameras typically use a sensor that is 24 X36 mm. Recent models offer anywhere from about 24 megapixels to about 50 megapixels at the high end.

My question is this - is there any significant performance difference between a camera using an APS-C 24 megapixel sensor, and a full frame camera using 24 megapixel sensor?

Perceived advantage of the APS-C camera:
1) Smaller, and lighter
2) Cheaper
3) Lenses for a given angular field of view are shorter in focal length - .667 X. Lens are lighter and cheaper for a desired aperture.
4) Zoom lenses designed to cover the smaller sensor are lighter, cheaper and usually sharper.

As the old Greek philosopher said, “There ain’t no free lunch.” I do understand there is a modest improvement in low light performance using the larger sensor. But then I do mostly scenics so that advantage is of little value to me. Smaller, lighter and cheaper do mean something to me. What are the advantages to using cameras with the full frame format?

Bob Locher

Reply
Jul 8, 2018 23:58:59   #
AlohaJim Loc: Retired. Hawaii >> N. Arizona.
 
The biggest difference between the Sony A6000-6500 series and a Full Frame DSLR such as Canon, Nikon, is the family of high level quality lenses available. And the flexibility that allows. Of course one can use the Metabones adapter but let's just say "native lenses".
For example: A Canon DSLR with an APSC sensor but with "L" glass might take superior pictures to a Full Frame Canon 5d MKIV with an EF generic lens mounted on it.
Yes, there are compromises. But as far as "image quality". For the most part, a modern DSLR with a full frame sensor and quality glass (such as Nikon or Canon "L" glass) is without peer in its class.
But, weigh in other factors such as "for travel", "for compactness", etc, etc, and there's a camera to fit everyone.

jim

Reply
Jul 9, 2018 00:06:09   #
RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA
 
Bob Locher wrote:
First, please, I am NOT trying to start a flame war here. This is an honest inquiry.

I use an APS-C cmaera, a Sony A-6000 camera, which incorporates a sensor that is 23.50mm x 15.60mm in size, and with 24.3 megapixels. I own three prime lens that are pixel limited in resolution.

Full Frame cameras typically use a sensor that is 24 X36 mm. Recent models offer anywhere from about 24 megapixels to about 50 megapixels at the high end.

My question is this - is there any significant performance difference between a camera using an APS-C 24 megapixel sensor, and a full frame camera using 24 megapixel sensor?

Perceived advantage of the APS-C camera:
1) Smaller, and lighter
2) Cheaper
3) Lenses for a given angular field of view are shorter in focal length - .667 X. Lens are lighter and cheaper for a desired aperture.
4) Zoom lenses designed to cover the smaller sensor are lighter, cheaper and usually sharper.

As the old Greek philosopher said, “There ain’t no free lunch.” I do understand there is a modest improvement in low light performance using the larger sensor. But then I do mostly scenics so that advantage is of little value to me. Smaller, lighter and cheaper do mean something to me. What are the advantages to using cameras with the full frame format?

Bob Locher
First, please, I am NOT trying to start a flame wa... (show quote)

For a given reproduction size, the smaller the sensor, the more magnification is required. The greater the magnification, the more the image quality is degraded.

Reply
 
 
Jul 9, 2018 00:19:36   #
robertjerl Loc: Corona, California
 
The low light performance can be more than moderate in favor of the FF sensor.
In very good light the APS-C because of its smaller pixels can show more detail and look sharper. That goes for macro also.
If you fill the frame and don't do much cropping the FF will do better making large prints. What is large? Most will say 16x20 and up.

But with either the shots will look good on a computer monitor or projected.

And of course you can do multiple shots and stitch them together to get images that look good at huge sizes with either size sensor.

But as stated for most photographers the biggest advantage is the larger selection of lenses. With a brand that makes both APS-C and FF cameras but have the same lens mount then the APS-C suddenly has the larger selection of lenses because it can use both lines of lenses. However when you put a FF lens on an APS-C body they do not magically get smaller and lighter.
A Canon SL1 or it's successor the SL2 (made to be the smallest and lightest DSLRs on the market) on one of the huge pro level tele lenses does look a bit funny.

If you are happy with the results of your camera, enjoy. Maybe upgrade to the newer version of the body if you like.

Reply
Jul 9, 2018 00:25:31   #
Bob Locher Loc: Southwest Oregon
 
But I can - and do - use some of the same lenses as the full frame cameras do. The Sigma 30 mm f1.4 or the Sony 85mm f1.8 are some of the highest rated lenses on DXO, and used on the APS-C camera they are equivalent of 45 mm and 137 mm lenses.

As to having to blow up a half frame image with the same pixel count as the full frame image, I honestly do not believe it is as simple as saying it requires twice the magnification to achieve the same result. But I lack the math and physics and understanding to convincingly argue that.

I am hoping someone here does...

Reply
Jul 9, 2018 00:36:42   #
Vietnam Vet
 
a full frame sensor handles noise better

Reply
Jul 9, 2018 00:47:56   #
JD750 Loc: SoCal
 
Bob Locher wrote:
First, please, I am NOT trying to start a flame war here. This is an honest inquiry.

I use an APS-C cmaera, a Sony A-6000 camera, which incorporates a sensor that is 23.50mm x 15.60mm in size, and with 24.3 megapixels. I own three prime lens that are pixel limited in resolution.

Full Frame cameras typically use a sensor that is 24 X36 mm. Recent models offer anywhere from about 24 megapixels to about 50 megapixels at the high end.

My question is this - is there any significant performance difference between a camera using an APS-C 24 megapixel sensor, and a full frame camera using 24 megapixel sensor?

Perceived advantage of the APS-C camera:
1) Smaller, and lighter
2) Cheaper
3) Lenses for a given angular field of view are shorter in focal length - .667 X. Lens are lighter and cheaper for a desired aperture.
4) Zoom lenses designed to cover the smaller sensor are lighter, cheaper and usually sharper.

As the old Greek philosopher said, “There ain’t no free lunch.” I do understand there is a modest improvement in low light performance using the larger sensor. But then I do mostly scenics so that advantage is of little value to me. Smaller, lighter and cheaper do mean something to me. What are the advantages to using cameras with the full frame format?

Bob Locher
First, please, I am NOT trying to start a flame wa... (show quote)


I suggest that both FF and APS-C formats, both DSLR formats, are at this point, obsolete. Mirrorless formats are the future. And they may or may not be either of those or neither of those.

Reply
 
 
Jul 9, 2018 01:59:16   #
rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
 
Digital camera sensors convert light to electronic signals. The signals are then processed, amplified and converted to binary data. The image is constructed from said data. If two cameras have the same pixel count but one is full frame and one is crop frame, here's the difference. The pixels, the photo sensitive diodes that gather the light, on the full frame are larger than on the crop frame sensor. The larger the pixel, the more light it can gather and convert into a electrical signal. The stronger the signal, the less amplification needed when converting the signal into binary data. Lowering the amount of signal amplification needed, lowers the amount of electronic noise associated with the amplification, thus less noise converted into the binary data.
Another advantage of the larger sensor is the spacing between each pixel. The closer together the more susceptible the pixels are to heat generated noise. Since the full frame pixels are farther apart, less heat related noise.

The newer generation of digital cameras possess very powerful processors. These high speed processors are capable of detecting and differentiating between actual image data and a good bit of the noise data and filtering it out. That's why you can get pretty darn good images at ISO 16000 when in the past the usable ceiling was ISO 1600.

Better diodes in the pixels and better processors converting the signals to data; none of it amounts to a hill of beans if the glass put in front of the sensor is incapable of getting the details in the light to the sensor.

Today's crop cameras with their high end sensors and super fast processors are capable of producing images almost as good as a full frame but they still can't match the larger pixels light gathering ability, that's just simple physics.

Reply
Jul 9, 2018 02:01:45   #
rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
 
JD750 wrote:
I suggest that both FF and APS-C formats, both DSLR formats, are at this point, obsolete. Mirrorless formats are the future. And they may or may not be either of those or neither of those.


The sensors and processors in a DSLR and MILC pretty much work the exact same way.

Reply
Jul 9, 2018 02:11:07   #
AlohaJim Loc: Retired. Hawaii >> N. Arizona.
 
JD750 wrote:
I suggest that both FF and APS-C formats, both DSLR formats, are at this point, obsolete. Mirrorless formats are the future. And they may or may not be either of those or neither of those.

Things are certainly changing fast. Mirrorless technology is evolving exponentially.

Reply
Jul 9, 2018 02:24:17   #
Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak
 
JD750 wrote:
I suggest that both FF and APS-C formats, both DSLR formats, are at this point, obsolete. Mirrorless formats are the future. And they may or may not be either of those or neither of those.


Not exactly. Full frame and APS-C are measurements of sensor size, independent of what kind of camera they are in, so they're not exclusively DSLR formats. Mirrorless cameras may be the way of the future, but sensor size is sensor size.

Reply
 
 
Jul 9, 2018 02:58:36   #
jdub82 Loc: California
 
JD750 wrote:
I suggest that both FF and APS-C formats, both DSLR formats, are at this point, obsolete. Mirrorless formats are the future. And they may or may not be either of those or neither of those.


If i understood the post correctly, The OP currently has a Sony Mirrorless A 6000 APS-C format camera, and is wondering about increased performance in a full frame Mirrorless camera that has the same Megapixel count. The Sony A7 III would match that description, as it is a Sony Mirrorless Full Frame Camera with 24MP. So I don't think this is about DSLR vs. Mirrorless. It is about any increased advantage with a larger sensor which has been addressed in the other responses.

Reply
Jul 9, 2018 03:50:14   #
selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
 
RWR wrote:
For a given reproduction size, the smaller the sensor, the more magnification is required. The greater the magnification, the more the image quality is degraded.

That's pretty much it, in a nutshell.

By the time you reach 24 MP the quality of the image is limited by the quality of the lens - its resolution and its defects.

APS-C magnifies the shortcomings of a lens 1.5x more than full frame.

Reply
Jul 9, 2018 07:00:51   #
Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England
 
Bob Locher wrote:
First, please, I am NOT trying to start a flame war here. This is an honest inquiry.

I use an APS-C cmaera, a Sony A-6000 camera, which incorporates a sensor that is 23.50mm x 15.60mm in size, and with 24.3 megapixels. I own three prime lens that are pixel limited in resolution.

Full Frame cameras typically use a sensor that is 24 X36 mm. Recent models offer anywhere from about 24 megapixels to about 50 megapixels at the high end.

My question is this - is there any significant performance difference between a camera using an APS-C 24 megapixel sensor, and a full frame camera using 24 megapixel sensor?

Perceived advantage of the APS-C camera:
1) Smaller, and lighter
2) Cheaper
3) Lenses for a given angular field of view are shorter in focal length - .667 X. Lens are lighter and cheaper for a desired aperture.
4) Zoom lenses designed to cover the smaller sensor are lighter, cheaper and usually sharper.

As the old Greek philosopher said, “There ain’t no free lunch.” I do understand there is a modest improvement in low light performance using the larger sensor. But then I do mostly scenics so that advantage is of little value to me. Smaller, lighter and cheaper do mean something to me. What are the advantages to using cameras with the full frame format?

Bob Locher
First, please, I am NOT trying to start a flame wa... (show quote)


Up until about a month ago I had been using APS-C and M43 cameras side by side for a number of years. It is my experience that both formats produce excellent results and most of the time are easily comparable with full format. I owned 2 x Canon 70D, a Canon 7D mark II, a Nikon D500, 2 x Olympus EM1 and an Olympus EM1 mark II. As someone who almost exclusively shoots wildlife I found the crop factors for APS-C and M43 a decided advantage. I always used full frame lenses with my APS-C cameras and Pro lenses with my M43 cameras. I recently swapped my D500 and EM1.2 systems for a full frame Sony A7III and Sony lenses - I won't bore you with the reasons as to why I changed to FF. What I will say is, I do obtain better low light images, especially when using the Sony 100 - 400mm G Master. But when using my Sony 28 - 70mm and Sony 90mm f2.8 macro in good light, I really do not see any difference. To qualify my reply; I confess I only ever view my images via a 55" UHDTV. I feel that I have merely changed formats, I do not consider that I have "moved up" to FF, as some would say.

Reply
Jul 9, 2018 07:22:59   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
Bob Locher wrote:
First, please, I am NOT trying to start a flame war here. This is an honest inquiry.

I use an APS-C cmaera, a Sony A-6000 camera, which incorporates a sensor that is 23.50mm x 15.60mm in size, and with 24.3 megapixels. I own three prime lens that are pixel limited in resolution.

Full Frame cameras typically use a sensor that is 24 X36 mm. Recent models offer anywhere from about 24 megapixels to about 50 megapixels at the high end.

My question is this - is there any significant performance difference between a camera using an APS-C 24 megapixel sensor, and a full frame camera using 24 megapixel sensor?

Perceived advantage of the APS-C camera:
1) Smaller, and lighter
2) Cheaper
3) Lenses for a given angular field of view are shorter in focal length - .667 X. Lens are lighter and cheaper for a desired aperture.
4) Zoom lenses designed to cover the smaller sensor are lighter, cheaper and usually sharper.

As the old Greek philosopher said, “There ain’t no free lunch.” I do understand there is a modest improvement in low light performance using the larger sensor. But then I do mostly scenics so that advantage is of little value to me. Smaller, lighter and cheaper do mean something to me. What are the advantages to using cameras with the full frame format?

Bob Locher
First, please, I am NOT trying to start a flame wa... (show quote)


Noise at higher ISO and in poor light is usually a bit higher, and sharpness "can" be lower in the APS-C camera due to magnification for viewing. With the APS-C for the same composition/framing and aperture, the depth of field will be greater because you need to move back, but at the same distance, aperture and focal length, the DoF is shallower because of the greater magnification required to print s specific image size.

It's hard to find an APS-C only long lens - they are nearly all designed for full frame cameras, so the weight advantage may not hold true for the APS-C based on subject material.

Reply
Page 1 of 6 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.