frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

It doesn't crop the image, it only can see a smaller part of the landscape etc because the sensor is smaller, than a full frame one. When you look through the view finder, you do not see a larger picture, then the camera takes a smaller one. What you see is what you get, no cropping.

You are right, people look at it different, because they do not really understand the comparison. That's all it is, a comparison.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

It's why they're called crop cameras, Frank.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I like my 5DM4 better than I did the 7DMII for BIF even though you have to give up that faster shutter.

Fotomacher Loc: Toronto

I don’t know how many mp’s the bodies under consideration have, but my experience is that you’ll get a better final image by utilizing the sensor in the camera vs cropping the image in post. HOWEVER, I did have a D300s that I was using with my SLR and FX lenses. When I starting shooting with a D810 and cropping, my final images were better. But that’s because the D300s has a 12mp sensor and my D810 in DX mode casts the image onto 16mp of the sensor.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

There was just an excellent post on this.
A Canon 300mm w/teleconverter showing no loss of quality.
Does not matter if it is 1.4x or 2x.
Other brands might have issues as many have stated but the MIII Canon converters with the matched lenses absolutely no problem.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

I have a friend that shoots the Canon 5D mark IV with the canon 100-400 II with a 1.4 for wildlife. When we shoot birds in flight or just birds it is all about EFFECTIVE MEGAPIXELS. That is, try to get the subject to fill the frame without cropping and in this way your maximizing the number of pixels on the subject. In this way even though your shooting with a cropped sensor or full sensor camera you are filling the frame without the need to crop which is very preferable to cropping because you can loose a lot of pixels that way. So, fine a camera and lens combo that can fill the frame with your subject and minimize cropping.

wishaw

All very interesting. I wonder what ansel Adams or Cartier bresson's comment would be.

WJShaheen Loc: Gold Canyon, AZ

Exactly. I've often thought the term should be "zoom factor".

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I do not have this exact gear but I am a Canon shooter. Since this thread seems to be ranging far afield (as usual !) I will give my educated opinion. Monitor viewing of the image qualities should be very equal except in lower light where the FF should become better and also with larger prints where the FF should become better. But, also, AF of fast moving subjects should be better with 7D.

..

BlueMorel Loc: Southwest Michigan

Good explanation. They don't call it a crop sensor camera for nothing. Those of us who use one know our camera has its limitations and work within its parameters.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

No. It captures an image on its full sensor. The image projected by any lens is round. Unless you have a round sensor, you are never capturing the full image projected by a lens.

RRS Loc: Not sure

Oh so true!

ecurb1105

That's why I call APSC sensors half frame cameras. And MFT sensor cameras quarter frame cameras. But I started photography in the 1960s when 35mm full frame was still considered minature format!

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

A Canon 7D Mark II is 20MP (...or, an 80D is 24MP in the same APS-C format).

A Canon 5D Mark IV is 30MP..... but if you crop the image to match the 1.6X of APS-C (regardless whether it's done in camera or in post), you end up with roughly 12MP.

Some years ago we actually tested it with earlier models of cameras (APS-C 18MP original 7D versus a full frame 21MP 5D Mk II).... used the same lens to shoot the same subject from the same distance, and then cropped the full frame camera image to match the APS-C camera's... which in effect reduced the 21MP camera to only about 8MP.... and the crop camera's image was clearly superior.

So there's actually more resolution to be had, simply by using one of APS-C cameras for "extra telephoto reach". And that's without any of the "light loss penalty" of a teleconverter.

Adding a teleconverter to the equation complicates things. Some combos work very well. Following was shot with 21MP full frame 5DII, EF 300mm f/4L IS lens and EF 1.4X II Extender (enlarged detail on right, due to the limitations of Internet sizes and resolutions)....



And here's the same lens on the same camera, without any teleconverter (image is somewhat cropped from original.... enlarged details from image on right, the bird's eye shows a magenta highlight tint that's typical of this lens)....



Below is the same lens & Extender combo on a 20MP APS-C 7D Mk II (sorry, no enlarged detail avail.)...



And below is the lens alone... no TC.... on the same 7DII (also no enl. detail avail.)...



Teleconverter/lens results vary depending upon the exact combo. Canon's own Extenders are very good and work quite well with most of their more premium zooms and primes. But due to the Extenders' protruding front element, can't even be fitted to some of the more "consumer oriented" zooms. Canon recommends using their Extenders only with the 70-200, 100-400 and 200-400mm zooms, and with the primes 135mm and longer.

Third party teleconverters from Kenko, Sigma and Tamron do not have protruding front elements, so are usable on more lenses (some recent Kenko TCs are even designed to be able to fit EF-S lenses... though aside from the 55-250mm, why anyone would want to do so with most EF-S lenses remains a question... Canon Extenders cannot be used with any EF-S lenses at all). But image quality may take a big hit, depending upon the exact combo of 3rd party TC and lens. Some lenses simply don't work well with teleconverters... especially more complex and wide range zooms. A teleconverter never "improves" images quality... there's always some loss (less with a weaker 1.4X than with stronger 2X). A lens that has very high image quality on it's own will tolerate a teleconverter better than a lens with marginal IQ.

There also can be some slowing of autofocus and reduced effectiveness of image stabilization, when a teleconverter is added to a lens.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Think of it how you will, but when doing a comparison of the images projected on the "full sensor" of the crop camera vs. the images projected on the full frame sensor, the image on the crop camera is, comparatively, cropped. Now, if there were no such thing as a full frame camera then there would be no such thing as a crop camera. However, as the image that I posted previously shows, the field of view of the crop camera is narrower than that of a full frame camera, comparatively, cropping out more of the image projected by the lens than a full frame sensor would. While what you say may be true, talking about a crop camera cropping "in camera" is due to comparison with a full frame camera only.