crop vs full with 1.4x
Oct 19, 2018 17:22:30 #
I stopped using "Crop Sensor" to describe the APS-C sensors. The sensor sizes are what they are--and therefore DEFINE the format of the camera Body just like in the Film Daze. Although I have no FUll Frame (another misnomer) DSLR's, I have upgraded my APS-C camera from 16 to 24 Megapixels. This leaves me with more MPIX (DATA) per image and therefore, more room to "crop-in" and not get unacceptable or unusable image degradation when the resulting image is enlarged to full size or printed larger than 8x12.
The OP has the tools to solve this problem in his own hands and eyes. I suggest he take a controlled set of images with both cameras and the lens with and without the adapter and decide for himself. I suggest that the resulting images be printed at varying sizes across the range the user actually anticipates he will reproduce the images. The results are STRICTLY in the eye of the beholder. I do not suspect we're dealing with a photographer who exhibits in juried shows or at demanding galleries or museums. But it is not unlikely that the photographer's standards may exceed those of the experts. It is his camera and HIS jollies derived from photography. PERIOD.
I think that all he was looking to the community for was a little conventional wisdom and if lucky, an answer from a similarly situated member who had germaine direct experiences. A fair enough expectation for this forum.
C
The OP has the tools to solve this problem in his own hands and eyes. I suggest he take a controlled set of images with both cameras and the lens with and without the adapter and decide for himself. I suggest that the resulting images be printed at varying sizes across the range the user actually anticipates he will reproduce the images. The results are STRICTLY in the eye of the beholder. I do not suspect we're dealing with a photographer who exhibits in juried shows or at demanding galleries or museums. But it is not unlikely that the photographer's standards may exceed those of the experts. It is his camera and HIS jollies derived from photography. PERIOD.
I think that all he was looking to the community for was a little conventional wisdom and if lucky, an answer from a similarly situated member who had germaine direct experiences. A fair enough expectation for this forum.
C
Oct 20, 2018 04:04:59 #
whitehall
Loc: Canada
I think the fallacy in this discussion is the assumption that one would wish to crop the captured image to the size of a cropsensor. I would have thought that one uses a full frame percisely because one whishes to have more information, and perhaps more dynamic range comparing a 5D mk4 and an 80 D.
Oct 20, 2018 13:38:00 #
whitehall wrote:
I think the fallacy in this discussion is the assumption that one would wish to crop the captured image to the size of a cropsensor. I would have thought that one uses a full frame percisely because one whishes to have more information, and perhaps more dynamic range comparing a 5D mk4 and an 80 D.
That is only true for a limited number of high pixel count full frames. Many have about the same number as their APS-C counterparts. The 5D MK III had 22.3 Mp But the problem starts when you need great reach. Long lenses on full frame cameras become rather heavy. You get much more reach with the same lens on an APS-C body.
Oct 20, 2018 14:51:09 #
SteveR wrote:
It's why they're called crop cameras, Frank.
No no no....... They are called crop sensors because they take a smaller photo, compared to a 35mm or FF camera. It does not crop the photo. It takes a photo that appears like a FF photo that has been cropped by the crop factor. But the camera does not crop. It is strictly a comparison.
Oct 21, 2018 13:34:44 #
[quote=frankraney]No no no....... They are called crop sensors because they take a smaller photo, compared to a 35mm or FF camera. ...
Really? It is all semantics. How is the photo smaller? If I compare a photo from a 5D MK III at ~22 Mpixel with one from an 80D at ~24Mpixel, which is smaller? But with the same lens, the photo by the 80D has a FIELD OF VIEW that is smaller while the resolution is larger.
Really? It is all semantics. How is the photo smaller? If I compare a photo from a 5D MK III at ~22 Mpixel with one from an 80D at ~24Mpixel, which is smaller? But with the same lens, the photo by the 80D has a FIELD OF VIEW that is smaller while the resolution is larger.
Oct 21, 2018 16:05:04 #
whitehall
Loc: Canada
My point was that if one changes the field of view with a zoom or by approaching the subject, and thereby duplicate the image on the “crop” the IQ will be superior.
Oct 21, 2018 16:08:19 #
whitehall wrote:
My point was that if one changes the field of view with a zoom or by approaching the subject, and thereby duplicate the image on the “crop” the IQ will be superior.
But if one needs extra reach on a FF they crop.
Oct 21, 2018 21:47:29 #
[quote=PHRubin]
Oops. I meant on a smaller sensor.
frankraney wrote:
No no no....... They are called crop sensors because they take a smaller photo, compared to a 35mm or FF camera. ...
Really? It is all semantics. How is the photo smaller? If I compare a photo from a 5D MK III at ~22 Mpixel with one from an 80D at ~24Mpixel, which is smaller? But with the same lens, the photo by the 80D has a FIELD OF VIEW that is smaller while the resolution is larger.
Really? It is all semantics. How is the photo smaller? If I compare a photo from a 5D MK III at ~22 Mpixel with one from an 80D at ~24Mpixel, which is smaller? But with the same lens, the photo by the 80D has a FIELD OF VIEW that is smaller while the resolution is larger.
Oops. I meant on a smaller sensor.
Oct 22, 2018 09:18:01 #
whitehall wrote:
My point was that if one changes the field of view with a zoom or by approaching the subject, and thereby duplicate the image on the “crop” the IQ will be superior.
If you "approach the subject" you have changed the composition of the photo. The comparison is not longer relevant.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.