Full frame vs aps-c
May 9, 2022 09:54:50 #
Longshadow wrote:
Sounds like a logic class I once took... One or the other or both.....
May 9, 2022 14:13:05 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
Timothy S wrote:
By the way, my crop sensor crops out 37.5% of the frame, which is a lot, but much better than many cameras. I do enjoy the reach it gives me with my wildlife photography emphasis.
What are you shooting with?
I don't know where you got that figure, but you have to compare area to area.
So-called "full frame" cameras produce a 24x36mm image, that's 864 square millimeters.
An "APS-C" camera from Nikon, Sony, Fuji, Pentax uses a sensor that's 15.6x23.7mm, or approx. 369 sq. mm.... or 57.3% smaller than "full frame".
A Canon APS-C camera uses a slightly smaller 14.9x22.3mm or approx. 332 sq. mm. That's 61.6% smaller than "full frame".
The third common type of crop sensor is Micro 4/3 used in Olympus and Panasonic. it's 13x17.3mm or about 224 sq. mm. That's over 70% smaller than FF.
If the FF camera is 24MP...
Cropping a 24MP full frame image down to APS-C (Nikon, Sony, etc.) size reduces it to 10.25MP.
Cropping that FF image down to Canon APS-C size reduces the image to 9.22MP.
Cropping the FF image down to Micro 4/3 size reduces only leaves about 7.2MP.
Or you can get a 24MP APS-C camera, with more than double the resolution of cropping a 24MP FF image to APS-C... or a 24MP M4/3 camera offers more than triple the resolution of cropping a 24MP image to M4/3.
May 9, 2022 19:30:42 #
Timothy S wrote:
I am wondering how a crop sensor image would compare with the same image taken with the same lens and distance on a full frame camera, manually cropped to the same extent. Does that result in the same resolution and IQ?
Here we go once again
May 9, 2022 19:42:31 #
There is no comparison. When I admire the wonders of a sunset or the beauty of the moon, my soul expands knowing I captured it with a full-frame camera.
May 9, 2022 21:37:43 #
bikinkawboy
Loc: north central Missouri
Any one ever tear apart an old digital compact camera? My old Kodak was approximately 2mp I think. The sensor was something like 3/8” x 1/4”. Like 6x9mm? The credit card sized jobs are a bit smaller.
May 10, 2022 22:20:58 #
PHRubin wrote:
NO! Cropping throws away more than 1/2 the individual elements (pixels) of a photo. For Canon the factor is 1.6 in both length and width so that means it leaves 1/(1.6 X 1.6) = 0.39 or only 39% of the original ones.
As previously mentioned, if both cameras are of similar pixel count, the full frame camera's pixels are much larger and so have a better signal to noise ratio, or, putting it another way, add less noise to the photo.
As previously mentioned, if both cameras are of similar pixel count, the full frame camera's pixels are much larger and so have a better signal to noise ratio, or, putting it another way, add less noise to the photo.
i think you explained it ,perfectly, i was wondering too
May 13, 2022 08:39:33 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
If your sensor throws away 50% of the frame, how will you ever achieve your potential as a photographer?
Switch to Canon and only lose 40% of the frame?
May 13, 2022 08:45:16 #
mikeroetex wrote:
Switch to Canon and only lose 40% of the frame?
The 1.6x EOS crop factor makes it the other way ...
May 13, 2022 08:56:48 #
Gene51 wrote:
There is a lot to unpack, and there is more, but I didn't want to be responsible for your head exploding.
LOL 
May 13, 2022 09:00:12 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
The 1.6x EOS crop factor makes it the other way ...
See? That’s why I left crop sensors. Of course, my Dad and his Hasselblad doesn’t understand “full frame!”
May 13, 2022 09:18:03 #
mikeroetex wrote:
See? That’s why I left crop sensors. Of course, my Dad and his Hasselblad doesn’t understand “full frame!”
'because the Hassy is a crop with the crop factor less than 1.
May 13, 2022 09:20:31 #
mikeroetex wrote:
See? That’s why I left crop sensors. Of course, my Dad and his Hasselblad doesn’t understand “full frame!”
Thats funny... Tell your Dad that my little DP2 Merrill with APS-C sensor and only not much larger than a pack of cigarettes will rival ANY Hassy image you can DISPLAY on this site... This is not a Hasselblad dig but just a practical statement for all the non professionals who don't enlarge and post on sites like FB with it's compression... You don't need the big clunkers for normal postings.
May 13, 2022 09:26:38 #
Ysarex
Loc: St. Louis
MrBob wrote:
Thats funny... Tell your Dad that my little DP2 Merrill with APS-C sensor and only not much larger than a pack of cigarettes will rival ANY Hassy image you can DISPLAY on this site... This is not a Hasselblad dig but just a practical statement for all the non professionals who don't enlarge and do not post on the internet with it's compression...
The Internet does not have compression.
MrBob wrote:
You don't need the big clunkers for normal postings.
May 13, 2022 09:40:45 #
Sorry Ysarex... I stand corrected. I was thinking of Facebook as my fingers got away from me... I edited my post to reflect my mishap... Thank you.
May 13, 2022 19:40:10 #
DPFotoZ
Loc: Woodruff, SC USA
Great answer! I feel a D500 can hold it's own with many of the more expensive and newer cameras out there. JMO
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.