Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Full frame vs aps-c
Page <<first <prev 7 of 7
May 13, 2022 19:49:27   #
DPFotoZ Loc: Woodruff, SC USA
 
Love the come back Timothy!!!

Reply
May 13, 2022 20:28:47   #
lukevaliant Loc: gloucester city,n. j.
 
DPFotoZ wrote:
Great answer! I feel a D500 can hold it's own with many of the more expensive and newer cameras out there. JMO



Reply
May 14, 2022 21:55:52   #
ruzbynik Loc: Victoria BC
 
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?


Dust on a smaller sensor will be more troublesome assuming the same size dust.

Reply
 
 
May 14, 2022 22:15:25   #
ruzbynik Loc: Victoria BC
 
gwilliams6 wrote:
There are a bunch of misconception and wrong conclusions in some of these comments;

Take a minute and refresh yourself to the general facts of this endless debate:

Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras: Which Do You Need?
Updated on December 3rd, 2021

Do you want to know the difference between full frame vs APS-C cameras? Are you struggling to decide which type of camera to buy?

Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras: Which Do You Need?
You’re not alone. Full Frame vs APS-C is a topic that’s been debated for years – with neither option coming out on top.

Because here’s the truth:

While beginners often think they need a full-frame camera to succeed, APS-C cameras can perform better in a number of scenarios. And whether you’ll do better with an APS-C camera or a full frame camera has nothing to do with your level of professionalism. It has to do with your photography needs.

And in this article, I’m going to tell you everything you need to know about two types of cameras APS-C and full frame. You’ll ultimately come away knowing the perfect camera type for you.

What is the difference between Full Frame and APS-C sensors?
Full-frame and APS-C formats indicate the sensor’s physical dimensions, which is different from pixel count. A full-frame sensor has 36mm by 24mm size based on the traditional 35mm film format. An APS-C sensor is 1.5 times smaller, 25.1mm by 16.7mm, and named after Advanced Photo System type-C film format.

Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras: Which Do You Need? 1
Wikimedia commons.
What is the Origin of Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras?
Back when film was popular, there were a number of well-known film formats: 35mm format, medium format, large format, and more. These could only be used by corresponding cameras. A medium format camera used medium format film, a 35mm camera used 35mm film, and so on.

These different film formats could be distinguished by their physical size; for instance, 35mm film was 36mm by 24mm.

Origin of Full Frame Sensors
35mm film was by far the most popular format, primarily because of its perfect size. It was small enough for easier to carry around a 35mm camera than medium or large format bodies. And, it was large enough to produce high-quality photos. This made 35mm cameras into highly desirable pieces of kit for professional and amateur photographers alike.

Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras: Which Do You Need? 2
The origin of Full Frame sensor size is 35mm film format
In fact, the 35mm format was popular enough and so perfectly sized that many of the first digital cameras were 35mm, which was known as full frame. The sensors on these full-frame cameras offered dimensions of 36mm by 24mm.

Origin of APS-C Sensors
This term – full frame – was defined in contrast to smaller, or APS-C, camera sensors. APS-C stands for Advanced Photo System type-C. It is equivalent in size to the Advanced Photo System film negative in its “Classic” format, of 25.1×16.7 mm, an aspect ratio of 3:2.

Related: What Camera Should I Buy?

These cameras featured sensors with a range of dimensions, often around 24mm by 16mm. Many digital cameras these days sport APS-C sensors because smaller sensors are cheaper to produce. Smaller sensors also require smaller camera bodies and smaller lenses, which results in more compact camera setups.

Confusion Surrounding Crop Factor
APS-C cameras include something called the “crop factor.” This simply refers to a “crop” effect created by the smaller sensor. When you shoot with an APS-C camera, the field of view is changed, creating the impression of a cropped photo.

Related: Full Frame Lens on APS-C Camera

For instance, if you shoot a bird at 100mm on a full frame vs crop (APS-C) camera, the APS-C photo will look tighter. This is because the smaller sensor captures a smaller portion of the scene.

Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras: Which Do You Need? 3
Field of View Cheat Sheet: Placing a smaller sensor behind a lens doesn’t change its focal length. What changes, is the angle of view only.
Note that the focal length of your lens doesn’t experience any real shift. Nor does the depth of field or the lens speed change. The only real change is a field of view, which makes your lenses appear longer.

That said, having a smaller sensor can make a big difference to your photography:

Advantages of Full Frame vs APS-C
Full frame cameras, while more expensive than their APS-C counterparts, are known for their quality.

This is for a few reasons.

1. Better Low Light Performance
First, full frame cameras have more sensor space, so they offer larger pixels. Larger pixels means that each pixel can take in more light, which results in decreased noise (and better low light performance). Therefore, a full frame camera at 24 megapixels will outperform a crop sensor camera at 24 megapixels; the ISO performance will be better.

Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras: Which Do You Need? 4
Full Frame sensors always outperform smaller sensors in low light situations
2. Wider Dynamic Range
Second, full frame cameras offer a greater dynamic range than APS-C cameras. While dynamic range is often hard to perceive, it manifests as the difference between the detailed whites and the detailed blacks in your photos. Full frame cameras are better able to render extreme tones in a scene.

3. Higher Resolution
Third, full frame cameras often have higher resolution than APS-C cameras. The larger the sensor, the more pixels that fit!

4. No Crop Factor
Fourth, full frame cameras don’t force you to deal with annoying crop factors. A crop factor makes your wide angle lenses less wide and makes your standard lens into telephotos. For some, it’s important to be able to shoot with the lens field of view that you initially purchased.

Related: Best Cameras for Low Light Photography

And speaking of wide-angle lenses, full frame cameras allow you to shoot wide angle lenses as true wide angle lenses. That way, you can capture sweeping landscapes without missing a beat.

Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras: Which Do You Need? 5
Wide angle is always wide on Full Frame cameras
5. Better Lens Selection
Finally, the full frame lens selection is much broader than the APS-C lens selection. While you can use full frame lenses on APS-C bodies, camera manufacturers also offer APS-C lenses, such as Canon’s EF-S lens series.

Disadvantages of Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras
Full frame cameras are often great, but they sometimes fall short.

Why?

1. Higher Cost
First, full frame cameras and lenses tend to be hugely expensive. While there are some budget full frame cameras and lenses, they’re hardly cheap. Most beginner photographers just can’t justify the cost of a full frame option.

2. Bigger Size and Weight
And second, full frame cameras and lenses tend to be larger and heavier. This isn’t ideal for photography on the move: outdoor photography, travel photography, etc.

Advantages of APS-C vs Full Frame Cameras
Depending on your needs, there are plenty of reasons why you should go for an APS-C camera:

1. Size and Weight
First, if size and weight are important characteristics to you, then I recommend going with an APS-C setup. Both the cameras and the lenses are smaller than their full frame counterparts, and therefore much more manageable. APS-C cameras are perfect for travel, hiking, and backpacking.

Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras: Which Do You Need? 6
Compact Fujifilm combo is the perfect travel companion
2. More Attractive Cost
Second, APS-C cameras (and lenses) tend to be far cheaper than full frame gear. So if you’re on a budget, APS-C may be the way to go.

3. Longer Reach
Third, if you’re looking to shoot birds or wildlife, you’re going to need a lot of reach. Because of the crop factor, an APS-C camera will give you a 1.5x or 1.6x extension on your lens focal lengths. This can be invaluable for getting the close-up shots that bird and wildlife photographers love.

Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras: Which Do You Need? 7
It can be advantageous to use APS-C cameras for wildlife photography
4. Larger Depth of Field
Finally, because of the way the crop factor works, it’s easier to achieve a deeper depth of field with APS-C cameras. If you want to get the entire scene sharp, you won’t have to stop down as much–which is fantastic for shooting in low light scenarios.

Disadvantages of APS-C vs Full Frame Cameras
What are the downsides to APS-C cameras?

A few things:

1. Poorer Lens Selection
First, APS-C lenses just aren’t as plentiful as full frame lenses. There aren’t many high-quality APS-C lenses, though there are plenty of great full frame options.

2. Crop Factor Issue
Second, there’s no way of turning the crop factor off. When you shoot wildlife, the crop factor may be useful. But if you’re trying to photograph a beach sunset, the crop factor can be thoroughly annoying.

3. Lower High ISO Performance
Third, the low light performance of APS-C cameras just doesn’t match up with the low light performance of full frame cameras. So if you want to shoot genres such as astrophotography, a full frame camera is a better choice.

Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras: Which Do You Need? 8
In optimal light conditions, APS-C cameras produce amazing results
Full Frame vs APS-C Cameras: Conclusion
This article described the difference between full frame and APS-C cameras, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of each.

As you should now realize, neither camera format is more valuable than the other. Deciding whether to go with a full frame or an APS-C camera should be based on your current needs as a photographer.

So think about what you want to photograph. Think about what you’d like to see in a camera.

And then choose a camera body and start photographing!



Cheers
There are a bunch of misconception and wrong concl... (show quote)


Some misconceptions are difficult to overturn. The more reach misconception is a favorite. You do not get more reach but instead a cropped image compared to full frame that makes some people think they have more reach.

Reply
May 14, 2022 22:54:57   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
ruzbynik wrote:
Some misconceptions are difficult to overturn. The more reach misconception is a favorite. You do not get more reach but instead a cropped image compared to full frame that makes some people think they have more reach.

That depends on the camera and sensors. For example I have a 24mp APS-C sensor camera and a 24mp FF camera. I can put the same lens on both. Assume the lens on the FF camera isn't long enough for my subject. If I put that lens on my APS-C body I get a higher resolution image -- more pixels on the subject and that gives me overall better IQ from the APS-C camera. I think people who have that experience with their cameras and want to call that superior APS-C image "more reach" can do that and it makes some sense.

On the other hand I also have a 45mp FF camera and if I conduct the same test there's no advantage to the APS-C camera -- I get equivalent IQ from both. So it really depends on the cameras and sensors used.


(Download)



Reply
May 15, 2022 02:17:27   #
profbowman Loc: Harrisonburg, VA, USA
 
BebuLamar wrote:
'because the Hassy is a crop with the crop factor less than 1.


BebuLamar and Mike Roetex are hinting at the real issues here. The idea of a full frame sensor being that which matches a 35-mm film negative is an arbitrary choice. And even then, it is not truly full frame; there are still plenty of pixels "thrown away"" if you want to use that nomenclature.

For example, if one has a lens whose circle of light information just covers the rectangle of a full-frame sensor, then the light area lost to the sensor is approximately 41% as compared to an imaginary circular sensor just covering the total light circle entering the camera.

And if the "full-frame" crowd wants to belittle those of us with cameras with crop sensors, let's remember that medium frame sensors cover 250% more area than do full-frame sensors. So why doesn't everyone buy a Hasselblad Medium Format or Arca Swiss camera? Primarily for the same reason I have not bought a -so-called full frame camera. I could barely afford the Sony A6000 (an APS-C crop-factor camera) a few years back.

Since electronic chips as sensors or cpu's in computers get better with each generation, which often spans 2 or 3 years, buy the best camera and lenses you can afford and then start shooting. Isn't that what photographers are most concerned about--composition and how to get the shot we know we want to get? --Richard

Reply
May 15, 2022 07:59:14   #
BebuLamar
 
profbowman wrote:
BebuLamar and Mike Roetex are hinting at the real issues here. The idea of a full frame sensor being that which matches a 35-mm film negative is an arbitrary choice. And even then, it is not truly full frame; there are still plenty of pixels "thrown away"" if you want to use that nomenclature.

For example, if one has a lens whose circle of light information just covers the rectangle of a full-frame sensor, then the light area lost to the sensor is approximately 41% as compared to an imaginary circular sensor just covering the total light circle entering the camera.

And if the "full-frame" crowd wants to belittle those of us with cameras with crop sensors, let's remember that medium frame sensors cover 250% more area than do full-frame sensors. So why doesn't everyone buy a Hasselblad Medium Format or Arca Swiss camera? Primarily for the same reason I have not bought a -so-called full frame camera. I could barely afford the Sony A6000 (an APS-C crop-factor camera) a few years back.

Since electronic chips as sensors or cpu's in computers get better with each generation, which often spans 2 or 3 years, buy the best camera and lenses you can afford and then start shooting. Isn't that what photographers are most concerned about--composition and how to get the shot we know we want to get? --Richard
BebuLamar and Mike Roetex are hinting at the real ... (show quote)


I never meant what you said. I just said that people using a crop factor less than one for camera sensor size that is larger than 24x36mm.

Reply
 
 
May 15, 2022 08:41:56   #
profbowman Loc: Harrisonburg, VA, USA
 
BebuLamar wrote:
I never meant what you said. I just said that people using a crop factor less than one for camera sensor size that is larger than 24x36mm.


My apologies! I was just wanting to give credit for those who had already presented kernels of what I was saying. Just for my interest, what did I ascribe to you that you did not mean? --Richard

Reply
May 15, 2022 09:00:06   #
BebuLamar
 
profbowman wrote:
My apologies! I was just wanting to give credit for those who had already presented kernels of what I was saying. Just for my interest, what did I ascribe to you that you did not mean? --Richard


Well let see.
1. Nobody said thrown away pixels that I heard but rather CHG_CANON said thrown away half of the image. That is if you use a full frame lens the lens forms an image that is more than twice as large as what the APC-C can capture. I didn't mean that since the lens forms a circular image so any sensor that is rectangular would have to throw away some of the image or having vignetting.
2. I am a Nikon user an I never bought a DX camera. The same if I am a Canon user I woud never bought a Canon DSLR with APS-C sensor. The reason is that both the F and EF mount were designed for FF and not optimized for APS-C size camera. I would buy the Fuji X series or even M43 cameras.
3. About affordability. Since I do not need a camera to live on. I am not earning my living as photographer. So if I can't afford the camera I want I would buy no camera. That's always been my policy on hobby. I do not buy something because I can't afford more.

Reply
May 15, 2022 13:53:39   #
ruzbynik Loc: Victoria BC
 
Ysarex wrote:
That depends on the camera and sensors. For example I have a 24mp APS-C sensor camera and a 24mp FF camera. I can put the same lens on both. Assume the lens on the FF camera isn't long enough for my subject. If I put that lens on my APS-C body I get a higher resolution image -- more pixels on the subject and that gives me overall better IQ from the APS-C camera. I think people who have that experience with their cameras and want to call that superior APS-C image "more reach" can do that and it makes some sense.

On the other hand I also have a 45mp FF camera and if I conduct the same test there's no advantage to the APS-C camera -- I get equivalent IQ from both. So it really depends on the cameras and sensors used.
That depends on the camera and sensors. For exampl... (show quote)


Yes, you clearly show more reach is possible if the smaller sensor has sufficient resolution.

Reply
May 15, 2022 23:37:54   #
profbowman Loc: Harrisonburg, VA, USA
 
BebuLamar wrote:
Well let see.
1. Nobody said thrown away pixels that I heard but rather CHG_CANON said thrown away half of the image. That is if you use a full frame lens the lens forms an image that is more than twice as large as what the APC-C can capture. I didn't mean that since the lens forms a circular image so any sensor that is rectangular would have to throw away some of the image or having vignetting.
2. I am a Nikon user an I never bought a DX camera. The same if I am a Canon user I woud never bought a Canon DSLR with APS-C sensor. The reason is that both the F and EF mount were designed for FF and not optimized for APS-C size camera. I would buy the Fuji X series or even M43 cameras.
3. About affordability. Since I do not need a camera to live on. I am not earning my living as photographer. So if I can't afford the camera I want I would buy no camera. That's always been my policy on hobby. I do not buy something because I can't afford more.
Well let see. br 1. Nobody said thrown away pixels... (show quote)


Way back on the first page of this thread, we had three references to throwing info away. CHG_CANON wrote: "If your sensor throws away 50% of the frame, how will you ever achieve your potential as a photographer?" I am not sure what is being thrown away if it is not pixels since they are what contains all the recorded light information.

Soon after that PHRubin said in response to a comment made by Timothy S, "NO! Cropping throws away more than 1/2 the individual elements (pixels) of a photo." Here PHRubin actually refers to throwing away pixels. I was referring to these comments plus many others that did not use the term "throw away" but similar ones.

In the seven pages of this thread, 17 references were made to throwing away “something”—percentage of a frame or image, number of or percentage of pixels, etc. Also, more than 30 references were made to cropping, cropped, or crops part of an image. Since digital images are composed of pixels, I therefore conclude that pixels must be what was being cropped.

My point is that all of us as photographers (hobbyist, semi-professional, or professional) have bought a camera of one ilk or another. And we did not buy the next grade up camera when we bought our cameras. There are those of us who have sold or who are now selling photos, who use AP-C cameras and those of us who use FF or even medium format cameras.

I was probably wrong in saying that affordability made the choice for all of us. But for many of us who bought an APS-C camera over a FF one, that was one factor in our decision. I did not mean to lump you or anyone else in this category. My apologies.

To me, the discussion of FF being better than APS-C format cameras is often like discussing whether a 2018 Toyotas Rav4 is better than a 2022 Toyota Corolla. There are way too many factors that go into such decisions that such a discussion does not even make sense.

And I am tired of reading threads where someone (let me explain that this was not you, BebuLamar) brings up that I am not a true photographer unless I am using a FF camera. That is just not the case. Just my two cents. --Richard

Reply
 
 
May 16, 2022 07:20:41   #
BebuLamar
 
profbowman wrote:
Way back on the first page of this thread, we had three references to throwing info away. CHG_CANON wrote: "If your sensor throws away 50% of the frame, how will you ever achieve your potential as a photographer?" I am not sure what is being thrown away if it is not pixels since they are what contains all the recorded light information.

Soon after that PHRubin said in response to a comment made by Timothy S, "NO! Cropping throws away more than 1/2 the individual elements (pixels) of a photo." Here PHRubin actually refers to throwing away pixels. I was referring to these comments plus many others that did not use the term "throw away" but similar ones.

In the seven pages of this thread, 17 references were made to throwing away “something”—percentage of a frame or image, number of or percentage of pixels, etc. Also, more than 30 references were made to cropping, cropped, or crops part of an image. Since digital images are composed of pixels, I therefore conclude that pixels must be what was being cropped.

My point is that all of us as photographers (hobbyist, semi-professional, or professional) have bought a camera of one ilk or another. And we did not buy the next grade up camera when we bought our cameras. There are those of us who have sold or who are now selling photos, who use AP-C cameras and those of us who use FF or even medium format cameras.

I was probably wrong in saying that affordability made the choice for all of us. But for many of us who bought an APS-C camera over a FF one, that was one factor in our decision. I did not mean to lump you or anyone else in this category. My apologies.

To me, the discussion of FF being better than APS-C format cameras is often like discussing whether a 2018 Toyotas Rav4 is better than a 2022 Toyota Corolla. There are way too many factors that go into such decisions that such a discussion does not even make sense.

And I am tired of reading threads where someone (let me explain that this was not you, BebuLamar) brings up that I am not a true photographer unless I am using a FF camera. That is just not the case. Just my two cents. --Richard
Way back on the first page of this thread, we had ... (show quote)


For me the FF by the way people call it has one advantage that it has the crop factor of 1.

Reply
May 16, 2022 08:14:49   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
The surest way to corrupt a novice is to explain the importance of full-frame sensors.

Reply
May 16, 2022 08:19:37   #
MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama
 
Buy 1 of each and be done with it....7 pages down and ? more to go .... Good Grief !

Reply
Page <<first <prev 7 of 7
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.