Hal Masover Loc: Iowa and Florida

For the last decade I've been a devoted user of full frame DSLRs. It's been quite a love affair. dozens of weddings and portraits, commercial work and thousands of miles of travel, lightpainting and astrophotography. My digital photography started in earnest with a Sony NEX6, which is an APS-C camera. From there I graduated to a Nikon D750 and what a difference! Boom. But in the last decade it seems that APS-C cameras have greatly advanced. I'm currently trying out the Nikon Zfc, which is a 2022 APS-C camera and comparing to my D750, it's really hard to tell any difference. I've tried low light, high ISO, etc. No, I don't want to buy the Zfc. It simply doesn't have the amount of control I'm used to and it's hard to hold in my hand. But here's my questions - are today's APS-C sensors equivalent to full frame or are they just equivalent to my 10 year old D750? Are new full frame cameras better at handling noise? How about dynamic range? And my second question is, if APS-C has gotten so much better, what about MFT? In other words, does sensor size matter anymore? Because my 72 year old body wouldn't mind lighter gear on my shoulders but I also don't want to go backwards in quality and capability. Comments?

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

Yes.

And yes again the tip goes to FF.

They've improved as well.

Yes, FF will always have an edge but it may be the best way to look at it is what do you need. I have FF, APS-C and a 1" sensor compact. I use that compact the most and I use the APS-C more than the FF. If someone held a gun to my head and said pick one I'd pick the APS-C.

bonjac Loc: Santa Ynez, CA 93460

May I ask which APS-C camera you are using?

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

It depends on how concerned one is about any image difference and one's desires.
My one camera is an APS-C (Canon T1i), that's what it is. Looks great to me.
My bridge camera (Sony H-1) has a smaller sensor than the APS-C. But I'd have to look up the size specs...
I don't worry about either camera (sensor size, comparison to other cameras, is it the "best", ...) I just take pictures with them.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

I have a Fuji X-T2 and X-T4. I'm very happy with them.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

I have been using FF for about four years now. I LOVE it compared to APS-C (although I really like my Nikon D500) and still lust after MF!

tdozier3 Loc: Northern Illinois

My D7500 and D500 with my assortment of lenses do everything I need. Not that I wouldn't like a D850, but it's just not necessary for my needs.

Hal Masover Loc: Iowa and Florida

As stated, temporarily using the Nikon Zfc on a 30 day free trial

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

My experience suggests that you can't have a discussion about full frame vs. APS-C unless that discussion includes which full frame camera and which APS-C camera. My sequence of camera ownership is D200-D300-D810-D850-D500. The first four of those saw a significant, observable progression of resolution, capability, and image quality. I thought that the D500 would be a step back. It most definitely was not. I regularly challenge folks to identify if an image came from a D500 or a D850. They cannot.

So my answer to your question is, "It depends." I can't speak about MFT from personal experience, but my (uninformed) answer there would be the same, as it would also be for more current camera models than mine.

Ysarex Loc: St. Louis

It is possible to make a generalization concerning noise performance. All else similar (in other words one camera isn't this year's model while the other is 15 years old) sensor size is a determinant of noise performance such that more sensor area improves SNR and so lowers noise. You can see this by comparing a FF camera with itself set to crop mode in which case you're comparing the same physical sensor.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Go to YouTube and watch some reviews of the Lumix G9 Mark II and the OM Systems Olympus OM-1. That will give you a sense of what MFT (mu-43, m43, Micro Four Thirds...) can do. Those are the two bodies best suited to photography. The Lumix is also a great video camera.

There is still about a one stop difference between full frame and APS-C, and about a 2/3 stop difference between APS-C and MFT. BUT, low light performance of all three formats has improved quite a bit in ten years.

My position is that if you are working for Sports Illustrated, use full frame. If you make wall size mural prints, use full frame. If you are a normal human being who photographs in average light most of the time, use what feels right to you. If I'm in a situation where I'm at ISO 3200 to 6400, I'll use raw files and noise reduction on my MFT images. OR, I'll add light from my LED panels or flash. Most environments dark enough to reveal shadow noise will look better if you can light them, regardless of the camera format.

Personally, I'm NOT a fan of shallow depth of field when using lenses shorter than the full frame equivalent of 100mm. Our eyes don't see with shallow depth of field. It has an unnatural look to me. So MFT has a special appeal, where f/2.8 on a 25mm lens has about the same depth of field as f/5.6 on a 50mm lens, when both lenses are used from the same distance for the same field of view.

Toment Loc: FL, IL

I’ve tried everything but medium format. I really like my OM-1. Smaller lenses and total kit. Image quality is good enough for me.
Have FUN no matter what you do.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

If significant cropping is involved, they can!

DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA

Had one. Sold it. Ergonomics for my arthritic hands. Otherwise, liked it. Like a smaller Nikon Df.

DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA

[quote=larryepage]. The first four of those saw a significant, observable progression of resolution, capability, and image quality. I thought that the D500 would be a step back. It most definitely was not.

I have both the 850 and D500 and find the size and weight difference to be small. The control layout is very close. The D500 is mostly used with long lenses and D850 for most everything else. My Df is lighter when I'm concerned about the weight of my kit.