TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

And that is all that matters

spywayman Loc: Bridport -Dorset-UK

I can't help it, but I smell nitpicking.

SteveG Loc: Norh Carolina

Personally, I have battled with this question as a Sony man. Going from various models. In the end, at least to my eye, in certain situations, I can definitely detect a difference in the dynamic range, at least with my Sonys. This example may not offer that. Images with a lot of changes in color difference and especially with DOF when required has led me down the full frame path. Of course I use legacy primes for "those special" wall hangers and the difference there, to me at least is discernible. For me, and this is for me, if I feel I'm leaving anything on the table with a finished image I'll go nuts as to why I didn't use my A7II. Of course I love the IBIS! But for most images, the crop, and even M4/3rds do a terrific job. Besides, my Sony is actually smaller,I believe than most of the top brand crop sensor cameras like Canon and Nikon.

drharveys Loc: Holly Springs, NC

Great quote!

alberio Loc: Casa Grande AZ

Maybe it's my viewing screen, but the white fence in front of the house on the far right has a distinct difference between the two cameras when zoomed in to 100%. I can see other differences at different distances, some better for the crop, some better for the full frame. Maybe focusing or maybe my screen is interpreting the files differently.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

I deliberately highlighted resolution as the object of this test by selecting a scene with a relatively narrow dynamic range where there is plenty of light and most of the values are close to middle gray. This scene is a lot like most daylight landscapes in good weather.

But you are correct in saying that a scene with a wider dynamic range calls for a camera that can collect more light. Just looking at the size of the front lens elements in the side-by-side image of the two cameras you can tell that the Tamron is going to collect a lot more light. And we know that larger pixels will do a better job with the larger range of luminance values.

If I had instead used a 24 MP Fuji X100F I would have compared it to the A7 II or the D610. I expect that we would have seen the same comparison of resolution and sharpness as we see here with the 16MP test. But a test with a darker or wider DR subject at ISO 1600 would also have revealed the DR and noise advantage of the full frame format.

Incidentally, the X-Trans sensor in the X100T has no Optical Low Pass Filter filter. That narrows the sharpness gap between it and the Df and many others that use an AA filter. One theory was that the X-Trans array would not be as vulnerable to moiré but that does not appear to be the case.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

There is a little more chromatic aberration and a little less sharpness at the far right in the Fuji image than in the Df/Tamron image but this is mainly because of the difference in the lenses, not the sensor size.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Kind of like the wind...

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

Not really a FAIR comparison. A FAIR comparison would be the same lens on a FF and Cropped sensor camera. Like comparing the results of a Nikon 28 mm 1.8 on a D500 and D750/D610.
The mp would also have to be close to the same.
But, all comparisons aside, generally speaking, the FF image will be better than a cropped sensor camera. You can compare until your worn out, but, the results will be the same, FF wins, every time. Been there, done that.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

A home run is worth more than two doubles. So is a full frame camera.

alberio Loc: Casa Grande AZ

Thanks for the response, I was wondering about the difference in lenses also.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

I often default to my FF combination since I often crop to get to the composition I’m looking for. Plus, i record the effort on Strava as exercise.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Possibly but not clearly...it depends... If the bases are empty then two doubles is better than a home run. It likely scores a run and puts another in scoring position.

Low Budget Dave

In good light, with a stationary subject, and a large depth of field, most people will not be able to tell the difference between a full frame camera and a cell phone.

Much less APSC.

mflowe Loc: Port Deposit, MD

And if I was George Soros's son, I'd be rich. But I'm not and we always don't shoot at base ISO.