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?
It depends which 2 cameras you're talking about.
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?
If the sensor tech is similar between the two cameras (similar pixel density) then yes. If the sensor tech is different between the two cameras (different pixel density) then no.
BebuLamar wrote:
It depends which 2 cameras you're talking about.
For instance, I've done the experiment with a D850, and a D500, which have sensors with about the same sensor density and about the same generation. With the same camera setup (which is possible on those two cameras), it is not possible to tell the two images apart.
If I did the same experiment with a D200 or D300, which are much older cameras with much different sensor density, that would not be true at all.
Bridges
Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA
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?
To make an exact comparison, take a FF camera that is capable of setting the image size to a crop frame setting. Some of the higher end FF cameras will sense if a DX lens is attached and adjust automatically, but you can manually set the camera to that setting if you leave the FF lens attached. By doing so you will be using the exact same sensors in your comparison. Take photos with the same lens, using the FF setting, then with the crop setting and continue your comparison by enlarging both photos to where the perimeters of both shots are the same. Then enlarge both images several times to see if the FF image is better or not.
If your sensor throws away 50% of the frame, how will you ever achieve your potential as a photographer?
CHG_CANON wrote:
If your sensor throws away 50% of the frame, how will you ever achieve your potential as a photographer?
Take twice as many pictures?
bwana
Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada
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?
Depends on the two cameras!
If we're talking two 24MP cameras, the crop sensor will have better resolution (smaller photosites) but the full frame camera may have lower noise.
bwa
Thanks for your answer. I should have specified that I am referring to cameras with the same pixel density, which is the only way to do a scientific comparison. All things being equal other than the question at hand considering the crop.
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?
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.
I imagine that I am much newer to photography than you are, but I have found that depending on budget and the photographer’s purpose, there are advantages and disadvantages to each. I agree that for those with an unlimited budget, taking primarily landscapes, architecture, or portraits, full frame is definitely the way to go. I made my decision based on budget and doing wildlife photography. I understand that great photography means putting out the money necessary for the very best, but people with lower budgets can still make the best choices to be highly competitive. Wildlife photography demands a super telephoto lens, and I believe, also mobility. I can get pictures handheld that are much better than people that I see who are mostly immobile with their heavy and bulky lens on a tripod because I get moments and angles that they miss. They need lenses with much more reach and all the bulk that comes with it. The images that I get with my used aps-c and used EF 100–400 mm f/4.5–5.6L IS USM I has won a number of contests for me and the images blown up to 24x36 have done quite well for me in the gallery where I have a display. So to me, I have made the best choices that I can, considering both my budget and my priorities. I do appreciate your advice, but I have given much thought to my purchases. I actually enjoy the challenge of getting better pictures than photographers with the best and newest equipment.
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
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?
The resolution is determined by the sensor pixel count. Sharpness is qualitative and difficult to measure but MTF charts combine contrast and lines pairs per millimeter to come up with something that can be used to make some sense.
So, since many lenses show more of their flaws ("sharpness"), distortions (pincusion, barrel and complex), and aberrations like coma and vignetting - at the corners and edges especially when used wide open, an image taken with a lens for a full frame camera "may" show less than optimal performance in the problem areas, whereas a crop sensor camera will not use the corners and edges, so the performance will be more uniform and better from corner to corner. If the pixel pitch is different then the camera with the highest # of pixels wins. Until you start raising the ISO, which means you are actually underexposing the image, which is why high ISO images are actually severely underexposed images which the camera turns up the gain on to compensate. Also, smaller sensor cameras do not do as well as larger sensor cameras.
There is a lot to unpack, and there is more, but I didn't want to be responsible for your head exploding.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.