Full Frame Cropped or APS-C?? (Page 4): Since I sold my D7100 some time ago I can't do a direct comparison but I can show that a high res FF sensor holds up very well to cropping. Some...

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Kmgw9v wrote:

After reading the explanation that APS-C sensors produce higher resolution images than full frame sensors. I Am still one of those totally missing the point.

Since I sold my D7100 some time ago I can't do a direct comparison but I can show that a high res FF sensor holds up very well to cropping.

Some prefer crop sensor cameras for reach and that's their prerogative. Based on my experience and tastes, I prefer FF Hi-Res sensor cameras for more flexibility. That may change as the technology advances.

This image was captured with a D800E in raw converted to jpg and then cropped. No PP other than cropping.

% of original pixels: #1 100%, #2 52%, #3 12%

7360x4912

(Download)

3684x4912

(Download)

1726x2456

(Download)

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

joer wrote:

Please provide objective images that prove your point.

You are free to provide objective images that prove your point.

Review the facts which easily do prove the point. If you question the validity of any of them, point out which ones and I'll provide impeccable sources.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

[quote=Apaflo]You are free to provide objective images that prove your point.

I just did and that's all I'm going to say on the subject. Let us agree to just disagree.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

Roger Lee wrote:

Yes, we could get into the "artsy-fartsy" aspect also but it probably belongs in another post as the OP was asking about gear.

The fartsy is just for you...

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

patcarls47 wrote:

My wife and I are going to Africa and, of course I'm bringing my gear. I am currently shooting with a 5D Mark3 and plan to take my 70-300L (among others) with me. If I want to get an effective focal length of 480 mm, which will give me the best results for large prints a)shooting with 5d and cropping image, or b) buying a 7d, and relying on the crop sensor to give me the extra reach I'm looking for?

I vote for Glass. All the stuff about FF or crop doesn't matter at all unless you plan to make prints larger than 16X24. I defy any one to tell the difference on an 9x14 inch print.BTW a 5d3 and a 7d with lenses ia a lot of weight to carry all day. If you decide to go that way hirea bearer

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

joer wrote:

Since I sold my D7100 some time ago I can't do a direct comparison but I can show that a high res FF sensor holds up very well to cropping...% of original pixels: #1 100%, #2 52%, #3 12%

You are just being difficult, our alaskan friend has told you that you have to use a small sensor if you want a good picture and you keep saying full frame cameras are adequat.
Get with the program and stop confusing the newbies.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

[quote=joer]

Apaflo wrote:

You are free to provide objective images that prove your point.

I just did and that's all I'm going to say on the subject. Let us agree to just disagree.

Where are objective images that prove your point?

You've provided three crops from one single random image, which doesn't even have Exif data attached. It merely proves that you don't understand the subject of this thread.

A D800E can provide 102.5 lp/mm, but a D7200 can provide 127 lp/mm. If the same shot were taken, using the same lens on a D7200, and then trimmed to the same framing as your third image it would have more pixels and therefore higher quality with better resolution than your image. It would be 127/102.5 times the 1725x2456 pixel dimensions of your image. That's 2137x3043.

A nice improvement from the APS-C sensor. Which proves my point rather than yours...

Just be aware that if the lens used on the FF camera is 1.5x the focal length used on the APS-C camera, all that advantage then goes to the FF camera. Like many other photography issues, this comes down to knowing your equipment well enough to make the right choices.

Roger Lee

joer wrote:

Please provide objective images that prove your point.

This guy explains it pretty good, better than I can anyway.

http://www.mdavid.com.au/photography/pixeldensity.shtml

Anandnra Loc: Tennessee

Roger Lee wrote:

Good for you. I shoot full frame, often using a 5... (show quote)

Agreed. :thumbup:

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

Apaflo wrote:

Where are objective images that prove your point? ... (show quote)

100% correct. I'm not sure why folks aren't getting this.

If I take a shot with my D810 and crop to 1.5X, I have 16MP. The same image shot with a D7200 needs no cropping, is 24MP, and thus has more detail.

I think people want a "this is always better than that" answer but the problem is, it all comes down to what tool you need to get the job done.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

Steve Perry wrote:

100% correct. I'm not sure why folks aren't getting this.

If I take a shot with my D810 and crop to 1.5X, I have 16MP. The same image shot with a D7200 needs no cropping, is 24MP, and thus has more detail.

I think people want a "this is always better than that" answer but the problem is, it all comes down to what tool you need to get the job done.

Only if you crop. I am using the appropriate prime lenses to get the what I need inside the frame. If necessary, I will also use a TC. I am always going to get a better image in challenging conditions with my FF than any crop sensor.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

then there is the other side of the coin.
If the crop shooter backs up enough to get the same view as my FF gets, the crop camera subject detail will be too small to even recognize.
Advantage still goes to FF camera, a 36mp image and a 24mp image aren't even in the same class.

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

Mark7829 wrote:

Only if you crop. I am using the appropriate prime lenses to get the what I need inside the frame. If necessary, I will also use a TC. I am always going to get a better image in challenging conditions with my FF than any crop sensor.

Right - only if you crop. If you aren't doing any cropping to fill the frame, then full frame can give better results, especially in low light. No arguments there, I think the problem is there are quite a few posts that seem to think that full frame is better even if you crop down to 1.5X size and that usually isn't the case (too many variables in cameras to say never the case :) )

Although there is an exception that comes to mind, and that would be if the full frame camera were lower MP than the crop camera. It would come down to how bright it was and how well each handled noise. Might be a fun test to do with my D4 and D7200 when I get a chance.

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

oldtigger wrote:

then there is the other side of the coin.
If the crop shooter backs up enough to get the same view as my FF gets, the crop camera subject will be too small to even recognize.
Advantage still goes to FF camera.

By definition, if you back up enough to get the same image view, it will look the same in either camera, with the crop camera having 1.5 stops more DOF.

The disadvantage is that the further back you have to be, the more likely you are to encounter diffractive air (turbulence, heat distortion, that sort of thing), so I agree the advantage in this case goes to full frame - but I agree for a different reason :)

All that said, I rarely find myself too close to my particular subjects (wildlife), so a crop camera isn't bad to have in the bag. I keep both full frame and crop cameras handy, in many cases using my D7200 like a high quality, no light loss 1.5 TC :)

RRS Loc: Not sure

Steve Perry wrote:

Right - only if you crop. If you aren't doing any ... (show quote)

Another good test would be between a 1 DX at 18 MP against a 7D MK II at 20 MP. The fudge factor here would be the size of the pixels. I do agree with Mark up to a point and that is the 800mm f/5.6 where I'd rather be shooting a 600mm f/4.0 with a 1.4 but only because of cost and weight.