camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I have both types of camera and I find that I use the cropped sensor more often.

gwilliams6

I have both a Sony A6500 (APS-C) and a Sony A7R3 (full frame). The difference is 24 megapixels (APS-C) vs 42 megapixels (Full frame). The APS-C costs much less and makes great photos, but the Full-frame has greater dynamic range and can make images that will blow up/or crop with less image quality loss. If I could only afford the A6500 it could take great photos for a lifetime, but I am also a professional shooter and for most of my client work I use the full-frame to give them the absolute best final images that could hold up to being poster-sized. Cheers, use what you can afford. There are great APS-C cameras out there that will satisfy most folks still and video needs.

For example, the newest Fuji X-H1 has all the features of the best full-frame cameras and more, but has APS-C sensor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uO18zQFsx-sSo ; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aw3K0Bp2D74. No longer do APS-C take a back seat to the still and video features of a full-frame camera. Buy the best you can afford and be happy. Image quality of the best APS-C cameras is excellent.

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Advantages or disadvantages are subjective. It is an advantage if you like one result better than another, and the result is not always confined to the technical aspects of the image. So there are as many unique answers to your question as there are photographers.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Images, after you download them, are not measured in the physical size of the sensor that took them. They are measured in pixels. So given that the size of the sensor in pixels is the same (a 24MP FF and a 24MP APS-C) and you used the focal lengths you mentioned in your example filling the sensor with the same framing, the resulting images would be the same size. As a result multiplying those sizes by the physical size of the sensor is meaningless.

RolandDieter

I have full frame and also micro 4/3 for when I want light weight and less bulk, such as travel or lots of walking. I got rid of my APS because it had no role after I added m4/3. Now I have best of both worlds -- when I want to go light I can go very light -- when I want best image I can suffer through the weight and bulk.

Meganephron Loc: Fort Worth, TX

For me it’s a question of light capture. Two sensors, a 25 mp FF and 25 mp crop sensor. The megapixels on the FF are larger and process light differently than the crop sensor because of space. I have stayed with my Nikon D4s with 16 mp because it is much better at capturing and processing light. Much greater detail in shadows. I had a D800 before and noticed loss of shadow detail from my D3. I understand that the D850 deals with this better, but I love the fps I get from the D4s and the depth of detail. IQ at 36x24 and higher has not been an issue. The D5’s only advantage seems to be a faster processor. The 4 extra mp don’t impress me, however, the availability of two XQD slots is a an improvement. Therefore, can’t justify the money, maybe for the D6 😛whenever that comes out.

Paul Buckhiester Loc: Columbus, GA USA

I use APS-C when I need the reach, eg. kids’ sports.

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

I own both. FF is for landscape with my wides. My crop censor gets used for wildlife cause I can put more EFFICTIVE MEGAPIXELS on my subject.

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

Why do people bother themselves over this issue? Buy a camera. Use it. Don't worry, be happy.

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

I shoot with Sony full frame cameras but often shoot these in crop mode when I don't require the full real estate of full frame. Also, a number of my lenses are not all that great out to the edges of a full frame sensor (or are actually crop mode lenses); thus, shoot in crop mode and hit the lens' sweet spot.

bwa

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

I have used the FF for weddings, head shots, portraits, and prefer it. I use APS-C for sports. I solved most low light issues by going with mirrorless, but still use my APS-C DSLR for outdoor sports due to availability of lenses.
If I could afford the lenses, I would ideally prefer FF's of the same make and model for primary and backup use. However, I think you can make just as strong a case for using a FF with a crop sensor camera as a back up in some cases as well. Overall, I think it matters most learning the limitations and potential of both. The person pushing the shutter button is as important as any gear you may use.

MidnightManiac

I'm fortunate to have both. Each have their place in what I shoot. I'm a Canon user and for sports my 7DII is the best. For indoor, portraits and family events I like my 5D. The results from both are great IMO. Budget plays a big part in cameras and lenses. All but two of my lenses are full frame. My favorite for outdoor sports is my Canon 70-200 f4L, for indoor sports use a Tamrom 70-200 f2.8. Indoor full frame like the 50mm. Does it really make a difference FF or crop? If I had to choose one over the other the 7DII wins...Again your budget plays a big part...most of my $$$'s are in lenses.

raferrelljr Loc: CHARLOTTE, NC

Print sharpness.

wmsj12646

I’m a 7200 owner and a recent re-entrant from the film days. Seems like one obvious advantage of FF not mentioned is the ability to print to larger print sizes at 300 dpi. This really has to do with the greater megapixels generally of the FF cameras. Am I wrong about this?

gwilliams6

The larger individual pixels in a full-frame shot (comparing 24 megapixel full-frame sensor vs 24 megapixel APS-C sensor) tend to have better noise characteristics, and greater dynamic range. So in comparing two separate prints from a 24 megapixel Full frame camera, and from a 24 megapixel APS-C, blown up to the same image size, the full-frame print should also exhibit better "pixel-peeped" resolution (both shot with same full-frame lens, with exposure settings and lighting the same). I have done this test myself in the past as an exercise with my students in my university digital photography class that I teach. That better "pixel-peeped" advantage should continue as the print size is further enlarged.

Will most people be able to see the difference? No ,not all will see much of a difference as APS-C shots have been blown up to large sizes and are quite satisfactory. But physics is physics, and pixels are pixels (yes there is some variance, as in-camera sensors and image processors vary in their performance from camera model to camera model), but yes it does make a difference. I own both APS-C and Full-frame mirrorless Sony cameras and use the full-frame when I need the better image resolution for larger display and printing of my images. Still love the image quality from my 24 megapixel APS-C A6500, as a companion to my 42 megapixel Full-frame A7R3. Cheers