Full Frame Quality...

[jay_van]

<p>I just want to know a few things about Full Frame Cameras, 5dmII in particular, comparing to cropped sensors..let say like the 7d. I understand the sensor is bigger on FF, and on a cropped sensor a 50mm lens will be equivalent to 80mm, but is there a real difference in the picture quality..(what the picture looks like). If so what is it? A guy I know is using the 5dmkII and I asked him and all he said is..."oh...its just...its just better....it has something nicer I cant explain"..hmm</p>

[martin_engineer]

<p>Hey Jay,<br>

Full Frame has<br>

- Better images at high ISO... that means less noise and more dynamic range at the higher ISO's<br>

- overall higher dynamic range... greater range of tones from highlights to darks<br>

- more pixels in the case of the 5d mkII... allows crazy detail... or the ability to do crazy crops....<br>

- The ability to print larger prints with less loss of detail due to enlargement.<br>

- greater depth of field control.... can get a thinner dept of field... or you could stop down more and not face the bad effects of diffraction untill F16 or so.<br>

All that being said... I suspect that it is very difficult to see the above differences in a print made by a 7D and 5D Mark II. Anyone who is not an expert and dosnt know what to look for will not be able to tell which camera took a particular shot.</p>

[tdigi]

<p>In my experience the real difference in a few areas. first and biggest is low light, its pretty amazing and to me this is where it really excels. I use 3200 often with little noise. If you shoot in nightclubs or anywhere that is dark or without flash you will really appreciate a 5d2. Second is depth of field, this could be good or bad but depth of field is shallower so you get more blur but it can be tricky to focus, I find I often have 1 eye sharp the other not so sharp even shooting at F4 or 5.6. and third is wide angle. There are lenses for APS-C that give the same angle but when it comes to primes there is no match especially on the wide end. </p>

<p>On top of that all of this transfers to the video which is also amazing and will blow away any camcorder.</p>

[john_a5]

<p>The only theoretical difference I could see is that the larger MP of the 5dmkII would generate better large images. Also, the greater MP allow for less destructive post processing (more pixels to absorb the blows!). You can really see this latter effect if you correct keystone effects in architectural shots, but the 7D is not that small a MP camera. More noticeable comparing the 5dII to a 12mp camera.</p>

<p>Because I haven't really looked at the 7D, I don't know, but there is probably a limit to the MP one can put on a certain amount of real estate with the current technology. At some point the receptors get too small and that is when noise starts to become a factor--smaller sensors are less light sensitive essentially. Is the 7D at that limit? The sensors are certainly going to be smaller than on the 5dII, therefore, theoretically, the noise will be greater. But if they have that under control, it would give us a good clue that the next generation 1ds and 5d might come with a 28-30MP sensor.</p>

<p>It should be noted also that at some point, the lens quality will not be up to the MP of the camera! If you think about it, a current 5dII at 100% is about a 1490x enlargement of a 35mm frame. No one ever printed that big from a 35mm piece of film! An 8x12 print is only a 66x enlargement. Yes, you can make a 40x50 print from these cameras and they look great, much better than one from a 35mm piece of film--there is a limit to what these lenses can do. You will notice the lens flaws on a 7D I would think, but the biggest issues are at the edges and you do see them on the FF cameras that have the 21mp sensors already.</p>

[jay_van]

<p>thanks for your replys...I didnt state that I have a 7d. I get pretty good dof with my primes..are you saying it is better background blur/bokeh with a full frame using the same lens. And I am finding shooting at 3200 iso is great. As for the video....someone told me this but I didnt google to look, does the camera use the same sensor for both video and photos..I cant imagine it would have 2 in there..?</p>

[john_a5]

<p>Depth of field itself isn't going to be different from one camera to the next with the same lens, but certainly the "equivalent" focal length will have a much greater DOF on a crop sensor--the lens has a shorter "real" focal length to get the same framing and physics is just that it will also have a greater DOF than a longer lens!</p>

<p>One sensor for everything.</p>

[mike_hitchen]

<p>That guy you know - has he used a 7D? If no then he is probably comparing the 5D2 to lenses available at that time. And I can believe there may well have been differences, but the sensor and processsing in the 7D changed the rules. And don't forget the power of pre-conditioning: many people go to buy a 5D2 already convinced (by marketing, by anecdote, by media) that the 35mm sensor is superior and I agree that very few (if any) could tell the difference between pictures taken with either of them. Quite a few people on this forum and in reviews believe the two are indistinguishable up to about 20x16; and the 5D2 has a little over 1 stop meaningful advantage in high ISO performance.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> I get pretty good dof with my primes..are you saying it is better background blur/bokeh with a full frame using the same lens.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>DOF and bokeh are a function of the lens, not the camera. In theory if you stay at the same position with a 50mm lens on both cameras, and take the same picture, then you crop the 5D2 image the DOF and bokeh will be identical. In practice, with a 50mm lens on both cameras, you would change your position to get the same framing, and that changes the focus distance which changes the DOF (and hence bokeh) with a given aperture. So you will see that you never simply 'change the sensor' - many other things change as well when you pick up the 5D2.</p>

 

[paulferesten]

<p>I have used boththe 5DII and the 7D. The advantage of the 5DII is low light (ISO 3200 and above) but other than that, the 7D is a superior camera. The two areas that I noticed most were the focusing (7D is clearly better) and the shutter noise (7D is quieter). Also,, the 7D has 8 frames pere second, so it's better for action. When they offer a 5DIII, I assume that these issues (except fps) will be addressed.</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>Since the sensor is larger, it takes in more of the outer edges of the image circle being projected to the back of the camera. This gives photos better bokeh since more blur occurs farther from the center of the image circle. It also allows for larger prints. Just imagine "stretching" the sensor into the desired print size. A larger sensor wouldn't have to "stretch" as far as a smaller one, meaning it maintains more of the original image quality. It also handles noise better due to larger individual pixels being able to capture light better. When thinking about the image circle, remember that cropped sensors will never see the outer edges that a full frame sensor sees; so even with using the crop factor to get an equivalent focal length, the crop sensor won't see the same thing as a full frame. For example, 10mm on a 7D will have the same field of view as 16mm on a full frame, but the photos won't be identical since the 16mm on the full frame is taking in the outer edges of the image circle whereas the 10mm on the cropped sensor is only taking in the middle portion of the projection.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>There are probably a few "real" differences due to sensor spacing in things like noise. Aside from that, I know that, just as long as I know what camera took what pictures, there is an indefinable air of "quality" to the so-called "full-frame" images.</p>

<p>However, when I don't remember what camera the image was taken with, the difference in undefinable quality seems somehow to go away.</p>

<p>There's no way to try it out here with the variables involved in web display, but I'd actually bet money (and I am not a gambler by nature) that a true double-blind test of <strong>comparable, same-generation</strong> cameras (same generation, same lenses, same everything except for the sensor) would show that no one could consistently pick out different images as coming from either APS-C or 35mm-sized sensors in prints up to 16x19 or so and with similar MP density.</p>

<p>No fair comparing a 20D to a 1Ds Mk VIII - but I'd suppose that a 7D and a 5DMkII might show comparable results, if not a slight edge to the newer 7D.</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>Full frame can be better, but not necessarily in ways that will make a difference to you. That is the issue that you must resolve. Potential benefits include:</p>

<ul>

<li>Higher potential for detail resolution across the image.</li>

<li>Potential to get smaller depth of field if needed. (Large DOF available at expense of slower shutter speed or higher ISO.)</li>

<li>Potential for better low light performance.</li>

<li>When diffraction blur is considered, potential to have more usable apertures from a given lens.</li>

<li>Arguably more options for wide angle lenses.</li>

</ul>

<p>Potential advantages of cropped sensor bodies that are sometimes suggested are:</p>

<ul>

<li>Lower cost</li>

<li>Narrower angle of view from a given focal length. ("Your 200mm lens works like a 280mm lens" - sort of)</li>

<li>Smaller body size possible with some models</li>

<li>In general faster burst mode is available</li>

</ul>

<p>So, you need to figure out what is most important to you and what may not be important at all. If you regularly print carefully-shot highly detailed images at very large sizes the full frame format is probably compelling. If you rarely print large or mostly share electronic images on the computer screen the differences is likely not compelling.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>I wrote: Narrower angle of view from a given focal length. ("Your 200mm lens works like a 280mm lens" - sort of)</p>

<p>Never was good at math. I should have written <em><strong>320mm</strong></em>. (That's what I get for reading about 1.4x TCs right before writing about 1.6x cropped sensor bodies...)</p>

<p>Dan</p>

[robertbody]

<p>First question would be - which pictures you want to take with your Full-frame sensor camera.<br /> Case 1: landscapes -- if you want to print big, 20x30 inch... or bigger<br /> Case 2: portraits -- if you want shallower depth of field [on purpose] and have fast lenses [expensive lenses] that allow for that<br /> What else... if you want to crop and still keep quality<br /> if you want to take pictures in low light and expect great pictures at ISO-800 or more<br /> If you want a brighter viewfinder<br /> if you want the camera to focus in less light<br /> if you want a 17-35mm lens to give you a "wide-angle" behavior<br /> I could have missed some points, but there are many times when Full-Frame can be better.<br /> And there are arguments how you normally won't notice the difference if you don't print big...... and if you do get Full Frame camera, then you should plan on getting the Better lenses too.... if you are after best quality that is<br>

-----------<br>

To answer your question better, you should know what kind of pictures you want to take, and which lenses are you going to get in the future [and why].<br>

For animal photos I would prefer a cropped-sensor body.. a very specific one.. 1D Mark IV. Otherwise I would prefer full-frame.<br>

If you can't see a reason why you would want a full-frame, then get the cropped sensor camera like 7D, and if you get to a point where your camera is not letting you to take the picture you want, then think about upgrading for very specific reasons.<br>

I had a reason like that when I printed 30x40 picture from a cropped sensor and i could see it's not as sharp as it could be, while i know i did everything right with focus and depth of field.<br>

Another reason I saw was with low light pictures like this [really low light]:<br>

<img src="http://www.robertbody.com/things08/images/2008-12-13-tempe-lights-boats-62645m.jpg" alt="" width="750" height="500" /><br>

I was using ISO-3200 and ISO-6400 and max aperture of the lens at 1.8 and 2.8 and still that wasn't enough, there was some motion blur [and at ISO-6400 i could see degradation of colors]</p>

[William Michael]

<p>Add to the lists above - if you work at the wide and need a fast aperture: there are not the same quality, equivalent fast, wide lenses, for APS-C cameras - though the wide zooms are making comparative inroads.<br>

WW</p>

[anuragagnihotri]

<p>Agree. <br>

You don't have a fast 20/24/35 in the crop sensor world. <br>

Max you can go is F2.8 at 28mm and F4.5 at 24mm. <br>

Canon thinks professionals don't shoot with a crop camera. </p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>I wrote a fairly comprehensive comparison of APS-C and FF formats here:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.graphic-fusion.com/fullframe.htm">http://www.graphic-fusion.com/fullframe.htm</a></p>

<p>(Comments, criticisms, and other input welcome.)</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>I'd say that the difference between FF and crop becomes visible long before you get to 20 x 30, though it is quite hard to see at 13 x 19 - but visible there if you know what to look for and know how to print well.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>Don't just consider prints for comparing IQ. More and more of us are viewing our images on large HDTVs (52" for me) at 1080 resolution. This is the 21st century and this type of viewing is becoming more and more common. For the non-pro phototgrapher this may be the most common mode of viewing other than the computer monitor.</p>

[gunjankv]

<p>With crop sensor affordability, more and more prosumer or semi-pro photographers started coming into field. Many of them shoot just for self satisfaction, as hobby which is really very rewarding w.r.t satisfaction and not money. This increased (and still increasing) crop sensor equipment demands.</p>

<p>Gap between excellent crop sensor camera and above avg full sensor camera is already narrowed by 5DMII and 7D. Similarly gap between above avg lens of full sensor world and excellent lens of crop sensor lens would also narrow down. L lens availability in crop sensor does not seem far to me.</p>

<p>Point is: With many hobby/semi-pro people shooting around, crop sensor camera like 7D would remain in better and more demand and one day people would stop comparing them like two different genders.</p>