Full Frame vs Crop Cameras

2012 and the big action, this year, is in the full frame cameras. Nikon released the D800 and the D4, Canon has released their 5Dmk3 and the 1Dx, Sony is poised to release the Alpha 99. The talk of the town is that Nikon will be coming out with a full frame the D600 at around $1,500 US and Canon will have to follow suit.

Obviously, full frame cameras must be better. If not, why is all the buzz and all the press promoting all these cameras that start around $3,000 and top at $6,500? People say:

Bigger pixels, less noise…

Some of it can be true, but it's not always the case. Let take the cameras with the biggest pixels around, the Hasselblad HD4 serie and the Phase 1 IQ serie. Their pixels are so big that they compete with the CO2 bubbles of any pop drink when you open the bottle/can. But meanwhile, it's hard to go above ISO 400 with these cameras and to get the excellent image quality. The choices are ISO 50, ISO 100 or ISO 200. No taking photos of black cats in a coal mine.

On a full frame camera, the number on the lens from the focal lens is the “bible.” You get what you see. A Canon 16-35mm lens on a full frame camera gives an angle of view from: 83° to 44° and a 500mm give an angle of 3°

On a Canon crop camera like the 7D, the number on the lens from the focal lens need to be multiplied by 1.6. A Canon 16-35mm lens on a 7D gives an angle of view from: 70° to 35° and a 500mm give an angle of 2° The perspective is the same, just the angle of view is cropped.

I do “some” bird photography, it's more like an attempt. I have far more success with BOG (Birds on the Ground) than with BIF (Birds in Flight).

6 days old Sandhill Crane The Sandhill Crane chick is under the constant supervision of the parent Sandhill Crane. The chick grows at the speed of an inch/2.5 centimeters per day. They grow fast. It's mostly the body and the legs. The wings are just stumps that will start growing when the feathers will start growing.reifel-20110523-6814.jpg — Copyright © 2009 Syv Ritch: http://www.foto-biz.com/usageterms

6 days old SandHill Crane Colt, Canon 7D, Sigma 120-400mm   click on image for gallery

The vast majority of the bird photographers at Reifel Bird Sanctuary use Canon and almost all of them have switched from their full frame cameras to the 7D. That's because of the crop factor. The 500mm becomes the equivalent of an 800mm, then there is the 1.4x tele-converter and we have the equivalent to a 1120mm at f/5.6! In bird photography, focal length trumps everything, except for the skills of the “birder/photographer.” And even then an “incompetent” birder like me with my 400mm on a Canon 7D, will often get better photos than an expert with a 200mm f/2 on a full frame camera.

In the photo world, there two type of photographers:

  1. The wide angle photographers. People that see the world in wide. It's a “vision thing.”
  2. The tele photographers. People that see the world in some small chunks, the tele people. I'm a tele photographer. The tele matches my vision.

If you are a wide angle photographer, you will be happier with a full frame camera. If you are a tele photographer, you will be happier with an APS-C crop camera.

BTW, I'll defy anybody to look at a photograph and say: this is a full frame camera and this is an APS-C crop camera.

Comments

Well, all other things being

Submitted by Anonymous on 15. September 2012 - 9:19.

Well, all other things being equal, bigger pixels have inherently lower noise since they gather more photons. But other things are rarely equal. The micro-lens design, actual light-gathering area of the pixel, the processing electronics, etc. all play a role in the noise performance and overall sensor design is still improving rapidly. So the latest sensor may have the best noise performance even if it has smaller pixels. But given two sensors with the same design technology, the one with the larger pixels will have lower noise. The problem with the Hasselblad and other medium-format sensors is that the comparatively tiny volume, as compared to the SLR market, means there is less R&D and slower design turnover. SRLs are a billion dollar business and there are new sensors every 6 months or so. Specialty products can't really keep up, despite the high price tag per unit.

Two other things: smaller pixels generally demand higher glass quality. And smaller sensors increase depth-of-field. So bigger sensors allow shallower DOF, which is sometimes desirable.

This is not to say that bigger is always better. Like most things in photography, there are tradeoffs and the best choice depends on the type of photography and one's personal esthetic. I also shoot with a 7D, partly because I do a lot of sportshooting (where the Canon flagship has always been the slightly cropped APS-H 1D). Probably not the best choice for streetshooting or portrait work. But my choice was also influenced by the significantly higher cost of full-frame. I'm eager to add a second body in full frame. (I'm sure most photographers share my feeling that what we really want is both!)

very true

Submitted by Anonymous on 8. September 2012 - 4:09.

However, I think you forgot to mention, that for non-medium format cameras the bigger pixels less noise tends to be true. At least in my personal experience the ISO 1600 on the 7D competes with ISO 12800 on the 5DmarkIII. And those insanely high ISOs now deliver the quality I need as a commercial photographer (thanks to your ebook). But of course it's a bit unfair to compare them directly, since the 5D also has a new processor..

Ps. I'm a wide-angle guy. :) But I find it often disturbing, that the wideangle lenses, while matching my fov, don't have a matching perspective and the other way around.