Comments on: Full Frame Sensor vs Crop Sensor – Which is Right For You?

By: foodbymark

foodbymark — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 23:40:53 +0000

I am upgrading from 20D to 5Dmk2 next month… I want the low light performance which is far superior. I’ve played with one, it’s incredible the difference but then my 5D is long in the tooth.

By: Tyler - Building Camelot

Tyler - Building Camelot — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 03:17:52 +0000

The article and comments here have been very helpful. I also found a great write up bu Ken Rockwell about the advantages of full frame cameras. Granted it's from 2007 but I think the principles still hold true today. Now if I could just convince my wife that I need to drop some $$$ on a D700

By: Mr DP

Mr DP — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 16:32:59 +0000

I have a hard time understanding the argument that a smaller than full frame sensor is better because you get more reach. This just doesn’t make any sense to me. It’s really a function of pixel density. If I have a full frame and a 1.3x crop sensor with the same pixel density then I should be able to zoom in on the full frame image to get the same 1.3x picture. Am I missing something here?

I could see that if I have two 12 megapixel cameras, one at a 1.3x and one full frame that I would have more reach with the 1.3x. However, this is at a loss of image quality. This would mean the pixels on the 1.3x camera were smaller and therefore would contain more noise.

What’s so great about having a smaller than full frame sensor?

By: stacey

stacey — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 13:40:38 +0000

I am seeking advice on what sort of camera to get and i am torn between the canon 50d vs the full frame of canon 5d mark 2, sony a900 and the nikon d700. i have 2 different sales man tell me i need 2 different cameras, one said i need the canon 50 d and the other one told me only go nikon. i want to get a good camera that is going to last me for many years and one that does not become outdated within a year. i like taking pictures of kids and family and of landscapes and i do not plan on it being my profession. i like the faster frames per second that sony, nikon and the 50d offer. i have been reading on numerous websites about cropped vs full frame and on the ISO. i am confused on what would be the best for me.

By: Andrew Brown

Andrew Brown — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 08:51:30 +0000

I’ve just got a 5D MkII after owning a 30D and a 40D. The 40D is a great camera and i’m more than happy to use it except…

I do a lot of low light shooting and i have to say that the 30D and 40D doesn’t even come close to the abilities of the 5D MkII under low light conditions. Next, i am looking at making a living from photography and am starting off by using image libraries. Outputting a picture at 21mp allows me to have far greater control of IQ for an image library than having to scale up via interpolation which is necessary with the 30D and 40D.

Did full frame over crop come into my equation when choosing to buy this camera? Only as a curiosity factor to see what the difference was. For my type of photography the 5D MkII is ideal – i don’t need the 5 & 6 fps provided by the 30D and 40D bodies – but i will say this. For any one looking to get into DSLR photography using Canon kit i would most definitely recommend the 40D – you won’t go far wrong.

By: Dennison Uy

Dennison Uy — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 05:52:59 +0000

Very informative write-up. It has definitely helped me understand and appreciate my gear even more.

By: Javid Jamae

Javid Jamae — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:26:57 +0000

I’m just getting into photography, so correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think a crop sensor gives you any extra “reach” as you claim in the article and as some of the comments claim. The focal length on a lens doesn’t change when you put it on a crop body vs. a full body. Its only the field of view that changes. This means that you can get the same shot standing in the same position at the same focal length with the same lens using a full frame body vs. a crop body and the only difference would be that the image with the full frame body would contain more “picture” so to speak. You could then crop that picture (taken with the full frame camera) down to the same exact size as you would get with a crop lens. I guess if you don’t want to post process your pictures, or you want to frame them perfectly right when you take them, this might be important to you, but otherwise, I don’t really see any technical advantage to using a crop lens, and I don’t think it gives you any extra “reach”.

See: http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/crop_sensor_cameras_and_lenses.html

Again, I could be wrong, since I’m new to this, so if I am, please correct me.

By: David

David — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 10:13:00 +0000

@Thomas,

I guess no one answered your question yet about equivalent cameras and different size sensors asking what will the exposure value be. Thomas, for a given film speed, aperture and lightvalue, the shutter speed will be the same regardless of whether the sensor has a 1.0 crop factor or any other crop factor. This is also true about digital vs film and different film sizes. I.e., the shutter speed you get for the DSLR is the same for a 35mm negative and a 4×5 negative. The relationship between the light value and aperture is the same by definition. This is also why you can use a handheld light meter and get the correct exposure regardless of the camera. Hope this helps!

By: Jamie

Jamie — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:17:19 +0000

@David: it’s a crop, not magnification. It’s just like pulling the middle of the image out.

@Stan: the Olympus crop is 2x. The 4/3 system uses a smaller sensor, so it crops more.

@Gregg: you can get a little bit more shallow on the DoF, but it isn’t a huge difference. On the other end, diffraction isn’t nearly as bad as it is with the smaller sensors. You can stop down to f/16 without taking a hit on the quality.

Just a point of clarification: the 1D is a crop body (1.3x), the 1Ds is FF.

By: Richard

Richard — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 06:38:14 +0000

The APS-C size crop is 1.5 of 35mm