and the site receives a small commission
Crop or full frame sensor?
- Thread starter treeman
- Start date
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Tell us the reason youre askingParticularly field sports photographers, what do you use and why?
Thanks
(There is a reason why I'm asking, it's not pure indulgence)
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I dont think its purely a question of crop of FF but more brand loyalty, before Nikon introduced the D3 there wasnt a choice as all "pro" sports photo journalist cameras were crop, 1.3x for Canon and 1.5x for Nikon.
If you had heavily invested in glass then you tended to stick with whatever your choice of camera maker came out with next and only Nikon came out with a full frame pro sports camera.
so like i say its more a brand choice than anything
Then of course theres the question of budget, anyone on a budget has no real choice other than a crop camera for either Canon or Nikon
It can also depend on the sport and wether or not you need the extra reach a crop camera affords
If you had heavily invested in glass then you tended to stick with whatever your choice of camera maker came out with next and only Nikon came out with a full frame pro sports camera.
so like i say its more a brand choice than anything
Then of course theres the question of budget, anyone on a budget has no real choice other than a crop camera for either Canon or Nikon
It can also depend on the sport and wether or not you need the extra reach a crop camera affords
Last edited:
OP
treeman
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 4,094
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
I thought some one may ask
Long story short, I can't get my head around what to do with regard to lens purchase.
Currently F/F body with 300mm f2.8 and 1.4 convertor, giving me 420mm at f4, I'd rather be shooting at f2.8 though. So I started to wonder about getting crop body, then with the 300mm effectively giving me 450mm at f2.8, BUT that also gives me greater DOF which I don't want.
So I then started wondering what every one else shoots on :shrug:
I know what the answer is, go and buy a 400mm f2.8, but with the exception of my house, it would be the most money I've spent on anything in my life!
DemiLion
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 13,016
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
You've already sussed out the correct answer though Mark... hire a cropper and see whether you like it or not.
I use both x1.3 and x1.6 on Canon for different purposes pretty much like you are suggesting, but that's because I couldn't come close to getting a 400/2.8 at the moment; FFS I'm still saving for a 300!!
It does work for Eventing though, when I need extra reach for a more distant fence, but as you suggest DoF gets sacrificed.
I use both x1.3 and x1.6 on Canon for different purposes pretty much like you are suggesting, but that's because I couldn't come close to getting a 400/2.8 at the moment; FFS I'm still saving for a 300!!
It does work for Eventing though, when I need extra reach for a more distant fence, but as you suggest DoF gets sacrificed.
OP
treeman
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 4,094
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
Yep, looks like a trail and error job! I basically need to find out if a crop sensor at f2.8 might have less DOF than a F/F at F4.
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I use a D3S with a Nikon 400mm f/2.8 with a 1.4 attached so f/4 and the depth of field is very shallow, i did also use the 400 on my old D300s wide open at f/2.8 and the deptH of field wasnt anywhere as shallow as f/4 on FF
Even with my 1.7x attached to my D3s (f/4.8) the depth of field is still shallower than f/2.8 on a crop camera
Thats Nikon of course, Canon 1D series only have a 1.3 crop sensor so would give different results
DemiLion
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 13,016
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
You can work that one out easily by punching some figures into a DoF calculator:
@20m
x1.0 (FF) f/4:
400mm = 58.81cm
450mm= 46.35cm
x1.5 300mm:
f/2.8 = 49.04cm
f/4 = 70.07cm
so the difference is going to be minimal
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not so sure about the accuracy of those things, theres simply no way on FF that my depth of field is 59cm (2 ft) at 20 metres using f/4, i would say its 8-9 inches maximum
OP
treeman
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 4,094
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
Does that take into account camera to subject distance, that would need to change to keep the image the same in camera?
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I would say borrow a cropper and check yourself, i guarantee you will give it back straight away, been there, several times, bought several t shirts but always gone back to FF
Only way i could even consider a cropper again would be by switching to the 1.3x crop of a Canon 1 series but ive also done that twice in the last 4 years and come back to FF Nikon or as a third lightwieght everyday body but the D700 takes care of that for me
DemiLion
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 13,016
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
Yup - hence the @20m being the distance, and the use of 300mm for the x1.5 and 450mm for FF, giving roughly the same angle of view/framing.
Gary, I agree that the calculators aren't perfect, but they give an approximation of what you can expect.
You've got weird ideas about these things anyway!
OP
treeman
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 4,094
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
I think I need to try that, a £1000 crop body just sounds so much more attractive that a £7000 lens, but I think I know where this is going
Yup - hence the @20m being the distance, and the use of 300mm for the x1.5 and 450mm for FF, giving roughly the same angle of view/framing.
Gary, I agree that the calculators aren't perfect, but they give an approximation of what you can expect.
You've got weird ideas about these things anyway!
Yep, see what you're saying now. Thanks