Crop Vs Full Body
- Thread starter studio68
- Start date
- Messages
- 49,339
- Name
- Nod (UK)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Pro FF.
Wider angle of view from a given focal length.
If coming from a 35mm background, FoV from given FL is what you're used to.
In general, FF cameras have better high ISO performance in terms of noise handling.
Pro crop.
Extra perceived reach from a given focal length.
All lenses from the system fit and work.
generally cheaper than FF.
Wider angle of view from a given focal length.
If coming from a 35mm background, FoV from given FL is what you're used to.
In general, FF cameras have better high ISO performance in terms of noise handling.
Pro crop.
Extra perceived reach from a given focal length.
All lenses from the system fit and work.
generally cheaper than FF.
jryans10
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 546
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- No
Don't think that because Full Frame is more expensive that it's better, because this isn't the case.
Both are good, and have their benefits.
Essentially, a full frame has a bigger sensor and because of this, the image quality is better, you have less depth of field so you have more bokeh, the iso performance is better, wide angle lenses are wide etc.
However with crop, you get more for what you pay for because it has a zoom in effect when cropping. They're (much) cheaper, focal lengths increase, more lenses.
I have had a crop, moved to FF and now considering moving back to crop.
Both are good, and have their benefits.
Essentially, a full frame has a bigger sensor and because of this, the image quality is better, you have less depth of field so you have more bokeh, the iso performance is better, wide angle lenses are wide etc.
However with crop, you get more for what you pay for because it has a zoom in effect when cropping. They're (much) cheaper, focal lengths increase, more lenses.
I have had a crop, moved to FF and now considering moving back to crop.
- Messages
- 43,206
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
Some of this has already been said...
FF, has a bigger sensor than APS-C (like your 550D.) FF cameras generally have better performance particularly at the highest ISO's but any difference may only be visible when printing BIG, cropping a lot or pixel peeping.
With a FF camera you'll probably be using longer focal length lenses and this gives the effect of shallower DoF. This may be an advantage if you're going for shallow DoF but it's a disadvantage if you're going for deeper DoF and may push you to use smaller apertures and possibly longer shutter speed and / or higher ISO settings.
A FF camera and lens will generally be both bigger and heavier than an equivalent APS-C camera and lens set up.
Because APS-C has a smaller sensor you get the effect of having longer focal lengths. This can be an advantage when shooting some subjects, like macro or birds in flight.
APS-C may give you greater resolution.
An APS-C camera + lens will probably be smaller and lighter than an equivalent FF set up.
Because an APS-C camera has a smaller sensor you'll probably be using wider lenses and this can give the effect of deeper DoF and you may be able to shoot at faster shutter speeds and / or lower ISO's than you would with an equivalent FF camera and lens set up.
APS-C cameras are generally considered to give slightly lower image quality than FF cameras but you may have to print BIG, crop a lot of pixel peep to see any significant difference.
Last edited:
philthejuggler
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 7,086
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think it isn't necessarily worth the upgrade at the moment, but I think crop vs FF is a valid question for someone starting out.
Phil
Phil
