Why are so many of you on 1.6 crop cameras?

In my opinion, crop camera's are slightly more versitile than FF. Both body's will be fine to shoot any occasion, but overall, a crop sensor will handle more situations better (if that makes sense). Buy what you can afford or lean towards the body which suits the type of shooting you want to do. Personally, I shoot alot of landscapes and portraits, but also do a few sports shoots and candid street so I decided I wanted the overall versitility of a crop sensor and the higher FPS that the 40D gives.
 
mrgubby - I've got a cropped sensor because Canon fitted it to the camera I could afford, as simple and boring as that


68lbs - FWIW I've got one because until I joined this forum I didn't even know there were different size sensors.


Me two.
 
neo2810 said:
In my opinion, crop camera's are slightly more versitile than FF. Both body's will be fine to shoot any occasion, but overall, a crop sensor will handle more situations better (if that makes sense). Buy what you can afford or lean towards the body which suits the type of shooting you want to do. Personally, I shoot alot of landscapes and portraits, but also do a few sports shoots and candid street so I decided I wanted the overall versitility of a crop sensor and the higher FPS that the 40D gives.
Click to expand...

Apart from a possible higher FPS rate I can't see how a cropped sensor would be superior to a FF.
 
the reason why I raised this issue is that I am growing into a very keen photographer (with my aging 350D) but work as a graphic/motion graphics designer who delves frequently into video work combined with 3D/AE etc etc..

Now I can admit that the 5DmkII is a bit above my level of skill in photography terms, but due the release of the HDVideo support, the idea of having an all in one package (for a comparatively cheap price) that can do both, well its pretty much worth it for me.

So I was really wanting to know if any of the reasons that people havent stepped up to fullframe are very important to me. So unlike most of this threads mention of FF cost, its actually cost effective for me to be upgrading...

I am however still waiting for more 5D2 video to be posted as Im not completely sold yet
 
coldyn8w said:
Ive just been looking through the "Show your gear" thread and firstly am shocked at the amount of "Gear Heads" there are in this forum...

Secondly its weird to me that so many people has stuck with 30D's/40D's/450D's etc, and put huge investment into nice lens's. Is the 1.6 crop preferable for action shooting?

what is it that has stopped so many of you, including professionals to not move to full frame?

It just seems like the natural progression to me but maybe Im wrong.
Click to expand...


Put me behind a F/F camera and i will still take crap photo's:lol: we have hammered the crop sensor in previous threads, as for gear heads i use all my equipment "not at the same time" it's a collection like any other i should know i collect anything, mostly dust these days ;), each to there own and i like this forum a wide verity of experience and a wide verity of people with different views we respect yours and would ask like wise, anyway show us some pictures get your photo's out for us :lol:

Regards mark
 
Chappers said:
Apart from a possible higher FPS rate I can't see how a cropped sensor would be superior to a FF.
Click to expand...

Because pound for pound, you get more features on a crop than a FF (just compare the 40D to the 5D)

Personally I think that manufacturers keep the price of FF cameras artificially high so that they are considered "professional".

It would be nice to see an "entry level" FF body without all the sealing and very high build quality priced at around the same price as an XXD unit.....

I'd like a FF body because of the rich colours they produce, but I'm going to concentrate on glass for the time being. I want some "L's" in my kit bag...

Steve
 
My standing principle is "Invest in glass" Decent lenses depreciate *very* slowly - camera bodies come in and out of fashion very quickly.

Some of my very best photos are taken on 10 year old L series glass :)
 
On a slightly different slant to the same theme could someone please tell me the difference between going with a FF camera against my Nikon D200 using my Nikon 12-24mm wide angle lens? or even just using a wide angle lens anyway?

Thank you in advance
Realspeed
 
Crop sensors (longs their pixel density is high of course) are great for wildlife and other subjects where its actually hard to get close to your subject or its preferable to be further away from your subject.

I have a 1D which is only used for flight and action and a 30D (soon hopefully upgrading to 50D) which is my main camera for most wildlife.
To put it simply it puts much more pixels on the subject and you have a much more detailed photo at the end of the day.

Obviously in a perfect world, animals wouldn't be scared of people and in those rare situations i use my 1D. But at all other times the bigger crop camera gets the better photo 99% of the time.


coldyn8w said:
Ive just been looking through the "Show your gear" thread and firstly am shocked at the amount of "Gear Heads" there are in this forum...

Secondly its weird to me that so many people has stuck with 30D's/40D's/450D's etc, and put huge investment into nice lens's. Is the 1.6 crop preferable for action shooting?

what is it that has stopped so many of you, including professionals to not move to full frame?

It just seems like the natural progression to me but maybe Im wrong.
Click to expand...
 
Forgot to add.. some people like the fact that crop cameras don't suffer from soft edges with their lenses so much as well
 
Each sensor size has it's own pro's and con's and it's as simple as that. I use the format that's going to give me the best potential result for the shot I'm taking.

Bob
 
mercmanuk said:
Put me behind a F/F camera and i will still take crap photo's:lol: we have hammered the crop sensor in previous threads, as for gear heads i use all my equipment "not at the same time" it's a collection like any other i should know i collect anything, mostly dust these days ;), each to there own and i like this forum a wide verity of experience and a wide verity of people with different views we respect yours and would ask like wise, anyway show us some pictures get your photo's out for us :lol:

Regards mark
Click to expand...

Maybe It sounded like I was dissing 1.6 crops cams in my opening post and I apologise for that, I use a 350D, Im in no position to be running my mouth!:lol:

I was really just curious because I assumed moving to full frame once you could do so was a natural progression. But I understand why not now:)

Thanks for all the info everyone, this seems to be a topic that could be argued to the death:bang:

EDIT: and by gear heads, I meant people who love their equipment, just as I love mine. Not people who own or carry too much for their needs or anything like that:)
 
D300 crop sensor suits my photography, I don`t want a FF D3 or D700, simple as that really........:shrug:
 
coldyn8w said:
Maybe It sounded like I was dissing 1.6 crops cams in my opening post and I apologise for that, I use a 350D, Im in no position to be running my mouth!:lol:

I was really just curious because I assumed moving to full frame once you could do so was a natural progression. But I understand why not now:)

Thanks for all the info everyone, this seems to be a topic that could be argued to the death:bang:

EDIT: and by gear heads, I meant people who love their equipment, just as I love mine. Not people who own or carry too much for their needs or anything like that:)
Click to expand...

I am old:)

Sorry to diss you re the gear heads i should have made the analogy as to piston heads car lovers i see the link. hope you enjoy TP.



Anyway Brudder Like I'll be shootin off slipping my wheels-chair into high gear and gowin for a cruise, burn De rubber,,, hows that :) i do like to join in now and again.

Kind Regards Mark.
 
coldyn8w said:
yep, but if you Full Frame has ample resolution you could afford to crop it in Photoshop no?
Click to expand...

The only full frame cameras which you can really make that claim for are the 1DSMK3 and the new 5D MK2 - both with 21 million pixels. Both would retain slightly less pixels than the 40D to crop to the same field of view, which is actually pretty good, but the new 50D with 15 million pixels would be streets ahead again.
 
CT said:
The only full frame cameras which you can really make that claim for are the 1DSMK3 and the new 5D MK2 - both with 21 million pixels. Both would retain slightly less pixels than the 40D to crop to the same field of view, which is actually pretty good, but the new 50D with 15 million pixels would be streets ahead again.
Click to expand...

The 5DII would actually crop down to almost exactly what the 30D produces, so it's a couple of million behind the 40D. To match the 40D you would need almost 26 million and to match the 50D you would need over 38 million pixels!

This really hits home how much extra "zoom" you get with a crop sensor.
 
bod said:
This really hits home how much extra "zoom" you get with a crop sensor.
Click to expand...

But that's "digital" zoom, not "optical" zoom, which are two different things IIRC.....

Steve
 
coldyn8w said:
Secondly its weird to me that so many people has stuck with 30D's/40D's/450D's etc, and put huge investment into nice lens's. Is the 1.6 crop preferable for action shooting?

what is it that has stopped so many of you, including professionals to not move to full frame?

It just seems like the natural progression to me but maybe Im wrong.
Click to expand...
Investing in glass is a much wiser choise than camera's bodies as it's the lens that will make the most difference to your image quality, so it makes sense for people to upgrade the glass first.

A crop sensor is good if you do telephoto work and lastly, crop sensor bodies are cheaper lol
 
As we're now all pretty much over to digital, I'm not sure that the old 35mm format has any relevance what so ever.

Obviously I realise that the larger sensor probably means better quality, but it's a completely different thing and I can't really see why we still talk about it. If anything, we should be looking to a 'wide screen' format for our still cameras.
 
It's not digital zoom in the sense that it's been interpolated (what digital zoom is on compact cameras).
It actually puts more physical pixels on your subject, which is very similar to having a bigger focal length lens.


Jelster said:
But that's "digital" zoom, not "optical" zoom, which are two different things IIRC.....

Steve
Click to expand...
 
Digital zoom is a crop followed by an enlargement of the photo to bring it back up to the same pixel size (on most cameras anyway).
Which is why digital zoom degrades quality so much and has always been pointless to me.

A 1.6 crop sensor on a dslr on the other hand has the same amount of native pixels in that smaller crop (compared to a sensor of equal mp or even slightly more but on a bigger sensor). If you get my drift?

It's a whole different kettle of penguins.

Joe T said:
I thought diigtal zoom was just a crop?
Click to expand...
 
Badger UK said:
As we're now all pretty much over to digital, I'm not sure that the old 35mm format has any relevance what so ever.
Click to expand...

FF is the term still used because of the fact there are so many 35mm lenses out there, new and old, which will make the full use of the field of view offered on a 35mm (FF) sensor.So for example a 20mm lens is just that.

DX will crop your image down so your not getting the field of view of a 20mm lens but anything from 25mm to over 30mm depending on your DX camera, so really it makes perfect sense that that FF is still used and has plenty of relevance.

I wouldn't be surprised of DX bodies start to become few and far between further down the line as technology gets cheaper.
 
If I had the money for full frame, I'd be on full frame in a shot. Unfortunately I don't, so I'm not.
 
CT said:
The only full frame cameras which you can really make that claim for are the 1DSMK3 and the new 5D MK2 - both with 21 million pixels. Both would retain slightly less pixels than the 40D to crop to the same field of view, which is actually pretty good, but the new 50D with 15 million pixels would be streets ahead again.
Click to expand...

I know we've touched on this before but lets try again.....

The new 50D sensor has 212 pixels/mm which in ideal circumstances would allow recording of 106 line pairs/mm.....black-white-black-white and so on.
To be able to use the crop and enlarge to gain additional "zoom", the lens would need to resolve 106 lp/mm or 3160 line widths/sensor height (lw/sh).
A top quality (resolutionwise) Canon L series lens like the EF135L can resolve around 2300 lw/sh.
How can the detail be blown up (digitally zoomed) when it was never registered on the sensor in the first place due to the limitation of the lens?
I think that crop-zooming on the higher resolution sensors isn't possible beyond what the lens is capable of and a 15Mp sensor isn't going to capture any more than a 10Mp sensor with a quality lens and an 8Mp sensor with an average zoom.
What am I missing here?

Bob
 
Werecow said:
It's not digital zoom in the sense that it's been interpolated (what digital zoom is on compact cameras).
It actually puts more physical pixels on your subject, which is very similar to having a bigger focal length lens.
Click to expand...

Aha... So, 10M pixels on a (for example) 22x18mm sensor compared to 10m pixels on a FF sensor, would give you more pixels on a given area, but the pixels on the FF would be bigger (and potentially, of better quality) ????

Have I understood this correctly ?

Steve
 
Werecow said:
It actually puts more physical pixels on your subject, which is very similar to having a bigger focal length lens.
Click to expand...

Only if those pixels were given the detail by the lens.

Bob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top