Photography Full frame vs crop camera

[Vas (Jack)]

Hi. I know most photographers prefer full frame cameras over crop cameras. Is there any specific reason why everyone would go for full frame?

Example I have 2 body cameras, and both are crop, what's the advantages of using crop cameras in landscape photography?

 

[Andy Smith]

Hi. I know most photographers prefer full frame cameras over crop cameras. Is there any specific reason why everyone would go for full frame?

Example I have 2 body cameras, and both are crop, what's the advantages of using crop cameras in landscape photography?

For me the Full Frame provides better sharpness, resolution and less noise. I personally don't see any advantage of a crop sensor camera for landscape. If you have expensive lenses then a Full Frame camera will get slightly more quality out of them, especially in low light conditions where noise could be a factor due to higher ISO settings.
That being said, it's the end resulting image that counts, and you can get fantastic images on crop sensors. Most people don't care what camera was used really, just what the final image looks like. It really is the person behind the camera rather than which camera was used.

 

[Chavezshutter]

And

Hi. I know most photographers prefer full frame cameras over crop cameras. Is there any specific reason why everyone would go for full frame?

Example I have 2 body cameras, and both are crop, what's the advantages of using crop cameras in landscape photography?

I have to agree with what Andy Smith has said - low light performance, ISO, dynamic range, wider fov, shallower dof, another reason to go full frame is that sadly it seems crop camera manufacturing and buying does seem to be slowing down, there will be plenty of them for years to come but it does seem like their going the same way as film cameras eventually as FF becomes more common.

Reach (nice to have but wouldnt call it a must in landscape), sometimes weight and price are the advantages i can think of. Many FF cameras can run in crop mode getting the same reach of a crop (2 focal lengths out of one lens is kind of neat) but they sacrifice resolution doing it so mostly if we want more reach ideally you want a longer lens and that reminds me to think about the price increase in the lens not just the camera body. I also conclude that photography isnt about equipment but about the photographer's eye, timing and perseverance but i will also add - the better tools, the better the end results all things equal 😉

 

[Vas (Jack)]

For me the Full Frame provides better sharpness, resolution and less noise. I personally don't see any advantage of a crop sensor camera for landscape. If you have expensive lenses then a Full Frame camera will get slightly more quality out of them, especially in low light conditions where noise could be a factor due to higher ISO settings.
That being said, it's the end resulting image that counts, and you can get fantastic images on crop sensors. Most people don't care what camera was used really, just what the final image looks like. It really is the person behind the camera rather than which camera was used.

Thanks for reply Andy Smith . Because I was thinking to start saving for full frame mirrorless camera, but I would rather invest in a lens than in a body camera.

I know full frame provides better resolution, and works better in a low light as well. But are there any other advantages of full frame?

And yes, agree with, is all depends who is behind the camera.

 

[Vas (Jack)]

And

I have to agree with what Andy Smith has said - low light performance, ISO, dynamic range, wider fov, shallower dof, another reason to go full frame is that sadly it seems crop camera manufacturing and buying does seem to be slowing down, there will be plenty of them for years to come but it does seem like their going the same way as film cameras eventually as FF becomes more common.

Reach (nice to have but wouldnt call it a must in landscape), sometimes weight and price are the advantages i can think of. Many FF cameras can run in crop mode getting the same reach of a crop (2 focal lengths out of one lens is kind of neat) but they sacrifice resolution doing it so mostly if we want more reach ideally you want a longer lens and that reminds me to think about the price increase in the lens not just the camera body. I also conclude that photography isnt about equipment but about the photographer's eye, timing and perseverance but i will also add - the better tools, the better the end results all things equal 😉

You need right tools for the right job. I know for crop cameras there are other lenses, example for Canon, there are EF-S lenses, but I wouldn't want to invest in them since Canon might get rid of all crop cameras and eventually all these lenses will become legacy.

At the moment I have only 1 EF-S lens, wide angle. But haven't used much. I tent to buy FF lenses as maybe in couple of years I'll buy a full frame camera.

I believe crop cameras are good for wildlife, macro and Birding because of extra reach, and you don't need to have much in the picture.

 

[Andy Smith]

Thanks for reply Andy Smith . Because I was thinking to start saving for full frame mirrorless camera, but I would rather invest in a lens than in a body camera.

I know full frame provides better resolution, and works better in a low light as well. But are there any other advantages of full frame?

And yes, agree with, is all depends who is behind the camera.

Invest in lenses that is the smart choice.

 

[Chavezshutter]

You need right tools for the right job. I know for crop cameras there are other lenses, example for Canon, there are EF-S lenses, but I wouldn't want to invest in them since Canon might get rid of all crop cameras and eventually all these lenses will become legacy.

At the moment I have only 1 EF-S lens, wide angle. But haven't used much. I tent to buy FF lenses as maybe in couple of years I'll buy a full frame camera.

I believe crop cameras are good for wildlife, macro and Birding because of extra reach, and you don't need to have much in the picture.

If you got the lenses already, your most of the way there at FF already but I would only buy a FF camera if I didn't have a camera or had to replace an older one. Apart from that you're good for a long while. And yes crop sensor camera have a reach advantage in any situation where for whatever reason you can't fill the frame using FF, for birding the saying "you never have enough reach" is common, for macro if its a live subject, you cant get too close before you disturb the subject.

 

[Vas (Jack)]

Invest in lenses that is the smart choice.

Agree. That's why I prefer to buy an expensive lens rather than a expensive body. But I believe having good camera will work better with an expensive lens.

 

[Vas (Jack)]

If you got the lenses already, your most of the way there at FF already but I would only buy a FF camera if I didn't have a camera or had to replace an older one. Apart from that you're good for a long while. And yes crop sensor camera have a reach advantage in any situation where for whatever reason you can't fill the frame using FF, for birding the saying "you never have enough reach" is common, for macro if its a live subject, you cant get too close before you disturb the subject.

Yes, I believe makes sense to buy crop camera for wildlife and Birding and full frame for other genre of photography, like landscape. Maybe that's why full frame cameras are more expensive than crop cameras.

 

[René Rufer]

The advantages of the FF camera were explained. I have switched from crop (canon 80D) to FF (canon 6D MII) and estimate the top results in low light. Up ISO 1200 the crop sensor generate noise . I only use my old crop camera when I photograph macro and want to get closer (Butterflyy or dragonfly).

 

[oscar118]

Just take into account that everything is bulkier, heavier and more expensive for FF.

 

[Morexp57]

Just take into account that everything is bulkier, heavier and more expensive for FF.

Correct. And there is a good software for noise reduction. I’m using DXO Photolab with very good results.

 

[Vas (Jack)]

Just take into account that everything is bulkier, heavier and more expensive for FF.

I probably can get a mirrorless FF camera and use L lenses on camera. That's photography, is to be expected to cary heavy equipment around

 

[Vas (Jack)]

Correct. And there is a good software for noise reduction. I’m using DXO Photolab with very good results.

I'm using Topaz denoise, have you tried ?

 

[Vas (Jack)]

The advantages of the FF camera were explained. I have switched from crop (canon 80D) to FF (canon 6D MII) and estimate the top results in low light. Up ISO 1200 the crop sensor generate noise . I only use my old crop camera when I photograph macro and want to get closer (Butterflyy or dragonfly).

I will switch as well, once I'll get an other 2-3 L lenses on my collection. Would like to get 100-400mm II L. .

 

[Morexp57]

I'm using Topaz denoise, have you tried ?

No, I haven't tried. I switched to DXO Photolab because I didn't feel like paying a subscription fee for Lightroom. DXO's denoising process, DeepPrime, is comparable to Topaz denoise from what I've read. Now I don't use Lightroom at all.

 

[René Rufer]

No, I haven't tried. I switched to DXO Photolab because I didn't feel like paying a subscription fee for Lightroom. DXO's denoising process, DeepPrime, is comparable to Topaz denoise from what I've read. Now I don't use Lightroom at all.

for the same reason subscription by LR, i change on Capture one. I don't regret it!

 

[Vas (Jack)]

for the same reason subscription by LR, i change on Capture one. I don't regret it!

I think we have a voucher code on Macroderie to get discount on software.

 

[Vas (Jack)]

No, I haven't tried. I switched to DXO Photolab because I didn't feel like paying a subscription fee for Lightroom. DXO's denoising process, DeepPrime, is comparable to Topaz denoise from what I've read. Now I don't use Lightroom at all.

I know what you saying, nowadays most software have implemented this subscription which are not really worth. Depending if you make money out of photography and that's your profession.

 

[panos_adgr]

What an interesting topic Jack!

I could write tons of things on this subject.
My gear consists basically of Full Frame cameras plus one crop frame camera. I migrated to Full Frame some years ago for many reasons. But before I write anything more there is some things that must be said first!
Above all is the photographer, his/hers knowledge, motivation, psyche and purpose, behind the camera.
A better camera won't do better photos.
Better lenses will sure deliver better 'technical' results with moderate bodies than cheap lenses in hi-end bodies.
And finally is what kind of photography the photographer is doing and what expectations does he/she has.

Now about the advantages with facts.
There are some factors that are the most basic.

Pixel pitch / size
It has to do with the pixel surface and its ability to gather photons which will be then converted to electrical signal. And this is physics! A 24mp full frame sensor has larger pixel surface than a 24mp equivalent crop or smaller format sensor have.
This results in better 'sensor saturation' gathering more light (better signal to noise ratio even in native iso) and thus needing less 'signal amplification' in high iso with whatever this means in signal quality degradation.
There are also cases that some high res full frame cameras have identical pixel pitch / size to crop cameras. i.e. Nikon D850 (FF) has about the same size of pixels as the D500 (APSC).

Sensor Technology
Very very important as well! We have seen great improvements in sensor performance even in sensors with smaller sized pixels because they are designed with BSI technology or stacked.
In example a High res FF sensor (45mp - 60mp) could be greatly benefit from this technology because it uses smaller pixels to achieve the desirable designed resolution to the same physical boundaries of a standard (if i can use this term) resolution FF sensor, let's say 24mp. So it benefits from quicker readouts e.t.c.

Processor Technology
The 'magic staff'. Yes it is very important as well. Good computational technology is needed to manage the sensor signal with the least noise possible and the best possible 'called' colour science.

Inevitable Physics
So we have a good sensor, a good processor and all is fine. Well not exactly. A larger pixel sized sensor will surely achieve better 'saturation' (not colour saturation, I'm talking about light / photon saturation)
And physics do apply to lenses as well with the same inevitable way. A good lens formula and implementation will make even a modest camera offer great results.

It is a chain of things which combined offer a result.
BUT!
The photographer is the most important 'element' in the equation.
It is greatly important for any photographer to have the high knowledge in exposure understanding and interpretation of it creatively through the use of exposure settings in order to achieve his desired result. And for this case there are many techniques to achieve it.

Now to a more subjective (personal) side of things.

I work with almost the same comfort and trust with my crop camera as with my Full Frame cameras. One reason of course is that my crop camera offers amazing Image Quality for my personal criteria and needs.
My Full Frame cameras do offer though some significant advantages over my crop camera. They offer better colour depth, better dynamic range especially in shadows, significantly lower noise floor even in native iso which is quite helpful in files shot in native iso which happen to have a lot of shadow parts with plenty detail.
Better contrast/clarity especially in reach textured scenes or subjects.

Now about sharpness I won't comment because it has to do clearly with high pass filter presence or not in each sensor along with what lens the photographer uses.

Now if someone would set me a dilemma of choosing to use only one format I would choose Full Frame without a second or even a first thought. FF straight. Although I'm very pleased with my crop camera which I do also find it to be quite sufficient, the advantages of my FF cameras do offer my 'more space' to work on my images plus the advantages of colour depth I aforementioned.

Before someone answers the question Crop or Full Frame camera oughts to, at least, know very very well, the fundamentals of exposure, his/hers camera gear and how it works and of course the importance of lens implementation in the equation of Subject / Light / Camera / Photographer through his/hers personal needs!

If the above things are well sought out and the individual can 'take the most out' of his/her gear then he/she will definitely know what is the best to use along with his/hers needs.
If not, then discussions like this end with meaningless debates as we see in social media communities etc.