APS-C vs. FF vs. lenses

[Soocom1]

Try it some time.

 

[fjrabon]

Try it some time.

Here are some completely normal looking images of just that being done. MF lenses are sort of nice because their center is sharp and 35mm only gets the center of the image, but it simply looks like a good 35mm lens. It's not really different in any real way.

 

[Solarflare]

Is full frame better than APS-C.... yes, but really for 2 reasons only
1) Better dynamic range. There is no argument, you will have greater ability to recover shadow and highlight with a full frame sensor simply because they are generally better sensors and you pay for that.
2) Larger field of view. This will allow you more versatility in when you can use a lens with a longer focal length, especially indoors.

Well, thats kinda wrong, or at least highly misleading, on both accounts.

1) The general difference between smaller and larger sensors is in the signal to noise ratio. That means better color depth, better dynamic range, AND better high ISO performance.

According to DxOMark, the highest dynamic range is currently from the D810 with 14.7 EV, while the Pentax K-5 manages 14.1 EV on an APS-C sensor. The differences with bit depth are 25.7 bit on the D810 vs 24.3 bit on the D3300. The best high ISO is the Sony A7s with ISO 3702, while the best APS-C high ISO is Nikon D5500 with ISO 1438. The performance of the human eye, by the way, is approx 24-27 bit of color depth, so even the best digital cameras are barely enough to match the human eye in this area.

Thus simply switching from Sony/Nikon sensors to Canon sensors will already have a bigger impact on dynamic range (in general Canon offers approx 2-3 EV less dynamic range than compareable Sony/Nikon sensors, the best is the Canon 1Ds Mark III with 12.0 EV) than the sensor size. At least according to how DxOMark has tried to reduce a rather complex issue into a single number.

2) The crop factor is simply a fact, not an advantage or disadvantage. A 32mm lens will give the same field of view on an APS-C sensor than a 50mm lens on a full frame sensor. Thats how it is. No advantage there.

Especially there is ZIP advantage with an APS-C piece of glass on a full frame sensor because the full frame sensor will be reduced to using the APS-C area, so for example a 36 megapixel full frame sensor will suddenly only offer 15 Megapixels.

 

[sashbar]

I have a feeling I have read all that 10000000 times. For how long are we going to beat this dead APSC-FF horse? This horse is so dead, even worms that were eating it are dead. And bacteria that ate these worms are dead. This horse is the deadest animal in the Land of Dead. And we still take a stick and waste our time banging on its head. Really.
I would suggest a ban on discussing it again with no photos attached. If you want to compare, post a FF image and the same image taken with the same lense and APSC and we could discuss meaningful and meaningless differences.
And I do not want to see another "test image", give me a couple of images that have real photographic value and impact and explain how this value and this impact are affected by the sensor size.
Otherwise we look like boys students in a remote Pakistani village religious school, repeating the same old thing again and again.
Rant is over

 

[Solarflare]

I think its mostly because people feel the need to justify they bought a smaller sensor.


P.s.: Oh and thats perfectly cool if you're happy with the IQ you're getting.

It just happends that I often am photographing in bad light, so the sensors cant be big enough and I love bright primes, too.

 

[sashbar]

I think its mostly because people feel the need to justify they bought a smaller sensor.


P.s.: Oh and thats perfectly cool if you're happy with the IQ you're getting.

It just happends that I often am photographing in bad light, so the sensors cant be big enough and I love bright primes, too.

Here we go again...

 

[Soocom1]

Ok....

First, the sensor size is critical for another primary aspect. That being absolute resolution. You have more absolute area to record information. This is akin to a desktop to a server.
For those not able to relate to that, think of it this way: Look at the threads on your bed sheet. The finer the thread count the finer the cloth. The larger the cloth, the more information that can be recorded, PERIOD!

Secondly. In regards to the lens issue: in regards to that, why is it that the much desired Canon or Nikon lenses are so friggn large?
More than that, notice that many of those lenses are limited in zoom or are prime. Why?

To understand that, think of sucking soda through a straw. The larger diameter the straw the more you can suck through at one time.

Ok simple enough. So what about light?

In most modern lenses you have many multiple elements Though very high quality, that glass is not (just like the air) fully transparent. The more elements, means the more in the way of light refraction and blockage. Also you have more in the way of actual lens coating which is NOT transparent.

Third: Because of this aspect, here is where you have to put on the ol' thinking cap.
The concept is known as Modulation Transfer Function. or MTF. This little known aspect is what drives the lens size movement.

MTF - Luminous Landscape

You are correct that the center of the lens means sharper focus and a larger element means a large in focus area.

But it also means more actual light is coming in and reducing light drop off, vignetteing (as previously mentioned) because it increases actual light circle size, and because like the straw, your allowing in more actual light. This helps increase contrast.

There is another factor involving lines per millimeter and this take a while to understand. But its actual area that is the concern.
A Med. Format lens on an APS sensor will drive high quality light, but alas it also depends on the quality of the lens itself.

To finish this off, (and keep in mind I have played with micro, mini, small, med. large and VL Formats) I have a 1Ds and a 70D.

Putting them both to the test, the resolution of the 70D smokes the 1Ds in actual defined detail. (Here is the Mp count argument)
But the 1Ds smokes the 70D in actual area resolution. Any Med. format lens used on either or both will have diff. results.

It whether or not you want to play the game.