Full Frame DSLR with a flip out screen

[skieur]

Won't the a99 have a flip out screen?

The A77 has a flipout screen at 24 megapixels and the A99 will have a flip out screen in April 2012. Popular Photography magazine has indicated that there is no longer any difference in quality between images from crop body cameras and images from full frame cameras.

skieur

 

[ConradM]

Won't the a99 have a flip out screen?

The A77 has a flipout screen at 24 megapixels and the A99 will have a flip out screen in April 2012. Popular Photography magazine has indicated that there is no longer any difference in quality between images from crop body cameras and images from full frame cameras.

skieur

Serious question, what's the benefit of a FF?

 

[skieur]

Won't the a99 have a flip out screen?

The A77 has a flipout screen at 24 megapixels and the A99 will have a flip out screen in April 2012. Popular Photography magazine has indicated that there is no longer any difference in quality between images from crop body cameras and images from full frame cameras.

skieur

Serious question, what's the benefit of a FF?

Well, it was a matter of focal length. A 28mm wide angle lens on a full frame camera would create an image at a focal length of 28mm. A 28mm wide angle lense on a crop body camera would create an image at the focal length of approximately 40mm. The differrence is that the latter image would no longer be wide angle and you would get less in the picture. In other words, crop body cameras did not produce good wide angle images.

What changed is that camera makers started to produce quality 10mm to 20mm wide angle zooms which even on a crop body camera produced wide angle images at 15mm to 30mm in focal length.

So the original advantage of FF cameras was better wide angle photos, but that is no longer the case. The advantage of crop body cameras is the ability to produce a telephoto shot with a lighter, less expensive lens.

So a 300mm telephoto on a FF camera produces an image at 300mm focal length. On a crop body camera you multiply the focal length of the lens by approximately 1.5 which means that a 300mm telephoto lens will produce an image at a focal length of 450mm which would be a much closer photo of the bird or subject in the distance.

Picture noise used to also be less of a problem on a FF camera, than on a crop body camera but that gap has narrowed considerably as well to the point of being unnoticeable.

skieur

 

[Jimdus]

Here I am a noob. 1st night, but I may have an insight. I'm considering a D7000 and almost changed my mind on this feature until I thought: "Could this be an issue with weather / dust proofing?". I don't think a pro would find it offensive. After all, waist level IS a better perspective. The articulated screen is a help with macro, and going the otherway helps with shooting over other people's heads (parades / paparazzi). Even my old Olympus E-10 boasts it!

 

[nickzou]

Won't the a99 have a flip out screen?

The A77 has a flipout screen at 24 megapixels and the A99 will have a flip out screen in April 2012. Popular Photography magazine has indicated that there is no longer any difference in quality between images from crop body cameras and images from full frame cameras.

skieur

Serious question, what's the benefit of a FF?

First! Skieur can you post your source. Honestly, I would love to believe you. I'm looking forward to the D400 more than the D800 but IQ is always a concern for me. I would love to read this article.

And as to Conrad, IF we assume what Skieur is saying is true than the only real difference is that FF bodies can have wider focal lengths in the grand scheme of things and shallower depth of field. But again, only if this is true. I have a feeling that the D4 will rape my D7000 sideways in terms of IQ.

 

[trojancast]

The A77 has a flipout screen at 24 megapixels and the A99 will have a flip out screen in April 2012. Popular Photography magazine has indicated that there is no longer any difference in quality between images from crop body cameras and images from full frame cameras.

skieur

Sorry, I'm not buying. I have both FF and crop body Canon's (5D2 & T3i) and there is no comparison between the two. T3i is a lovely camera, but cannot hold a candle to the 5D2. IF Pop Photo made such a statement, it is rubbish. Maybe theft are talking about on a tiny laptop screen . . .

 

[nickzou]

The A77 has a flipout screen at 24 megapixels and the A99 will have a flip out screen in April 2012. Popular Photography magazine has indicated that there is no longer any difference in quality between images from crop body cameras and images from full frame cameras.

skieur

Sorry, I'm not buying. I have both FF and crop body Canon's (5D2 & T3i) and there is no comparison between the two. T3i is a lovely camera, but cannot hold a candle to the 5D2. IF Pop Photo made such a statement, it is rubbish. Maybe theft are talking about on a tiny laptop screen . . .

I kinda suspect that you are exaggerating to make a point... And I understand and probably would agree with your point... But it still feels like a hyperbole. And I think these hyperboles do more harm than good when it comes to educating people about the actual differences in IQ and optics design.

 

[EchoingWhisper]

Won't the a99 have a flip out screen?

The A77 has a flipout screen at 24 megapixels and the A99 will have a flip out screen in April 2012. Popular Photography magazine has indicated that there is no longer any difference in quality between images from crop body cameras and images from full frame cameras.

skieur

That is partly true but not. This is because the current crop sensor bodies are one generation newer than the full frame sensor bodies. Normally sensor become better by one time every generation, and full frame is supposed to be 1 time better than crop assuming it is made at the same generation. When 1DX and D4 comes out, you'll see that full frame sensors are actually one time better. It more fair to compare two sensors that are made at the same year. Even 1 year can be a big difference to the technology in the sensors.

 

[greybeard]

Won't the a99 have a flip out screen?

The A77 has a flipout screen at 24 megapixels and the A99 will have a flip out screen in April 2012. Popular Photography magazine has indicated that there is no longer any difference in quality between images from crop body cameras and images from full frame cameras.

skieur

That is partly true but not. This is because the current crop sensor bodies are one generation newer than the full frame sensor bodies. Normally sensor become better by one time every generation, and full frame is supposed to be 1 time better than crop assuming it is made at the same generation. When 1DX and D4 comes out, you'll see that full frame sensors are actually one time better. It more fair to compare two sensors that are made at the same year. Even 1 year can be a big difference to the technology in the sensors.

I understand what one STOP better means but what does one TIME better mean?

 

[EchoingWhisper]

The A77 has a flipout screen at 24 megapixels and the A99 will have a flip out screen in April 2012. Popular Photography magazine has indicated that there is no longer any difference in quality between images from crop body cameras and images from full frame cameras.

skieur

Serious question, what's the benefit of a FF?

Well, it was a matter of focal length. A 28mm wide angle lens on a full frame camera would create an image at a focal length of 28mm. A 28mm wide angle lense on a crop body camera would create an image at the focal length of approximately 40mm. The differrence is that the latter image would no longer be wide angle and you would get less in the picture. In other words, crop body cameras did not produce good wide angle images.

What changed is that camera makers started to produce quality 10mm to 20mm wide angle zooms which even on a crop body camera produced wide angle images at 15mm to 30mm in focal length.

So the original advantage of FF cameras was better wide angle photos, but that is no longer the case. The advantage of crop body cameras is the ability to produce a telephoto shot with a lighter, less expensive lens.

So a 300mm telephoto on a FF camera produces an image at 300mm focal length. On a crop body camera you multiply the focal length of the lens by approximately 1.5 which means that a 300mm telephoto lens will produce an image at a focal length of 450mm which would be a much closer photo of the bird or subject in the distance.

Picture noise used to also be less of a problem on a FF camera, than on a crop body camera but that gap has narrowed considerably as well to the point of being unnoticeable.

skieur

No, they could. Because lenses are generally 1 times smaller in DX (if you don't count AF and VR), you could could make lenses with shorter focal length than possible in FF. If what you say is true, then point and shoot cameras would be all telephoto and no wide angle.

 

[EchoingWhisper]

The A77 has a flipout screen at 24 megapixels and the A99 will have a flip out screen in April 2012. Popular Photography magazine has indicated that there is no longer any difference in quality between images from crop body cameras and images from full frame cameras.

skieur

That is partly true but not. This is because the current crop sensor bodies are one generation newer than the full frame sensor bodies. Normally sensor become better by one time every generation, and full frame is supposed to be 1 time better than crop assuming it is made at the same generation. When 1DX and D4 comes out, you'll see that full frame sensors are actually one time better. It more fair to compare two sensors that are made at the same year. Even 1 year can be a big difference to the technology in the sensors.

I understand what one STOP better means but what does one TIME better mean?

One stop and one time means the same. One stop more light = one time more light.

 

[EchoingWhisper]

The A77 has a flipout screen at 24 megapixels and the A99 will have a flip out screen in April 2012. Popular Photography magazine has indicated that there is no longer any difference in quality between images from crop body cameras and images from full frame cameras.

skieur

Serious question, what's the benefit of a FF?

Well, it was a matter of focal length. A 28mm wide angle lens on a full frame camera would create an image at a focal length of 28mm. A 28mm wide angle lense on a crop body camera would create an image at the focal length of approximately 40mm. The differrence is that the latter image would no longer be wide angle and you would get less in the picture. In other words, crop body cameras did not produce good wide angle images.

What changed is that camera makers started to produce quality 10mm to 20mm wide angle zooms which even on a crop body camera produced wide angle images at 15mm to 30mm in focal length.

So the original advantage of FF cameras was better wide angle photos, but that is no longer the case. The advantage of crop body cameras is the ability to produce a telephoto shot with a lighter, less expensive lens.

So a 300mm telephoto on a FF camera produces an image at 300mm focal length. On a crop body camera you multiply the focal length of the lens by approximately 1.5 which means that a 300mm telephoto lens will produce an image at a focal length of 450mm which would be a much closer photo of the bird or subject in the distance.

Picture noise used to also be less of a problem on a FF camera, than on a crop body camera but that gap has narrowed considerably as well to the point of being unnoticeable.

skieur

Optically, full frame is still better. To achieve the same sharpness in FF cameras and DX cameras with the same megapixel, the DX lens needs to be about 1 time sharper than the FF lens. Even if the resolution is the same (same pixel size), FF cameras will get the advantage of having 1 time more pixels, which means you get 1 time more detail, and means it is 1 time sharper than the DX lens again.

 

[greybeard]

Serious question, what's the benefit of a FF?

Well, it was a matter of focal length. A 28mm wide angle lens on a full frame camera would create an image at a focal length of 28mm. A 28mm wide angle lense on a crop body camera would create an image at the focal length of approximately 40mm. The differrence is that the latter image would no longer be wide angle and you would get less in the picture. In other words, crop body cameras did not produce good wide angle images.

What changed is that camera makers started to produce quality 10mm to 20mm wide angle zooms which even on a crop body camera produced wide angle images at 15mm to 30mm in focal length.

So the original advantage of FF cameras was better wide angle photos, but that is no longer the case. The advantage of crop body cameras is the ability to produce a telephoto shot with a lighter, less expensive lens.

So a 300mm telephoto on a FF camera produces an image at 300mm focal length. On a crop body camera you multiply the focal length of the lens by approximately 1.5 which means that a 300mm telephoto lens will produce an image at a focal length of 450mm which would be a much closer photo of the bird or subject in the distance.

Picture noise used to also be less of a problem on a FF camera, than on a crop body camera but that gap has narrowed considerably as well to the point of being unnoticeable.

skieur

Optically, full frame is still better. To achieve the same sharpness in FF cameras and DX cameras with the same megapixel, the DX lens needs to be about 1 time sharper than the FF lens. Even if the resolution is the same (same pixel size), FF cameras will get the advantage of having 1 time more pixels, which means you get 1 time more detail, and means it is 1 time sharper than the DX lens again.

Unless my understanding of how this all works is totally off, an 8 MP full frame and an 8 MP crop frame image will have the same number of pixels (more or less). The difference is in the amount of magnification of the lens image and the actual size of each pixel. As an example, I have a Nikon D5100 crop frame and a Sony F828 (6.6x8.8). The Sony is roughly 1/4 of a full frame while the Nikon is like 3/4 of a FF. With the Nikon set to Medium size (roughly 8MP) and the Sony at full size (8MP) and both set to ISO100, there is very little difference in the resulting image. That is because the Zeiss Vario Sonnar on the Sony is a really outstanding lens and the 18-55 on the Nikon is just so-so. Where the Sony starts falling apart is when you raise the ISO above 200. The Sony holds together right up to 6400 where the Sony starts falling apart at anything above 200. Pixel size is the difference. Bigger pixels are much better at low light.

 

[EchoingWhisper]

Well, it was a matter of focal length. A 28mm wide angle lens on a full frame camera would create an image at a focal length of 28mm. A 28mm wide angle lense on a crop body camera would create an image at the focal length of approximately 40mm. The differrence is that the latter image would no longer be wide angle and you would get less in the picture. In other words, crop body cameras did not produce good wide angle images.

What changed is that camera makers started to produce quality 10mm to 20mm wide angle zooms which even on a crop body camera produced wide angle images at 15mm to 30mm in focal length.

So the original advantage of FF cameras was better wide angle photos, but that is no longer the case. The advantage of crop body cameras is the ability to produce a telephoto shot with a lighter, less expensive lens.

So a 300mm telephoto on a FF camera produces an image at 300mm focal length. On a crop body camera you multiply the focal length of the lens by approximately 1.5 which means that a 300mm telephoto lens will produce an image at a focal length of 450mm which would be a much closer photo of the bird or subject in the distance.

Picture noise used to also be less of a problem on a FF camera, than on a crop body camera but that gap has narrowed considerably as well to the point of being unnoticeable.

skieur

Optically, full frame is still better. To achieve the same sharpness in FF cameras and DX cameras with the same megapixel, the DX lens needs to be about 1 time sharper than the FF lens. Even if the resolution is the same (same pixel size), FF cameras will get the advantage of having 1 time more pixels, which means you get 1 time more detail, and means it is 1 time sharper than the DX lens again.

Unless my understanding of how this all works is totally off, an 8 MP full frame and an 8 MP crop frame image will have the same number of pixels (more or less). The difference is in the amount of magnification of the lens image and the actual size of each pixel. As an example, I have a Nikon D5100 crop frame and a Sony F828 (6.6x8.8). The Sony is roughly 1/4 of a full frame while the Nikon is like 3/4 of a FF. With the Nikon set to Medium size (roughly 8MP) and the Sony at full size (8MP) and both set to ISO100, there is very little difference in the resulting image. That is because the Zeiss Vario Sonnar on the Sony is a really outstanding lens and the 18-55 on the Nikon is just so-so. Where the Sony starts falling apart is when you raise the ISO above 200. The Sony holds together right up to 6400 where the Sony starts falling apart at anything above 200. Pixel size is the difference. Bigger pixels are much better at low light.

Yes. But not fully right. It all depends on the lens. DX lenses are generally smaller than FX lenses. If the DX lenses are built to the same size as the FX lenses (not counting AF and VR) then the low light performance will be about the same, but sensors are more complicated than that. 1 time larger sensors doesn't always mean 1 time better light performance.

 

[greybeard]

Yes, I get that too and as sensors get better and better, the differences will become smaller and smaller until the only differences will be on the optical-analog side of it. When you enlarge crop frame vs full frame, to the same size print, you still have to magnify the optical image from the crop frame 50% more.