Are full frame cameras sharper?

[ronjohn]

Just considering the camera body, would a full frame camera deliver a sharper image than a crop camera?

 

[kundalini]

Umm, yeah, sure, why not?

 

[MLeeK]

Well, in theory the sharpness is in the lens, however when you break it down to the pixels it may be easier to get sharper images on a full frame camera.
In my experience? No. I can get amazing sharp images from my crop sensor cameras and I can get total crap from them-all depending on the lens I am using and my skills. Same goes for my full frame and my 1.3x sensor...

 

[Kerbouchard]

I would say that between a full frame and a crop sensor, the full frame is a bit more forgiving, at least in the Nikon world. You will rarely find a post that complains about a D700 producing images that are not sharp, but you can't throw a rock without seeing a post about somebody having trouble getting sharp images with a D7000.

For me, I much prefer my D700 to my D90, but there are more reasons than just sensor size. The Full Frame camera focuses faster, focuses more accurately, and has less noise at equivalent ISO's. All contribute to apparent sharpness and put the Full Frame firmly ahead.

Now, if we were talking about a subject that wasn't moving, in good light, at base ISO, and from a tripod, I think you would be very hard pressed to tell a difference. It's when the conditions are a bit tougher that the difference is apparent.

 

[MLeeK]

I would say that between a full frame and a crop sensor, the full frame is a bit more forgiving, at least in the Nikon world. You will rarely find a post that complains about a D700 producing images that are not sharp, but you can't throw a rock without seeing a post about somebody having trouble getting sharp images with a D7000.

For me, I much prefer my D700 to my D90, but there are more reasons than just sensor size. The Full Frame camera focuses faster, focuses more accurately, and has less noise at equivalent ISO's. All contribute to apparent sharpness and put the Full Frame firmly ahead.

Now, if we were talking about a subject that wasn't moving, in good light, at base ISO, and from a tripod, I think you would be very hard pressed to tell a difference. It's when the conditions are a bit tougher that the difference is apparent.

I do agree about the fact that you see a lot more problems with the sharpness when shooting on a crop sensor, but I also think SOME of that is because people are also in the entry level and skill plays a HUGE factor on the focus issues that MANY of them have. I constantly see complaints about the canon 7d and sharpness, but almost always it's a person who is just starting out with it. I have never had a single issue with the sharpness on my 7D from day one. I think MUCH of that is because I already know how to control my focus, focus properly and control my DOF and MANY starting out with it do not.

 

[2WheelPhoto]

I would say that between a full frame and a crop sensor, the full frame is a bit more forgiving, at least in the Nikon world. You will rarely find a post that complains about a D700 producing images that are not sharp, but you can't throw a rock without seeing a post about somebody having trouble getting sharp images with a D7000.

For me, I much prefer my D700 to my D90, but there are more reasons than just sensor size. The Full Frame camera focuses faster, focuses more accurately, and has less noise at equivalent ISO's. All contribute to apparent sharpness and put the Full Frame firmly ahead.

Now, if we were talking about a subject that wasn't moving, in good light, at base ISO, and from a tripod, I think you would be very hard pressed to tell a difference. It's when the conditions are a bit tougher that the difference is apparent.

I can't agree more between my full frame and cropper. And I'm a nooB student.

 

[Kerbouchard]

I would say that between a full frame and a crop sensor, the full frame is a bit more forgiving, at least in the Nikon world. You will rarely find a post that complains about a D700 producing images that are not sharp, but you can't throw a rock without seeing a post about somebody having trouble getting sharp images with a D7000.

For me, I much prefer my D700 to my D90, but there are more reasons than just sensor size. The Full Frame camera focuses faster, focuses more accurately, and has less noise at equivalent ISO's. All contribute to apparent sharpness and put the Full Frame firmly ahead.

Now, if we were talking about a subject that wasn't moving, in good light, at base ISO, and from a tripod, I think you would be very hard pressed to tell a difference. It's when the conditions are a bit tougher that the difference is apparent.

I do agree about the fact that you see a lot more problems with the sharpness when shooting on a crop sensor, but I also think SOME of that is because people are also in the entry level and skill plays a HUGE factor on the focus issues that MANY of them have. I constantly see complaints about the canon 7d and sharpness, but almost always it's a person who is just starting out with it. I have never had a single issue with the sharpness on my 7D from day one. I think MUCH of that is because I already know how to control my focus, focus properly and control my DOF and MANY starting out with it do not.

I won't argue that point at all. Yes, if a photographer is using a full frame camera, they are more likely to be more experienced and are likely to take better shots in the first place.

With that said, I will share some anecdotal evidence. Most of my photography centers around my daughter and weddings. The images of my daughter are easy now, where as before, I had some trouble. Some of that is her getting older and me getting experience, but a lot of it is better equipment that I don't have to fight to do what I want it to do.

As far as weddings, I actually started assisting weddings with a D90. I got my shot list, carried a tripod around, and made sure I got the detail shots. That was my job. Everything else was gravy. I would just be excited if a non-detail type of shot made the cut. Now, more and more of my images are being used and my responsibilities have also increased. Cindy, who I shoot with, has said she has seen a remarkable difference. Yes, I keep learning every day, but there was a huge difference between the first wedding I shot with a D700 and the last wedding I shot with a D90.

They were only a week apart. I didn't learn that much during that week.

 

[Derrel]

"Sharpness" in digital photos is a product that results from both a camera and its sensor, AND a lens. Those two components must work together to form the images which are evaluated for "Sharpness". And you know what the funny thing is? The highest resolution figures of various lenses are achieved on full-frame sensors, not crop-body sensors. Check into the resolution figures at a place such as dPreview for example, which uses the SAME 50mm lenses for its Nikon and Canon bodies, for test after test. Body after body. "Sharpness" is a hard to define quality, and it involves resolution, contrast,etc. The camera tests I am referring to at dPreview are basically measuring resolution, which is what I am assuming the OP means by "sharpness". Contrast in digital images is pretty easy to adjust upward, at least to a degree.

 

[djacobox372]

A full frame lens will provide higher resolution on a full frame camera simply because you arent cropping its output. However that rule may not apply to the entire image, as most lenses are softer towards the edges, which means the crop sensor camera may be better at the corners then a full frame camera, but the full frame will always be better at the center.

Of course, the full frame will be sharper at higher isos due to less noise reduction.

 

[Garbz]

Yes.

If you compare two cameras with identical resolution and identical lenses, and only compare the area of the image that would have been cropped by the smaller sensor. What I mean by this is that when everything else is constant the full frame appears sharper due to it's *lower* resolution. I.e. a 12mpx 35mm camera only has 5.33mpx in the same physical area as a 12mpx APS-C camera. So any image under that area will appear sharper due to the lower resolution, you can't zoom in enough to see the lack of sharpness and problems caused by the lens.

On the rest of the image though as others have said the edges of the lens are less sharp than the centre so while they are higher resolution in the centre the lens will contribute more error at the edges for a 35mm camera. This was a common complaint on the 70-200mm f/2.8 from Nikon when their full frame cameras came out as the edge sharpness of this lens was quite bad, which no one noticed when it first came out due to the lack of 35mm cameras from Nikon.

 

[gsgary]

They are so sharp they make your eyes bleed

 

[unpopular]

^^ I heard that chuck norris uses a full frame sensor.

 

[Helen B]

And you know what the funny thing is? The highest resolution figures of various lenses are achieved on full-frame sensors, not crop-body sensors. Check into the resolution figures at a place such as dPreview for example, which uses the SAME 50mm lenses for its Nikon and Canon bodies, for test after test. Body after body. "Sharpness" is a hard to define quality, and it involves resolution, contrast,etc. The camera tests I am referring to at dPreview are basically measuring resolution, which is what I am assuming the OP means by "sharpness".

No surprise there: dpreview quotes resolution in lines per picture height, not line pairs per mm. You would have to convert the dpreview figures to lpmm or lppmm to evaluate the sharpness of the lens itself (always bearing in mind that it is a lens/camera combo that is under test). By using lph instead of lppmm the lens is given a better chance of looking better on a full-frame camera than on a crop-sensor camera. I'm not saying that the dpreview results mean nothing or that they are misleading (they are useful), just that they need interpretation when compared to, say, DxO Mark resolution results (they are in line pairs per mm).