Crop Factor

[Carny]

Ok, let's say you stand at one location. You shoot it with an FX. You see a house in the middle and bunch of sky. You decided that it is too much sky. So you crop it on the computer so your resolution has changed (you lost native pixels). Now you switched to DX camera and use same lens. What you see on camera is tighter. So after you take the pics you decide the photo of the house is perfect the way it is. So your jpeg still has ALL the pixels.

Ok, but earlier you said the FX cropped would be better. I know the specific camera plays a part, so I'll get specific.

If I wanted the best pic possible of this house, but I have only one lens,a 5DII and 7D, and am able to stand in only one spot and want the exact fov of the 7D to crop out the neighbors pink flamingos, should I use the 5D and crop it, or the 7D?

And to be nitpicky, aren't all jpegs compressed at least some and therefore you don't have all the pixels?

 

[Robin Usagani]

it depends on the print size. The 5D will be a lot better UP to certain print size. Look at my other response on the other thread.

 

[Overread]

Ok, but earlier you said the FX cropped would be better. I know the specific camera plays a part, so I'll get specific.

If I wanted the best pic possible of this house, but I have only one lens,a 5DII and 7D, and am able to stand in only one spot and want the exact fov of the 7D to crop out the neighbors pink flamingos, should I use the 5D and crop it, or the 7D?

And to be nitpicky, aren't all jpegs compressed at least some and therefore you don't have all the pixels?

In that specific situation I'd get the 7D out - frame and compose the shot as I wanted it and take it. Unless I was blowing it up to extreme sizes most of the time the 7D would have more than enough resolution and for most prints you'd be hard pressed to tell which camera took the shot.

 

[Carny]

Ok, but earlier you said the FX cropped would be better. I know the specific camera plays a part, so I'll get specific.

If I wanted the best pic possible of this house, but I have only one lens,a 5DII and 7D, and am able to stand in only one spot and want the exact fov of the 7D to crop out the neighbors pink flamingos, should I use the 5D and crop it, or the 7D?

And to be nitpicky, aren't all jpegs compressed at least some and therefore you don't have all the pixels?

In that specific situation I'd get the 7D out - frame and compose the shot as I wanted it and take it. Unless I was blowing it up to extreme sizes most of the time the 7D would have more than enough resolution and for most prints you'd be hard pressed to tell which camera took the shot.

I think I'm satisfied as far as my initial question goes, but I am curious as to why you would pick the 7d. Just the simplicity of getting the frame you want in camera?

 

[Overread]

Mostly yes -

If I were crazy about quality for a landscape shot I wouldn't use either. I'd get a medium or heck large format camera and use that - film ones are still very high quality and not too expensive on the market (digital are exceptionally expensive). I'd then send the film off to be processed and have a high-res professional scan done.

 

[Carny]

Mostly yes -

If I were crazy about quality for a landscape shot I wouldn't use either. I'd get a medium or heck large format camera and use that - film ones are still very high quality and not too expensive on the market (digital are exceptionally expensive). I'd then send the film off to be processed and have a high-res professional scan done.

I don't have the energy to go down that road now, lol.

Thank you, and everybody else for the help.

 

[enzodm]

You have to factor in pixel pitch, image sensor generation, and which image processor version is being used in the camera.

I say if you are only cropping the FX to match the DX, The FX will yield better result. I think the FX will render the image better.

Finally! I was starting to go crazy! It seemed like no matter how I phrased the question people kept giving me the answer to another question.

No, simply you did not understand the answers, including this one. It all depends on the fact you do not have an idea of what means "better", or IQ.
If you crop, you obtain less pixels. You started telling that this decreases IQ. In fact, if there is much light and the image is properly exposed, you will find more details in 7D. If you are a pixel-peeper, 7D image will seem better due to the more pixels, if "better" is only that. However most people would take a 1Dx, because of its behaviour regarding noise (and dynamic range, ecc). All things that do not change with cropping. 1Dx plus a small walking, and you obtain same detail and less noise, more dynamic range, etc.

 

[Carny]

You have to factor in pixel pitch, image sensor generation, and which image processor version is being used in the camera.

I say if you are only cropping the FX to match the DX, The FX will yield better result. I think the FX will render the image better.

Finally! I was starting to go crazy! It seemed like no matter how I phrased the question people kept giving me the answer to another question.

No, simply you did not understand the answers, including this one. It all depends on the fact you do not have an idea of what means "better", or IQ.
If you crop, you obtain less pixels. You started telling that this decreases IQ. In fact, if there is much light and the image is properly exposed, you will find more details in 7D. If you are a pixel-peeper, 7D image will seem better due to the more pixels, if "better" is only that. However most people would take a 1Dx, because of its behaviour regarding noise (and dynamic range, ecc). All things that do not change with cropping. 1Dx plus a small walking, and you obtain same detail and less noise, more dynamic range, etc.

you are right to some degree. "Better" is subjective, which made answering difficult.

I did understand the two answers above to mean it depends. Later schwetty finally summed it up with this:

OMG... OK I am going to explain it to you for the LAST time. If you still dont get it... I wont make any more replies. Just for conversation sake lets say you have 2 cameras. One is 24MP FX, one is 24MP DX. Both cameras will produce 6000x4000 (24mp) JPEG. You are standing from one location using same PRIME lens on both cameras. You shoot a house from this location with the DX camera and you have the PERFECT composition. You are happy with the result. The printer you are using use 300 dpi. You can print high quality print of 20" x 13.33" (resolution divided by 300). NOW you use your FX. It shoots wider than the DX. You take the shot on the same spot. You decided to crop your 6000x4000 jpeg to have the same look as your DX photo. That means you crop the sides and you end up having 4000x2667 resolution JPEG. That means wiht the same printer you can only have high quality print up to 13.33"x8.9".

The conclusion is....... if you print 13.33"x8.9" OR SMALLER... without a doubt the FX print will look better while DX is slightly worse (more noise) but not that much worse if we shoot it at low ISO. If you print something bigger than that, the DX will continue to print decent up to 20"x13.33" while the FX will need to use software interpolation to be able to print at 300 dpi that big. You will start seeing pixelation if you dont interpolate it with a software. If you interpolate, it is just guessing/adding pixels so your photo wont look as good.

Do you get it or not get it now?

Very early on I posted this:

It just kind of seems like you really aren't gaining anything unless you are wanting to make big prints, then I could see where it would come into effect. Having to do with the total number of pixels.

which is roughly the same as what schwetty finally said

Unless I still don't understand I think I pretty well had it figured out in the beginning, I just couldn't get the question across and people kept explaining the FF vs crop framing thing over and over.

 

[Robin Usagani]

Just remember the higher the ISO, the more apparent the FX is better. Seriously though... newer full frame cameras have higher and higher pixel count. I would just get a full frame if you can afford it. Most of the time you can get closer to the subject or you have the lens to do the job.

 

[KmH]

With the exception of cameras that have the APS-H image sensor, there are no professional grade cameras that have an APS-C size image sensor.