Cropping and MP

[slat]

If you have a 45MP camera that's full frame and a crop camera that's 32MP which would give the better image if you cropped the full frame to the equivalent of the crop camera image?
I'm using for examples Canon R5 and Canon R7.

 

[smoke665]

Are you talking about shooting in camera in crop mode or post cropping. I wouldnt think you'd see any decrease in IQ cropping post, until you started enlarging the image. I routinely crop when needed, but im mindful of my final image size. My avatar is an extreme crop, as a thumbnail it isn't bad, but blow it up to an 11x14 and it's not useable.

 

[Strodav]

What is "better" to you? The detail you can capture depends on the number of sensor elements you put on your subject and the quality of the lens (assumes a stable camera, still subject in good focus). Note that detail / resolution in lp/mm is different than sharpness, which is subjective. Detail cannot be improved in Post, but sharpness can be improved in Post. So, if you keep the subject size the same in your FF and aps-c camera bodies using the same FF lens (you will have move back with the aps-c sensor to maintain the same size you get with the FF sensor),then the sensor with the higher pixel density will capture more detail.

 

[smoke665]

What is "better" to you?

Good point.

When using crop mode in a full frame camera it's cutting off parts of the outside edges of the sensor. However it's my understanding that the portion inside the crop is still the same pixel density as if you'd shot it full frame, the same as if you crop it post. Personally I've never found a use for crop mode on my full frame, preferring to fill the frame with what I want included and crop post.

then the sensor with the higher pixel density will capture more detai

Considering the newer crop sensor cameras are coming out with sensors reaching full frame resolution, like the Fuji X-H2 with 40.2 mp, I'm not sure you'd see much difference in a shot from a different distance to subject like you describe. Possibly some difference in dynamic range or DOF, but I'm betting the details would be close to equal.

 

[Strodav]

Good point.

When using crop mode in a full frame camera it's cutting off parts of the outside edges of the sensor. However it's my understanding that the portion inside the crop is still the same pixel density as if you'd shot it full frame, the same as if you crop it post. Personally I've never found a use for crop mode on my full frame, preferring to fill the frame with what I want included and crop post.



Considering the newer crop sensor cameras are coming out with sensors reaching full frame resolution, like the Fuji X-H2 with 40.2 mp, I'm not sure you'd see much difference in a shot from a different distance to subject like you describe. Possibly some difference in dynamic range or DOF, but I'm betting the details would be close to equal.

I shoot water birds here in SE Texas. Many times, I can't get closer to my subjects without getting into the lakes with the alligators. My Z9 AF system works better when the subject fills the frame (this is a well known quirk of the Nikon mirrorless AF systems), so I've programmed a button to go to DX mode (1.5 crop factor) for quicker and more accurate AF lock. It takes the camera from 45.7mp to 19 1/2 mp, but the lost pixels are useless anyway and you can do a lot with a 19 1/2 mp image. My first digital camera was 5mp and 2nd 12mp. I got a lot of great images from those cameras.

 

[Rickbb]

Depends;

What is the end product? Print 4x6 prints or 24x36, or just view on the screen?

What kind of photographs do you want to take? Artsy, or fine detail portraits or products?

Prints of 8x10 or less you most likely won't see a difference. Poster size, oh yeah, big difference. Artsy, no issue, you can do art photography with a 5-year-old iPhone. Fine detail work, yes, big difference. Big cropping in post for screen, yes you will see "some" difference.

 

[slat]

Are you talking about shooting in camera in crop mode or post cropping. I wouldnt think you'd see any decrease in IQ cropping post, until you started enlarging the image. I routinely crop when needed, but im mindful of my final image size. My avatar is an extreme crop, as a thumbnail it isn't bad, but blow it up to an 11x14 and it's not useable.

I would crop in post. I would like FF but I think sometimes I might miss that crop factor that I have on my current camera sometimes. The biggest print I've made so far was 8x10. That's not to say if I got a great shot that I wouldn't go bigger.

 

[slat]

What is "better" to you? The detail you can capture depends on the number of sensor elements you put on your subject and the quality of the lens (assumes a stable camera, still subject in good focus). Note that detail / resolution in lp/mm is different than sharpness, which is subjective. Detail cannot be improved in Post, but sharpness can be improved in Post. So, if you keep the subject size the same in your FF and aps-c camera bodies using the same FF lens (you will have move back with the aps-c sensor to maintain the same size you get with the FF sensor),then the sensor with the higher pixel density will capture more detail.

If the aps-c has better density but the full frame has better dynamic range which is the more important aspect? I wouldn't be cropping the aps-c image., just the FF to match.
I do shoot some birds at distance and sometimes the lighting isn't always what we'd like. My thought was the better dynamic range and higher MP on a full frame might allow more recovery of shadows and allow me to crop the image without losing as much as an aps-c.

 

[Strodav]

If the aps-c has better density but the full frame has better dynamic range which is the more important aspect? I wouldn't be cropping the aps-c image., just the FF to match.
I do shoot some birds at distance and sometimes the lighting isn't always what we'd like. My thought was the better dynamic range and higher MP on a full frame might allow more recovery of shadows and allow me to crop the image without losing as much as an aps-c.

A professional wildlife photographer recently told me he has never rejected an image for dynamic range, but has rejected them for noise. Generally, you are increasing ISO, resulting in a lower DR, because of poor / low light. Poor / low light tends to reduce the DR of your scene so a larger DR that comes with a low ISO may not be required. You can use the spot meter in your camera to measure the DR of a scene.

There are some techniques to deal with low light situations. 1) check your histogram to make sure you are not blowing out the highlights. Most find blown highlights unacceptable, but accept buried shadows, unless it's key features of the subject. 2) Topaz Noise AI and even the latest noise reduction algorithms in LrC and PS give pretty amazing results. 3) Take a correctly exposed initial image at high ISO, then start taken longer and longer sequences of shots at lower and lower shutter speeds / ISO trying to be as stable as possible. Hopefully, you'll get a sharp and less noisy shot than that initial shot at a much lower ISO. 4) Take a monopod or tripod with you, 5) If your subject was reasonably still and took a longer sequence of shots then you can align and average them in, say, LrC, to reduce noise. IF you align and average 2 shots taken at ISO 3200. The result will be as if you took the image at ISO 1600, ..., .

For birding, I use a mirrorless Z9 at 45.7mp. I have a button set to DX (aps-c) mode to make the subject larger in the frame and make the AF system lock faster. It goes to 19.5 mp in DX mode, but you can do a lot with 19.5 mp. If you have to do a severe crop with either a FF or aps-c camera, try Topaz Gigapixel AI or LrC -> Photo -> enhance.

Pick a camera you are happy with. The newer the better because of improvements in sensor technology and lower read noise electronics. If you will be shooting wildlife / birds or sports or even dogs running in the backyard, look for more AF points. If you like the Canon brand, stick with them and the R10 is an excellent choice, but a good used dslr will take great images while you decide how much time and money you want to dedicate to photography. I love street photography and love using my 2017 Nikon D7200 24mp aps-c camera even at the blue hour for street photography. You can also take great images with a 12mp smartphone camera, if you have a good working knowledge of the art and science of photography.

 

[Ysarex]

If the aps-c has better density but the full frame has better dynamic range which is the more important aspect? I wouldn't be cropping the aps-c image., just the FF to match.
I do shoot some birds at distance and sometimes the lighting isn't always what we'd like. My thought was the better dynamic range and higher MP on a full frame might allow more recovery of shadows and allow me to crop the image without losing as much as an aps-c.

If you crop the FF image down to the size of the APS-C image you lose the FF DR advantage. The FF DR advantage is there primarily because of the larger sensor area. Crop away that larger area and you crop away the DR advantage with it.

Here's a link to Bill Claff's site and two graphs of DR/over ISO for the same camera (Z7) -- one in FX mode and the other in DX mode. Switching to DX bins the DR advantage. Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting

 

[slat]

I appreciate the help and information you have both provided. My question was to help determine a camera choice I was thinking Canon R6 mark 2, but then thought that the R7 might be better. But since I'd like to move to a full frame started to consider saving a bit more and go to the R5. More info is always a good thing when trying to decide on something.