Sharing my thoughts and feeling about moving from APS-C (Crop Sensor) to Full Frame camera

[fjrabon]

FF and APS-C will never have almost same low light performance as FF brings about twice amount of light APS-C does and thats a lot!

Your argument isn't so much about FF v APS-C, it's about being on the bleeding edge of sensor technology. My APS-C X100T Fuji outperforms a 5DIII in low light (or any Canon, for that matter). What you're really judging here is more Nikon's most recent full frame sensors, which are incredible, but it really is nikon specific. It doesn't hold up across APS-C v FF comparisons.

Bill Claff actually rates your Fuji at ISO 6400 as better than a FF Nikon D750. There's more than just sensor size effecting low light performance. Ever look at a Bayer array and wonder why there's two green filters for every one red and blue? Look at a Fuji X-Trans CFA and figure up the green to red/blue ratio -- even more green.

Joe

yeah, I agree, the most recent Fuji sensors are pretty dang incredible in low light, but to me are hard to directly compare because they're just ... different I guess. I honestly think we're quickly getting to the point where sensor size is actually one of the less important aspects to low light performance.

 

[goodguy]

FF and APS-C will never have almost same low light performance as FF brings about twice amount of light APS-C does and thats a lot!

Your argument isn't so much about FF v APS-C, it's about being on the bleeding edge of sensor technology. My APS-C X100T Fuji outperforms a 5DIII in low light (or any Canon, for that matter). What you're really judging here is more Nikon's most recent full frame sensors, which are incredible, but it really is nikon specific. It doesn't hold up across APS-C v FF comparisons.

Bill Claff actually rates your Fuji at ISO 6400 as better than a FF Nikon D750. There's more than just sensor size effecting low light performance. Ever look at a Bayer array and wonder why there's two green filters for every one red and blue? Look at a Fuji X-Trans CFA and figure up the green to red/blue ratio -- even more green.

Joe

yeah, I agree, the most recent Fuji sensors are pretty dang incredible in low light, but to me are hard to directly compare because they're just ... different I guess. I honestly think we're quickly getting to the point where sensor size is actually one of the less important aspects to low light performance.

A guy at my camera store used to own the Fuji X-T1 and use a lot the D7100, he said in low light these cameras are pretty much equal, he also said from playing a bit with the D750 and knowing well the D610 these cameras are better in low light then the Fuji.

 

[fjrabon]

FF and APS-C will never have almost same low light performance as FF brings about twice amount of light APS-C does and thats a lot!

Your argument isn't so much about FF v APS-C, it's about being on the bleeding edge of sensor technology. My APS-C X100T Fuji outperforms a 5DIII in low light (or any Canon, for that matter). What you're really judging here is more Nikon's most recent full frame sensors, which are incredible, but it really is nikon specific. It doesn't hold up across APS-C v FF comparisons.

Bill Claff actually rates your Fuji at ISO 6400 as better than a FF Nikon D750. There's more than just sensor size effecting low light performance. Ever look at a Bayer array and wonder why there's two green filters for every one red and blue? Look at a Fuji X-Trans CFA and figure up the green to red/blue ratio -- even more green.

Joe

yeah, I agree, the most recent Fuji sensors are pretty dang incredible in low light, but to me are hard to directly compare because they're just ... different I guess. I honestly think we're quickly getting to the point where sensor size is actually one of the less important aspects to low light performance.

A guy at my camera store used to own the Fuji X-T1 and use a lot the D7100, he said in low light these cameras are pretty much equal, he also said from playing a bit with the D750 and knowing well the D610 these cameras are better in low light then the Fuji.

They're hard to compare, IMHO. The fujis just handle light... Differently. But it's not really a large difference either way, I don't think. I briefly had a D600 and the X100T at the same time and I thought they were comparable with a slight nod to the D600.

I think a lot of the idea that FF is miles better than APS-C originated from peculiarities of how the original full frames were made in comparison. That made people think that FF is inherently much better, and even some creating the "twice as good because twice as much light" misunderstanding. Comparing a 7D to a 5D classic and yeah, the 5DC blows the doors off the 7D in low light.

There was a time when a crop frame was borderline unusable with even ISO 800 and noise was visible even at ISO 400.

Another big reason for the FF > aps c for low light idea was that for a while nikons only full frame was the D3 Which blew everything else on the market away low light wise. The D3 was a beast for its time. Same for the D4.

While both FF and crop frame have both improved in low light, the improvement was greater for crop frame than full frame, IMO. FF still has an advantage but I think it's smaller than it was even 5 years ago and especially ten years ago.

 

[goodguy]

While both FF and crop frame have both improved in low light, the improvement was greater for crop frame than full frame, IMO. FF still has an advantage but I think it's smaller than it was even 5 years ago and especially ten years ago.

I agree with you on that, the improvement for me between the D7100 was noticeable but not huge, the D7100 is a very impressive camera and I think the advantage is about 1 to 1.3 stops better on the D750
1-1.3 stops of light isn't huge difference but when you need every bit of performance out of your camera this could be a pretty significant advantage.

 

[Derrel]

I was looking into the new Nikon D5500 last week...you know, there seems to be some talk over on dPreview that the D5500 now has a usable ISO 12,800, with good color retention at that ISO level...and some speculation too that the D7200 will also have similar 12,8K high ISO color retention and decent noise performance.

From what I read on dPreview, D7100 owners are feeling like the D7200 has a noticeable image quality boost...and I want to know more about that; if they are doing RAW conversions, I am assuming they are using something OTHER THAN Adobe software.

 

[Ysarex]

FF and APS-C will never have almost same low light performance as FF brings about twice amount of light APS-C does and thats a lot!

Your argument isn't so much about FF v APS-C, it's about being on the bleeding edge of sensor technology. My APS-C X100T Fuji outperforms a 5DIII in low light (or any Canon, for that matter). What you're really judging here is more Nikon's most recent full frame sensors, which are incredible, but it really is nikon specific. It doesn't hold up across APS-C v FF comparisons.

Bill Claff actually rates your Fuji at ISO 6400 as better than a FF Nikon D750. There's more than just sensor size effecting low light performance. Ever look at a Bayer array and wonder why there's two green filters for every one red and blue? Look at a Fuji X-Trans CFA and figure up the green to red/blue ratio -- even more green.

Joe

yeah, I agree, the most recent Fuji sensors are pretty dang incredible in low light, but to me are hard to directly compare because they're just ... different I guess. I honestly think we're quickly getting to the point where sensor size is actually one of the less important aspects to low light performance.

A guy at my camera store used to own the Fuji X-T1 and use a lot the D7100, he said in low light these cameras are pretty much equal, he also said from playing a bit with the D750 and knowing well the D610 these cameras are better in low light then the Fuji.

Well that's a guy at a camera store on one hand and Bill Claff on the other hand. I'll go with the acknowledged authority in this case. I like camera store guys -- used to be one long ago, but in this case I trust Mr. Claff's meticulous testing.

Joe

 

[Ysarex]

FF and APS-C will never have almost same low light performance as FF brings about twice amount of light APS-C does and thats a lot!

Your argument isn't so much about FF v APS-C, it's about being on the bleeding edge of sensor technology. My APS-C X100T Fuji outperforms a 5DIII in low light (or any Canon, for that matter). What you're really judging here is more Nikon's most recent full frame sensors, which are incredible, but it really is nikon specific. It doesn't hold up across APS-C v FF comparisons.

Bill Claff actually rates your Fuji at ISO 6400 as better than a FF Nikon D750. There's more than just sensor size effecting low light performance. Ever look at a Bayer array and wonder why there's two green filters for every one red and blue? Look at a Fuji X-Trans CFA and figure up the green to red/blue ratio -- even more green.

Joe

yeah, I agree, the most recent Fuji sensors are pretty dang incredible in low light, but to me are hard to directly compare because they're just ... different I guess. I honestly think we're quickly getting to the point where sensor size is actually one of the less important aspects to low light performance.

The Fuji X-Trans sensors are Sony. What's different is the implementation in the camera (X-Trans CFA) and Fuji's processing if you're looking at the EXRII JPEGs.

Another interesting development coming from left field is the new entirely home-made BSI CMOS sensor in the new Samsung NX1.

Joe

 

[goodguy]

Well that's a guy at a camera store on one hand and Bill Claff on the other hand. I'll go with the acknowledged authority in this case. I like camera store guys -- used to be one long ago, but in this case I trust Mr. Claff's meticulous testing.

Joe

Had a rather interesting talk with my mom few days ago about belief and faith, we tent to base our belief in something some due to facts some due to other reasons and then in most cases to stick to it.
We might be right and we might be wrong but that doesn't matter for us cause we have what we believe in.
I tend to question everybody and no body but at the end of the day the one thing that I trust more then anything is my own experience and to be honest this is all a very theoretical debate, I am very happy where I am right now and it doesn't matter if other people have this or that, when it comes down to it the most important part of the camera is us and how we use it
I think we really are getting further and further away from my initial first post and that's to share my own personal experience with FF camera.
If it will help someone on a quest to FF then I am glad.

 

[Ysarex]

Well that's a guy at a camera store on one hand and Bill Claff on the other hand. I'll go with the acknowledged authority in this case. I like camera store guys -- used to be one long ago, but in this case I trust Mr. Claff's meticulous testing.

Joe

Had a rather interesting talk with my mom few days ago about belief and faith, we tent to base our belief in something some due to facts some due to other reasons and then in most cases to stick to it.
We might be right and we might be wrong but that doesn't matter for us cause we have what we believe in.
I tend to question everybody and no body but at the end of the day the one thing that I trust more then anything is my own experience and to be honest this is all a very theoretical debate, I am very happy where I am right now and it doesn't matter if other people have this or that, when it comes down to it the most important part of the camera is us and how we use it
I think we really are getting further and further away from my initial first post and that's to share my own
personal experience with FF camera.
If it will help someone on a quest to FF then I am glad.

Glad you're happy. You listed better low light performance as your number 1 reason for the move. Given the cameras you switched between you got better low light performance.

And it's fair to say that in the past that was a clear and consequential difference. FF delivered better low light performance. What you're hearing from Frank and myself and some others is that the clear difference that used to exist isn't so clear any longer nor so much of a difference. Other factors besides just sensor size come into play and in fact the gap in low light performance that existed between FF and APS has substantially closed. I'd still acknowledge that FF has an edge in low light performance. That edge for me is meaningless -- a lot of us have no use for it. I can get a very clean, sharp, virtually noiseless photo at ISO 6400 using an APS sensor camera, but at ISO 12800 my APS camera starts to strain and your FF can do slightly better. No difference between the two cameras could mean less to me.

I recently upgraded from a FF camera to an APS class camera.

So what you're hearing from Frank and me is that the low light difference between the two formats isn't what it used to be. When you wake up in the morning it may be gone.

Joe

 

[rexbobcat]

Honestly, as amazing as the little Fuji cams' sensors are, they're still not quite up there with even some of the last generation full frame cameras.

Here's a shot from my Fujifilm X100S (Same sensor as the X100T/XT-1/XE-2) at ISO 6400, overexposed on purpose to minimize noise in post.


Here is a similar shot on my Canon 6D at ISO 12,800.


And a 50% zoom comparison

And here's a comparison after I bring the Fujifilm file's exposure down 1 stop.

The Fujifilm file at 6400 is slightly cleaner after the exposure is brought down than the Canon file at 12,800.


The Fujifilm sensors are quite spectacular in terms of dynamic range, noise quality (it really is much more randomized and filmic than Bayer array sensors) and even in terms of the amount of noise the camera produces. And their shadow noise is VERY well controlled when compared to Canon cameras.

However, these are not Holy Grail cameras. They still "suffer" from their smaller sensor size. The difference is pretty negligible in any real world sense, but it is there. They're also at a smaller resolution, so if the 6D files were downsized to 16 MP the it would also further minimize noise.

I love Fujifilm and Canon has kind of become an industry punchline, but I think saying the current APS-C X-Trans sensors are superior in low light to FF Canon sensors (or any current FF sensor) is wishful thinking.

 

[rexbobcat]

If you compare color noise, the X-trans sensor does perform better at ISO 6400 than the 6D does at ISO 12,800, especially in darker tones.

No exposure adjustments on either file. Color noise set to 0 in Lightroom.

In summation, the Fuji's noise has different characteristics than those from conventional Bayer Array sensors, but that doesn't necessarily mean there's less of it.

 

[gsgary]

Well that's a guy at a camera store on one hand and Bill Claff on the other hand. I'll go with the acknowledged authority in this case. I like camera store guys -- used to be one long ago, but in this case I trust Mr. Claff's meticulous testing.

Joe

Had a rather interesting talk with my mom few days ago about belief and faith, we tent to base our belief in something some due to facts some due to other reasons and then in most cases to stick to it.
We might be right and we might be wrong but that doesn't matter for us cause we have what we believe in.
I tend to question everybody and no body but at the end of the day the one thing that I trust more then anything is my own experience and to be honest this is all a very theoretical debate, I am very happy where I am right now and it doesn't matter if other people have this or that, when it comes down to it the most important part of the camera is us and how we use it
I think we really are getting further and further away from my initial first post and that's to share my own personal experience with FF camera.
If it will help someone on a quest to FF then I am glad.

And I bet the quality of you photos (comp and subject wise) didn't improve, I would rather have noise and a great photo than someone say wow that photo is noise free

 

[gsgary]

Honestly, as amazing as the little Fuji cams' sensors are, they're still not quite up there with even some of the last generation full frame cameras.

Here's a shot from my Fujifilm X100S (Same sensor as the X100T/XT-1/XE-2) at ISO 6400, overexposed on purpose to minimize noise in post.
View attachment 98951

Here is a similar shot on my Canon 6D at ISO 12,800.
View attachment 98952

And a 50% zoom comparison
View attachment 98954

And here's a comparison after I bring the Fujifilm file's exposure down 1 stop.
View attachment 98955

The Fujifilm file at 6400 is slightly cleaner after the exposure is brought down than the Canon file at 12,800.


The Fujifilm sensors are quite spectacular in terms of dynamic range, noise quality (it really is much more randomized and filmic than Bayer array sensors) and even in terms of the amount of noise the camera produces. And their shadow noise is VERY well controlled when compared to Canon cameras.

However, these are not Holy Grail cameras. They still "suffer" from their smaller sensor size. The difference is pretty negligible in any real world sense, but it is there. They're also at a smaller resolution, so if the 6D files were downsized to 16 MP the it would also further minimize noise.

I love Fujifilm and Canon has kind of become an industry punchline, but I think saying the current APS-C X-Trans sensors are superior in low light to FF Canon sensors (or any current FF sensor) is wishful thinking.

But in the right hands they probably are better and they fit in your pocket

 

[rexbobcat]

Honestly, as amazing as the little Fuji cams' sensors are, they're still not quite up there with even some of the last generation full frame cameras.

Here's a shot from my Fujifilm X100S (Same sensor as the X100T/XT-1/XE-2) at ISO 6400, overexposed on purpose to minimize noise in post.
View attachment 98951

Here is a similar shot on my Canon 6D at ISO 12,800.
View attachment 98952

And a 50% zoom comparison
View attachment 98954

And here's a comparison after I bring the Fujifilm file's exposure down 1 stop.
View attachment 98955

The Fujifilm file at 6400 is slightly cleaner after the exposure is brought down than the Canon file at 12,800.


The Fujifilm sensors are quite spectacular in terms of dynamic range, noise quality (it really is much more randomized and filmic than Bayer array sensors) and even in terms of the amount of noise the camera produces. And their shadow noise is VERY well controlled when compared to Canon cameras.

However, these are not Holy Grail cameras. They still "suffer" from their smaller sensor size. The difference is pretty negligible in any real world sense, but it is there. They're also at a smaller resolution, so if the 6D files were downsized to 16 MP the it would also further minimize noise.

I love Fujifilm and Canon has kind of become an industry punchline, but I think saying the current APS-C X-Trans sensors are superior in low light to FF Canon sensors (or any current FF sensor) is wishful thinking.

But in the right hands they probably are better and they fit in your pocket

In the right hands...they're still going to produce noise... there are probably some situations where the noise isn't as apparent, but I've owned both cameras long enough to understand the finer points of what they're capable of. A properly exposed photo from a Canon 6D has less noise than an identically exposed photo from the 16 MP Fujifilm sensor.

The Fujifilm handles over and underexposure better, however, when shooting at high ISOs, I still ETTR when possible.

Better is subjective depending on what your criteria is. In this regard, I've seen enough of my own photos with both cameras in a variety of situations to have a clear understanding of the technical qualities of the photos produced from each camera.

I've found the X-Trans II sensor is amazing as an APS-C sensor. If Fuji comes out with a full frame sensor, I have no doubt it will be more capable than Canon.

Choice-supportive bias - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[sashbar]

What I have learned after some years on this forum is that a true photographer wakes up in cold sweat each and every night because of the same nightmare: something has just shrunk. It is not as manly as it used to be.
He runs to the kitchen with a ruler in his trembling hand, grabs his camera, hastily removes the big tele zoom and measures the sensor to check if it is still Full Frame. Then satisfied he goes to bed and sleeps like a 5 y.o.

PS If it will help someone on a quest to FF then I am glad.