DSLR users, do you prefer FF or Crop Sensor?

[scaredcloud]

Obviously the FF camera will be at an advantage to the cropped camera - assuming price is the same. For those who think that a cropped camera is beter because of the "tele" effect, the same can be gotten on a FF cam, just crop the centre youself and viola, a tele effect from the FF cam.

AJ's wish for a 1.5x crop 2xcrop etc is much better than using PS to batch crop - first, you get to shoot RAW with a smaller file size (don't have to save the whole FF RAW), ie, more shots per card, second, you dont waste time doing batch. I also second FF with options for crop

hmm... izit tt my understanding is wrong? :dunno:

for a FF 6MP, say, if I'm using a 200mm lens. I'll get 200mm focal length picture at 6MP.
If I use a 1.5x Cropped 6MP, still using 200mm lens, I'll get 300mm focal length picture at 6MP.

Say if I wana crop FF 6MP picture to 1.5x. I'm losing 1.5x MP, you can't crop a 6MP pics 1.5x to 6MP pics isn't it? :think:

Unless we are comparing 10.2MP FF and 6MP 1.5x cropped.

Hence, for tele lover, 1.5x cropped is preferable isn't it? :dunno:

 

[gernie]

whtever isit, just get 2 or more bodies... //horses for courses

 

[ngebor]

Other advantage of cropped sensor is the high quality lens can be built economically... if you notice some of P&S and even phone camera can achive small f-number with the lower price because of smaller sensor... (i'm bit surprised when noticing my lousy handphone equiped with 33mm f/2.8 lens)

 

[ExplorerZ]

Other advantage of cropped sensor is the high quality lens can be built economically... if you notice some of P&S and even phone camera can achive small f-number with the lower price because of smaller sensor... (i'm bit surprised when noticing my lousy handphone equiped with 33mm f/2.8 lens)

eh 33mm on a HP sensor :bigeyes: :bigeyes:. it gonna be like 400mm or more... i guess you meant 33mm @ 35mm equiv... cos my fz5 with 12x zoom is only 6-72mm :bsmilie:

hmm... izit tt my understanding is wrong?

for a FF 6MP, say, if I'm using a 200mm lens. I'll get 200mm focal length picture at 6MP.
If I use a 1.5x Cropped 6MP, still using 200mm lens, I'll get 300mm focal length picture at 6MP.

Say if I wana crop FF 6MP picture to 1.5x. I'm losing 1.5x MP, you can't crop a 6MP pics 1.5x to 6MP pics isn't it?

Unless we are comparing 10.2MP FF and 6MP 1.5x cropped.

Hence, for tele lover, 1.5x cropped is preferable isn't it?

yup... but if you are shooting wide, FF gives you a advantage for not cropping it

 

[vince123123]

The FF cams usually have more MPs than the cropped ones.

hmm... izit tt my understanding is wrong? :dunno:

for a FF 6MP, say, if I'm using a 200mm lens. I'll get 200mm focal length picture at 6MP.
If I use a 1.5x Cropped 6MP, still using 200mm lens, I'll get 300mm focal length picture at 6MP.

Say if I wana crop FF 6MP picture to 1.5x. I'm losing 1.5x MP, you can't crop a 6MP pics 1.5x to 6MP pics isn't it? :think:

Unless we are comparing 10.2MP FF and 6MP 1.5x cropped.

Hence, for tele lover, 1.5x cropped is preferable isn't it? :dunno:

 

[ngebor]

eh 33mm on a HP sensor :bigeyes: :bigeyes:. it gonna be like 400mm or more... i guess you meant 33mm @ 35mm equiv... cos my fz5 with 12x zoom is only 6-72mm :bsmilie:


yup... but if you are shooting wide, FF gives you a advantage for not cropping it

Hehe... :bsmilie: you are right 33mm @ 35mm equiv... my point is actually the lens apperture... smaller the sensor, easier to make high apperture (small f-number...)...

and yes, I agree with you... since I'm more on landscape shooter myself, i prefer FF...

 

[ngebor]

The FF cams usually have more MPs than the cropped ones.

yap.. this also put some "limitation factor" for developmnet of cropped sensor... logically, you can not stuff to many pixel sensor in a tiny surface area...

 

[Razor54]

Sports.....crop-sensors.

Portraits.....FF anytime!:thumbsup:

 

[Stoned]

I think nowadays with DX format lenses, and assuming you lose the benefits of a larger sensor due to lower pixel density, I would prefer a cropped sensor camera and smaller more compact bodies.

As a canon user though, I think I would be interested for Canon to phase out the 1.3x range. It's annoying because it's neither here nor there. You can't get a decent wide angle on it, to the point where I had to buy another camera just to get an ultra wide angle perspective.

 

[obewan]

Of coz FF for the wider angle and lower noise.
There is always the "but" cost factor...:sweat:

However, I can live with the crop factor for the lower cost.
Can always get a cheaper film body for the wider angle shots. :bsmilie:

 

[JoshSiao]

For the same number of megapixels, FF is less pixel dense than cropped. Think 10MP of pixels divided over 35mm and the 1.6x crop. Cropped sensors thus give more detail when you try to increase the resolution of a taken shot. Thus with FF, they built bigger MP sensors that almost approach that of medium format but a very high cost. Of course, I'll take FF due to the really wide angles that I can't get with cropped unless you can turn the Sigma 8mm Fisheye into 8mm rectilinear.

 

[JediForce4ever]

I like the 1.3x Crop of Canon.Dosent cut you too much on wide.

 

[StreetShooter]

I prefer a cropped sensor for the following reasons:

1. Even if FF bodies cost the same as cropped sensor bodies (which they don't), the lenses to get the most out of a FF body would cost a lot more than those for cropped sensors, in terms of corner quality and vignetting.

2. The range of ultrawide angle lenses nowadays (eg Canon 10-22mm) means that there is no more problem getting sufficiently wide (10mm on a FF body is simply not useful except for stunt shots).

3. Lenses designed specially for cropped sensors are smaller, lighter and cheaper for the same equivalent focal length and maximum aperture size. This is a BIG plus for cropped sensors. It's like the move from medium format to 35mm. Sure, you lose a bit of resolution, but you gain portability. And advances in film technology gradually made up for the smaller film area. Same thing with digital sensors. Compare the size and weight of a 16-35mm f2.8 (for full frame) with today's 17-50mm f2.8. Or the Sigma 30mm f1.4 with the Canon 35mm f1.4 (full frame). Can't imagine what a 10-22mm full frame lens would weigh.

4. Most of my shots are for sharing on the web or printing at 4R or at most 8R. The increased resolution and pixel sensitivity of a FF sensor would not be apparent at such display or print sizes. I don't blow up my shots to poster size.

 

[NE clicks clicks]

That's an interesting scenario. If ever, the price of the FF comes down to only <1k more than the crop 1.6x. I would buy it while keeping my 1.6x DSLR. then can enjoy the best of both world.;p
However, I honestly doubt the FF will go down to that price level because, IMO Canon will be killing or providing unesscessary competition to its own 1.6x dslr . They would not benefit from it in any way. Unless one day, its competitor like NIkon, Pentax..... started making FF and sell at that kind of price would Canon make such a move.

 

[Sion]

If price between the 2 is about the same (less than S$1k diff) and spec & performance almost same, which will you go for?

If the difference is S$999.99 I go for Crop Sensor.

But if the difference is S$0.99 then I go for FF Sensor.

:bsmilie:

 

[hongjone]

If the price difference is minimal, of coz FF... :bsmilie:
But must be able to crop, and use my existing DX lens. :think:

 

[jdredd]

the 2 will never cost the same price.
for each sheet that they cut the sensors from, they can get only 15 or so FF sensors but maybe 200 or so 1.6 crop sensors (or something like that).

its a more fraught process as well for the FF sensors, because more chance of imperfections in the process.

so if the price of FF sensor can come down to 1000, u can bet that 1.6 crop sensors will be like 200-300 dollars.

btw,not sure if anyon ehas mentioned this, but to me, one of the BIG reasons going FF, is the viewfinder on a FF lens is SWEEE!!! compared to a 1.6 crop..
if ever u need convincing, if u have a friend with a 5D or 1DS mk II, just ask to peep through..

 

[smallaperture]

I prefer a cropped sensor for the following reasons:

3. Lenses designed specially for cropped sensors are smaller, lighter and cheaper for the same equivalent focal length and maximum aperture size. This is a BIG plus for cropped sensors. It's like the move from medium format to 35mm. Sure, you lose a bit of resolution, but you gain portability. And advances in film technology gradually made up for the smaller film area. Same thing with digital sensors. Compare the size and weight of a 16-35mm f2.8 (for full frame) with today's 17-50mm f2.8. Or the Sigma 30mm f1.4 with the Canon 35mm f1.4 (full frame). Can't imagine what a 10-22mm full frame lens would weigh.

.

The DX/APS size sensor is getting more and more acceptance as we get better and better dSLR. We have seen all the "standard" zooms with F2.8 in this format. However, I am still waiting for the telezoom like 80-200F2.8 in the DX format to appear - lighter, smaller and cheaper! I guess it is a matter of time we get that kind of lens coming on stream.

 

[user111]

. For those who think that a cropped camera is beter because of the "tele" effect, the same can be gotten on a FF cam, just crop the centre youself and viola, a tele effect from the FF cam.

the cropped sensor lets u have the tele effect right now in the field while shooting when peering through the viewfinder.

that is the main draw for tele shooters.

whereas for FF sensor u get the tele effect only when u stare at the computer screen at home after cropping the picture with software.