login info join!
Forums > Photography Talk > OK, which is the Full-Sized Sensor? Search   Reply
first12
Photographer
Robert Jewett
Posts: 2,428
al-Marsā, Tunis, Tunisia


A=5
B=14

19 total votes.  One more, guys!!!
Nov 13 12 09:49 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
L A U B E N H E I M E R
Posts: 8,361
Seattle, Washington, US


my therapist says A.

ok, let's have it!
Nov 13 12 09:50 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Moon Pix Photography
Posts: 3,890
Syracuse, New York, US


B is full frame
Nov 13 12 09:51 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Jewett
Posts: 2,428
al-Marsā, Tunis, Tunisia


Ya'll voted:
A=5
B=15


...but, A is the Full Frame.

smile
Nov 13 12 09:51 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Yingwah Productions
Posts: 1,341
New York, New York, US


Robert Jewett wrote:
Ya'll voted:
A=5
B=15


...but, A is the Full Frame.

smile

Can't wait for all the shit talking that'll come afterwards, "unfair testing method" blardy blah...

Nov 13 12 10:04 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lovely Day Media
Posts: 3,708
Vineland, New Jersey, US


Robert Jewett wrote:
Ya'll voted:
A=5
B=15


...but, A is the Full Frame.

smile

EXCELLENT!!!  smile

Nov 13 12 10:05 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
DougBPhoto
Posts: 37,487
Portland, Oregon, US


I wonder how many people guessed B because they thought it appeared to be the higher quality image (sharpness, dynamic range, etc).


I don't recall a thread where anyone was saying they could always tell images from Crop and Full Frame part, however I DO remember that even myself was saying that the suggestion that the two are identical is untrue.

Secondly, when I frame my images, I do so based on what I see in the frame and I select a lens accordingly, so if I was to shoot this same thing, I would NOT have been shooting the full frame body as the same focal length and then wasting my time cropping the resulting image.
Nov 13 12 10:10 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Fine Art Exposures
Posts: 31
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada


Thanks for the exercise, interesting results.
Nov 13 12 10:15 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Jewett
Posts: 2,428
al-Marsā, Tunis, Tunisia


Like everyone said, hardly scientific.  And, of course, my attempts to get them to look similar just made it worse...next time, I know what to improve.

Here are unprocessed RAW files, just converted to jpeg and resized.  I placed the 7D over the 5D MIII file for perspective on what the sensor sizes look like.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8487/8182762133_460d17110e_o.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8204/8182742157_09d3eabf5a_o.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8347/8182779854_db7f419b79_o.jpg
Nov 13 12 10:22 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Gabby57
Posts: 361
Coppell, Texas, US


DougBPhoto wrote:
I wonder how many people guessed B because they thought it appeared to be the higher quality image (sharpness, dynamic range, etc).


I don't recall a thread where anyone was saying they could always tell images from Crop and Full Frame part, however I DO remember that even myself was saying that the suggestion that the two are identical is untrue.

Secondly, when I frame my images, I do so based on what I see in the frame and I select a lens accordingly, so if I was to shoot this same thing, I would NOT have been shooting the full frame body as the same focal length and then wasting my time cropping the resulting image.

My reasoning was exactly the opposite.  My observations have been that all other things being equal, smaller sensors/lower resolutions tend to be "sharper" out of the camera at default settings.  This is certainly evident when comparing my old D70 to my D300 (admittedly one is CCD the other CMOS which is another variable).

However, I think the image that looks softer initially may well take more post process sharpening before halos etc. than it's companion.

Nov 13 12 10:41 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Jewett
Posts: 2,428
al-Marsā, Tunis, Tunisia


Lovely Day Media wrote:

EXCELLENT!!!  smile

You might be my only friend left. smile

(runs to avoid rotten tomatoes)

Nov 13 12 10:47 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Yingwah Productions
Posts: 1,341
New York, New York, US


DougBPhoto wrote:
I wonder how many people guessed B because they thought it appeared to be the higher quality image (sharpness, dynamic range, etc).


I don't recall a thread where anyone was saying they could always tell images from Crop and Full Frame part, however I DO remember that even myself was saying that the suggestion that the two are identical is untrue.

But surely you're seen people claim full frame images are a magnitude better and that they can instantly see the difference? this is merely calling bullshit on their claims.

I was shooting highschool tennis a few weeks ago and a parent asked what camera I was using (D300). They made same comments of how fullframe so much better. I shrugged and said i used the same camera for runway and my images got picked more often than some others guys using 8x more expensive gear.

Nov 13 12 11:20 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Yingwah Productions
Posts: 1,341
New York, New York, US


Robert Jewett wrote:
Like everyone said, hardly scientific.  And, of course, my attempts to get them to look similar just made it worse...next time, I know what to improve.

Here are unprocessed RAW files, just converted to jpeg and resized.  I placed the 7D over the 5D MIII file for perspective on what the sensor sizes look like.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8487/8182762133_460d17110e_o.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8204/8182742157_09d3eabf5a_o.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8347/8182779854_db7f419b79_o.jpg

I wonder what the results will be like if we tested a higher resolution crop sensor vs lower fullframe? Like a D5200 vs a D4

Nov 13 12 11:24 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
MC Photo
Posts: 4,144
New York, New York, US


Robert Jewett wrote:
Just for fun...
Specs:
One 7D.
One 5DMarkIII.
24-70L at 60mm for both.
ISO 400, F2.8, 100/sec on both.
Processed in LR.

Mark III cropped to the same perspective/magnification as 7D.

Vote for which is the full framed image in responses.

"A":
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8061/8181595150_9a763e6be9_o.jpg

"B":
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8200/8181594994_80a8b1131e_o.jpg

[EDIT] I made an effort to match tonality, contrast, brightness, etc. with very slight adjustments in LR.  As a point of interest, if you drop the blacks on the Mark III, the color/contrast looks pretty close to the 7D.  The slight brightness differences, were there in the originals (but I did bump up the exposure a bit on both).  Also, next time, I'll also crop in camera to show the difference.

B For full frame, but the shots aren't framed right the camera turned between shots, so it's a little misleading.

For instance the two items on the left look more compressed like they were shot with a longer lense, but if you look carefully, you can see that it's caused by the camera rotation.

Nov 13 12 11:32 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,577
London, England, United Kingdom


A=5DIII

But, the 7D is still sexy as hell, I'm in love with mine!
Nov 13 12 11:39 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Lovely Day Media
Posts: 3,708
Vineland, New Jersey, US


Robert Jewett wrote:
You might be my only friend left. smile

(runs to avoid rotten tomatoes)

Why would anyone throw rotten tomatoes?  If it's because they've picked the wrong picture, the problem is theirs.  If it's because I'm your only friend and I'm *so* terrible, they've got me all wrong. smile

Nov 13 12 11:42 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Image Magik
Posts: 1,067
New Orleans, Louisiana, US


Robert Jewett wrote:

smile

But... you can kinda see my point, right?

BTW, I'll reveal at 20 total votes.

No, I don't really see the point. Are you saying that a lot of photographers said that if you take the same picture with a crop frame and a full frame and then crop and tonally adjust the ff picture to look like the crop frame sensor that they can still tell the difference?
Personally on this "test" although quite jaded I would say that picture A has more saturation in the reds than picture B. Overall the picture I like looking at most is picture B.

Nov 13 12 11:42 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Image Magik
Posts: 1,067
New Orleans, Louisiana, US


Yingwah Productions wrote:

I wonder what the results will be like if we tested a higher resolution crop sensor vs lower fullframe? Like a D5200 vs a D4

I wonder what the results would be if you tested the camera's the way they were meant to be tested lol. A crop frame as a crop frame and a full frame as a full frame! Now who'd a thunk?

Nov 13 12 11:46 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Leonard Gee Photography
Posts: 16,032
Sacramento, California, US


framing, dof all irrelevant. the smoothness of the gradation and enlarged circle of confusion changes the quality of the image because of the smaller original image needing to be enlarged to match the larger sensor.

the difference is easy to spot - if you know what you are looking at. you can see it in the OP 100% size, but for the sight challenged, here's the 400% view.

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/121113/12/50a2abb19e641.jpg
Nov 13 12 11:59 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Jewett
Posts: 2,428
al-Marsā, Tunis, Tunisia


MC Photo wrote:

B For full frame, but the shots aren't framed right the camera turned between shots, so it's a little misleading.

For instance the two items on the left look more compressed like they were shot with a longer lense, but if you look carefully, you can see that it's caused by the camera rotation.

Ah, yeah.  Saw that too.  That would be the uber expensive Really Right Stuff brackets.  One is out of square.  Trying to find a machinist's square in Africa is impossible.

Nov 13 12 01:12 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12,113
Tampa, Florida, US


I'm not hiring you for my next scientific research project. By altering the image(s) in the way you did you've tainted the experiment and it's no longer a valid comparison.

You've changed the image to make them look similar to simply prove a point. By making subjective changes either of the images it's no longer a realistic or objective comparison.
Nov 13 12 01:29 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
R_Marquez
Posts: 4,608
San Francisco, California, US


Ha! I knew this thread would end up being funny one way or another.

I shoot with both crop and FF equally. Both are really good. Sometimes it seems like people take issue when FF is demystified.

I get that if you're zooming way in, maybe YOU can tell the difference, but most people can't. At the end of the day, most non-photographer people don't care. Just make good images.

I couldn't tell which was which, regardless of whether the test was screwed up. I mix images of the same shoot together and I can never tell which is the 5D2 or the 7D. They both look about the same.
Nov 13 12 01:41 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
London Fog
Posts: 6,577
London, England, United Kingdom


Leonard Gee Photography wrote:
framing, dof all irrelevant. the smoothness of the gradation and enlarged circle of confusion changes the quality of the image because of the smaller original image needing to be enlarged to match the larger sensor.

the difference is easy to spot - if you know what you are looking at. you can see it in the OP 100% size, but for the sight challenged, here's the 400% view.

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/121113/12/50a2abb19e641.jpg

Maybe it's my 40 something eyes, but there's a hardly a massive difference!, just shows how freakin' awesome the 7D is and how, er well average the 5DIII is.

Nov 13 12 01:45 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
M Pandolfo Photography
Posts: 12,113
Tampa, Florida, US


R_Marquez wrote:
Ha! I knew this thread would end up being funny one way or another.

I shoot with both crop and FF equally. Both are really good. Sometimes it seems like people take issue when FF is demystified.

I get that if you're zooming way in, maybe YOU can tell the difference, but most people can't. At the end of the day, most non-photographer people don't care. Just make good images.

I couldn't tell which was which, regardless of whether the test was screwed up. I mix images of the same shoot together and I can never tell which is the 5D2 or the 7D. They both look about the same.

I must have really missed the boat because I never considered a quality difference between a FF and a Crop sensor. Size difference/output, yes. Clarity/brightness of the viewfinder, yes. But I never thought of making the blanket statement that "a FF sensor takes better images than a crop."

I didn't even know this was a debate.

Nov 13 12 01:47 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Sherwood Forest Fotos
Posts: 24
San Diego, California, US


B is FF.
Nov 13 12 01:50 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jeffrey M Fletcher
Posts: 4,314
Asheville, North Carolina, US


So, we're trying to decide if it matters whether it's cropped at the sensor or at the output?
Nov 13 12 01:55 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
J O H N A L L A N
Posts: 9,728
Santa Ana, California, US


Leonard Gee Photography wrote:
framing, dof all irrelevant. the smoothness of the gradation and enlarged circle of confusion changes the quality of the image because of the smaller original image needing to be enlarged to match the larger sensor.

the difference is easy to spot - if you know what you are looking at. you can see it in the OP 100% size, but for the sight challenged, here's the 400% view.

http://photos.modelmayhem.com/photos/121113/12/50a2abb19e641.jpg

This is interesting as I was looking at exactly the same thing, to determine that B was the FF. Now what's also interesting is that I've never shot with a FF digital.
But, I shot Kodachrome FF for over 10 years and I'm comparing with that. Maybe my comparison between FF film and FF digital is faulty.

Nov 13 12 01:59 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Leonard Gee Photography
Posts: 16,032
Sacramento, California, US


John Allan wrote:
This is interesting as I was looking at exactly the same thing, to determine that B was the FF.

As I said, you have to know what you are looking at. Most people don't have the visual language to understand the difference in the gradations. Also there are better examples with very fine detail, which this example did not contain.

For the average user and especially those that have never dealt with high quality production (we are talking at least two-page full bleed with rotogravure or 200+ line sheet offset), it wouldn't make a speck of difference. But you can be surprised at how critical some of the top art directors and media buyer can be about the quality of the output.

The unanticipated uses sometimes can catch you off guard. Suddenly you wish you had shot it with medium format or large format. For web use it may be overkill, but I would rather be safe and have the minimum of what I need.

Nov 13 12 02:37 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
AspirationImages
Posts: 184
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia


So it's the same lens, at the same focal length at the same settings.

Why would there be any difference in a piddling little web shot.

Print them to at least A3 then have another look.
Nov 13 12 11:51 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Michael McGowan
Posts: 3,543
Tucson, Arizona, US


When you cropped the picture from the FF, then you weren't presenting a FF image. Cropped, they're both crop sensors. Your experiment is a total fail as far as telling which is FF and which is not.

The only difference between sensor sizes will be that to create a certain framing from a given distance with various sensor sizes, you need to adjust focal length. Then, you'll see the difference. Same focal length on same portion of a sensor, there's no difference. You defeated the only meaningful difference.
Nov 14 12 12:27 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Jewett
Posts: 2,428
al-Marsā, Tunis, Tunisia


Michael McGowan wrote:
When you cropped the picture from the FF, then you weren't presenting a FF image. Cropped, they're both crop sensors. Your experiment is a total fail as far as telling which is FF and which is not.

The only difference between sensor sizes will be that to create a certain framing from a given distance with various sensor sizes, you need to adjust focal length. Then, you'll see the difference. Same focal length on same portion of a sensor, there's no difference. You defeated the only meaningful difference.

(shhhhh.  no-one tell him that's the point, he likes thinking he's a rebel.) smile

Nov 14 12 12:52 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Drew Smith Photography
Posts: 5,209
Nottingham, England, United Kingdom


That was fun. Thank you for your time and effort.

7D and 5DII owner who hasn't thought once about upgrading to the 5DIII. smile

Okay, ... maybe once. Or twice.....





.... awww, but it's so nice and new and shiny! sad
Nov 14 12 01:04 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Neil Snape
Posts: 9,439
Paris, Île-de-France, France


Drew Smith Photography wrote:
That was fun. Thank you for your time and effort.

7D and 5DII owner who hasn't thought once about upgrading to the 5DIII. smile

Okay, ... maybe once. Or twice.....





.... awww, but it's so nice and new and shiny! sad

I had no choice as the shutter is going in my 5DII. I hesitated a lot as the Nikon D800 is way more bang for the buck.

Yet as much as I think the 5DII is capable of a very good image the AF is flawed, and seriously flawed.

I hear the 7D works well so as long as you like the IQ, no reason to move up.

Personally I hate spending money on a nul upgrade, and my old 5DMKII is still very shiny as I baby my stuff.

Nov 14 12 01:19 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Jewett
Posts: 2,428
al-Marsā, Tunis, Tunisia


Did you end up getting the Mark III?

And if so, what do you think?  I think it's the camera the Mark II should have been...and should cost $600 less.  Shrug.
Nov 14 12 02:03 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Neil Snape
Posts: 9,439
Paris, Île-de-France, France


Robert Jewett wrote:
Did you end up getting the Mark III?

And if so, what do you think?  I think it's the camera the Mark II should have been...and should cost $600 less.  Shrug.

Who me? Yes, and yes it's way over priced. Canon knows that as droves are going Nikon. If you do your research though Canon have a lot of lenses for what we do with models that are better and often less expensive.

For me I wanted to continue to use the 100mm macro, nothing better for the price weight and versatility as well as the 24-105 same thing.

Yet I did try the Nikon D800 a far better camera.

Nov 14 12 02:18 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Robert Jewett
Posts: 2,428
al-Marsā, Tunis, Tunisia


Yeah, I *almost* switched to Nikon, but I had just bought all new lenses for shooting overseas...and I couldn't afford the dump.

Also, with the grip, the prices are about the same.

I am not sure what Canon is thinking these days, but I wish they'd just buy Sony sensors already and get it over with.
Nov 14 12 02:56 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Extrosy
Posts: 656
Minneapolis, Minnesota, US


FF sensor doesn't change the DOF.  It's the LENS that determines the DOF. 
If anything, the crop sensor would appear to have less DOF because they typically have more pixel density. (except for the d800 which has more pixel density than the d300)   More pixel density equates to zooming in on the image which allows you to see the blurry parts more blurry. The 1.6 crop effectively does just that, a bit.
Nov 14 12 07:14 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
PhotosbyChuck
Posts: 2,222
Glen Ellyn, Illinois, US


Extrosy wrote:
FF sensor doesn't change the DOF.  It's the LENS that determines the DOF.

That's not the whole (wait for it....) picture.  The lens is only part of the equation.  The distance to subject is no less important.  And in practical use, most of us change our focal length, subject distance or both to get the desired composition in the viewfinder.  On a smaller sensor, you're going to have to get further away or use a shorter focal length to create the same visual composition.  Either way, you'll have a different DOF.  And so, viola!  Sensor size indirectly affects DOF.

So, said simply, a FF sensor will allow you to create a shallower depth of field in practical use.  We debate this topic over and over here, but it's really just that simple.  There's a good article on the topic that's linked often: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutori … r-size.htm

Nov 14 12 10:12 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Yingwah Productions
Posts: 1,341
New York, New York, US


Image Magik wrote:

I wonder what the results would be if you tested the camera's the way they were meant to be tested lol. A crop frame as a crop frame and a full frame as a full frame! Now who'd a thunk?

you can see direct comparisons of almost every camera they reviewed for the last 4-5 years over at dpreview.com, both raw and jpeg, at every ISO

Nov 14 12 11:17 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
photoimager
Posts: 4,799
Stoke-on-Trent, England, United Kingdom


If you use the same lens but use different 'crop' and 'full frame' bodies then you have 2 distinct areas of variables that will impact on the result. On a crop the emphasis will be on the usually better central area of the lens. With the bodies being different the sensors will be different as will the processing.

If you use a single lens on a 'full frame' body that also has a 'crop' mode then the camera based variables will be minimised but the lens variable will still be present.

Conclusion - conducting a valid test with 'off the shelf' equipment is not possible.
Nov 14 12 11:46 am  Link  Quote 
first12   Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers