Crop identification

This article is written in photographic slang and, moments, filled with my subjective opinions. This article describes the nuances of using cropped cameras and lenses, which few people pay due attention to.

Crop identification

Crop identification

'Crop', 'Crop', 'cropped camera', 'cropped camera', 'cropped sensor', 'cropped sensor' are synonyms for a camera with a reduced light-sensitive element (matrix, film). These concepts are strongly intertwined with the concept crop factor and basic information about crop can be found in the section ' Crop factor '.

Full frame Full Frame, FF, FF, Full sensor size are synonyms for cameras that have an original, not reduced photosensitive element. Nowadays, many amateur photographers believe that FF cameras are a panacea and the peak of the evolutionary development of modern digital cameras. Due to the fact that the price of amateur cropped cameras is several times lower than for full-frame cameras, a lot of amateur photographers use cropped cameras and dream of switching to full frame. Matrix size full-frame cameras is equal to the size of standard 35mm film (film type 135). But full frame is not the limit.

There are medium and large format cameras where the sizes of the photosensitive element are several times larger than the sizes of the photosensitive elements in full-frame cameras. Oddly enough it sounds, but modern full-frame digital cameras are narrow format... It turns out to be a kind of deception - on the one hand, a full frame is something beyond, on the other hand, a full frame is just a narrow format.

Photographers who have been shooting medium or large format all their lives most often look down on today's prohibitively expensive 'Full Frame Cameras' Nikon D4s, Canon 1DX and the like. I am writing this to the fact that there should be a clear understanding that full-frame cameras are just one of the steps in the evolution of camera engineering.

Crop Excellence

Crop Excellence

Since I use the Nikon system most of all, I will give examples based on Nikon's photographic equipment.

Basically, everyone knows that with the help of a FF camera it is easier to control the depth of field. With a full-frame camera, it is easier to achieve a thin depth of field, blurring the background and background.

But there is a second side to the coin, in which crop surpasses full frame. To get the same angle of view from a full frame lens Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm 1: 2.8G ED N used on a full-frame camera, on the crop you need to use an analogue - Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G ED IF SWM DX. We assume that 17mm crop and 24mm full frame give approximately same viewing angle and omit the difference 1.5mm EGF (Эequivalent Фsnack Рdistance, 17mm * 1,5-24mm = 1,5mm). But due to different real focal lengths, lenses have different depth of field and different hyperfocal distance... In practice, this has the effect that 17mm is easier to achieve a wide depth of field than 24mm full frame. For example, this is expressed by the fact that when I photograph a group of people in low light (for example, in a temple), the thin depth of field of the 24mm@F/2.8 lens is very strongly felt in the full frame and some of the people who 'fall out' of the field of focus are blurred. I do not need anyone to be blurred in the picture at all. At the same time, if you shoot the same scene with a 17mm@F/2.8 lens on a crop, the field of focus will be larger, this will allow you to capture all people in the field of focus, and when you print such a picture, all participants in the shooting will admire their sharp image. In this case, the lenses use the same aperture, and photographing occurs at the same shutter speed.

Often you can see a recalculation of aperture for cropped lenses. For example f / 2.8 for Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G ED IF SWM DX on cameras Nikon DX will have the equivalent of f / 4.2. You can look at the example of Nikon 14-24 2.8 on photozone.de. This does not mean that such a lens has a real darker aperture (smaller real aperture in terms of T-stops) when used on cropped cameras - this only means that the depth of field for such a lens will be F / 4.2 equivalent to full-frame cameras. Attention: this recount does not affect the exposure, it only affects the recalculation of the depth of field.

Thus, using Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G ED IF SWM DX at 17mm and F / 2.8 we get the equivalent of 25.5mm and F / 4.2. That is, to get the same large depth of field as with a cropped lens Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G ED IF SWM DX, using Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm 1: 2.8G ED AF-S N we will have to close the aperture to f / 4.2. But in the case of a full-frame lens, this will entail not only an increase in depth of field, but also a decrease exposure. The exposure will have to be compensated either by a longer shutter speed, or a higher ISO sensitivity or a higher flash output.

When you change the aperture by one stop, the depth of field changes in two times. F-stop numbers are F / 1.4, F / 2.0, F / 2.8, F / 4.0, F / 5.6, etc. The difference between f / 2.8 and f / 4.0 is one stop (two times). It turns out that when using a cropped lens, we gain more than twice the depth of field in magnification (F / 2.8 versus F / 4.2). To be precise, the depth of field is 2.25x for Nikon DX cameras. The increase in depth of field is linearly related to the size of the matrix. In fact, Nikon FX and Nikon DX sensors differ in their area by 2.25 times. The number 2.25 is very simple, you just need crop factor (Kf = 1.5) squared: 1.5 * 1.5 = 2.25.

This trick is used in many soap dishes for macro photography. The tiny sensors of digital soap cameras can produce huge DOF with small aperture numbers, which is very important for macro photography. So, to get similar pictures with a simple soap dish and Nikon D3s + Nikon AF Micro Nikkor 105mm 1: 2.8D on a soap dish it will be possible to calmly remove on F / 5.6 from hands with a short shutter speed, and on a large full-frame lens, you will have to close the aperture very strongly to get the same DOF.

Personal experience:

I described the difference in depth of field in detail only because I often shoot various kinds of wide-angle lenses on an open aperture baptism, weddings, etc. I usually use a 28mm lens. On a full frame at 28mm f / 3.5, it is already very noticeable that people 'fall out' from the depth of field. When printing in a format of 20 X 30 and more, it is already quite noticeable that some people are in focus, and some are 'floated'. Sometimes clients complain to me that part of the picture is not sharp. Using a crop camera and a lens with a similar EGF, you can increase the depth of field by a factor of 2.25 while maintaining aperture ratio and simplify this kind of shooting. I understand that you can close the aperture and get a wide depth of field, but in some cases you can’t shoot at F / 11.0, since there is very, very little light for the scene, and using a flash is highly undesirable.

Conclusion:

Equivalent focal lengths when using cropped lenses allow you to get a large depth of field, more objects in the focus area, more satisfied customers. At the same time, we need the same aperture the lens.

Ultimatu crop

Ultimatu crop

After the previous point, the crop has risen to its feet and can now compete with a full frame. But there is one very serious problem when using cropped cameras. And this problem is the lack of lenses. In general, this concerns the absence good professional fast lenses with a comfortable EGF. Professional photographers, such as wedding planners, studio photographers, and storytellers most often use a specific set of lenses with a certain focal length. Usually this is a range of 14-200mm.

But for cropped cameras there are simply no lenses for comfortable shooting. For example, for Nikon DX cameras there is nothing to replace Nikon 14-24 F / 2.8, Nikon 17-35 F / 2.8, Nikon 70-200 F / 2.8, Nikon 80-200 F / 2.8, Nikon 85mm F / 1.4. There is only a replacement for the Nikon 24-70 F / 2.8 in the form of the Nikon 17-55 F / 2.8 DX (and then, there is a Nikon 24-70 F / 2.8 VR, which, again, has no replacement).

Lenses have historically undergone a number of adjustments to suit the needs of photographers when working on narrow 35mm film. We have developed our own optimal standards. For example, reporting in 'close combat' is easier than ever to shoot with the Nikon 17-35 F / 2.8, and for portraits, weddings, use the Nikon 70-200 F / 2.8. These lenses complement each other to provide the photographer's desired coverage of the focal length range, are very easy to use and are a kind of standard. These lenses have undergone a number of modifications, have been hardened by time, and their focal lengths were chosen for a reason.

As a result, for the Nikon DX crop, there is neither a wide aperture-panorama (14-24 F / 2.8), nor a reportage-wide (Nikon 17-35 F / 2.8), nor a portrait-TV (Nikon 70-200 F / 2.8), no fix portraiture (Nikon 85mm F1.4).

In general, for 'professional photography' on a crop, only the Nikon 17-55mm F / 2.8 can be used as a versatile replacement for the full-frame Nikon 24-70mm F / 2.8.

When using lenses from full-frame cameras, the EGF and full-frame lenses largely lose their functionality on crop. To reinforce my words, I will give an example from personal practice. Using a Nikon 70-200 F/2.8 lens on a full-frame camera, I can easily shoot wedding walks and small groups of people at 70mm, all I have to do is step back a little. But when using the same lens on a crop, I have to run back and forth with 70-200mm to shoot witnesses, young people and a few more people. As a result, the 70-200 does not fulfill its function as a normal 70mm lens. For serious photography, crop is a road to nowhere due to the lack of a set of lenses the photographer needs.

There is one more thing - third-party manufacturers have realized the nuance described above and released equivalents. For Nikon 14-24 F / 2.8 there is Tokina 11-16 F / 2.8, for Nikon 70-200 F / 2.8 there is Tokina AF 50-135mm F / 2.8. Nikon 17-35 F / 2.8 replacements were never invented. On the one hand, I often recommend third-party lenses, but I only do this for hobbyists. On the other hand, there is one unwritten rule for professionals to use only 'native' lenses on their cameras. Let me give you an example, so I came to a wedding with 'Tamron', 'Sigma', 'Tokina'. They ask me, what is this lens? I answer - 'Tamron', 'Sigma', 'Tokina'. In response, I only hear “There ... What? ... Sigma? Bokina? " And all my professionalism and trust in me is multiplied by zero. It is difficult to prove to the client that important how to take pictures, and not using any technique. Give everyone only Nikon, Canon, Sony.

Of course, it should be understood that the concepts of 'professional photographer' and 'professional photographic equipment' have very vague boundaries.

We can also mention Canon cameras with APS-H sensor - Canon EOS-1D, 1D MarkII, 1D Mark II N, 1D Mark III, 1D Mark IV, which have crop factor 1.3 and for which neither the native manufacturer nor third-party ones produce lenses taking crop into account. Only full-frame native lenses are suitable for such cameras.

Conclusions:

For full-frame cameras, there are lens solutions with a convenient set of focal lengths. For cropped cameras, there are practically no such lenses.

Crop evolution

Crop evolution

In the previous paragraph, I tried to defeat the crop. At this point, I will try to finish it off.

Not only professional lenses have evolved, but also a number of simple 'dark' zooms. Usually, for comfortable, simple photography, the 28mm-XXXmm range is used. For example, 28-50mm, 28-70mm, 28-85mm, 28-100mm, 28-105mm, 28-200mm, 28-300mm. Such lenses are called universal, with their help you can practically shoot anything. Most of their versatility lies in their ability to use the wide 28mm field of view on a full frame camera. The equivalent of 28mm on crop is 18mm, for example 18-55m, 18-70mm, 18-105mm, 18-135mm, 18-200mm, 18-300mm.

For example, Nikon has over 10 class 28-XXX universal autofocus lenses and their modifications. All these lenses are practically unprofitable when used on cropped Nikon DX cameras, as they completely lose their versatility due to the fact that 28mm gives EGF at 42mm (almost fifty dollars). Now the good old lenses, for example, the Nikon 28-105mm F / 3.5-4.5 Macro with outrageous image quality and super fast focusing, are sold for $ 150, since no one needs them.

This is true not only of universal lenses, but of almost all full-frame lenses that have been designed for full-frame cameras. Black magic happens on crop, constantly full-frame lenses with specific goals and objectives'turn into something'. For example, a fifty-kopeck piece in a short-portrait, any shirik into a standard lens, over a shirik into a wide one. The only thing unchanged is the telephoto. Televik and televik on the crop.

The main advantage of crop marketing experts highlight 'free' increase in equivalent focal length. In fact, such an increase is needed only in very rare tasks. For example, I very rarely need a lens longer than 200mm at full frame. Few photographers can really use this advantage for shooting distant subjects. For an ordinary amateur photographer, such an increase EGF often not needed. Many remain deceived by what is usually said about the increase EGF for telephoto lenses. Everything is extremely simple there - the longer the focal length, the better. But due to the fact that the EGF increases not only for telephoto lenses, but for all lenses, from this wide angles suffer greatly. That is, the wide angle of a wide-angle full-frame lens simply disappears when using such a lens on a cropped camera. In general, it is better to shoot wider than narrower - the image can then be cropped, but not vice versa. Because I really like the expression: 'crop eats frame'.

Conclusion:

When using cropped cameras lost the ability to use a huge number of old full-frame lenses with excellent optical and mechanical performance. Often such lenses cost a penny, and their image quality is at a high level.

Crop accuracy

Crop accuracy

Another important point is accuracy of the focusing system when used on crop and on a full frame of FX lenses. It is connected with hyperfocal distance and a feature of the focusing system of each lens separately.

To shoot the same subject with the same full-frame lens in crop and full frame with the same crop, you need get closer or further to the subject. The difference in shooting distance between the Nikon DX camera and Nikon FX will be 1.5 times. For example, if you need to shoot something with a cropped camera and a full-frame lens from a distance of 6 meters, you will need to shoot something with the same lens and a full-frame camera with the same crop from a distance of 4 meters.

The focusing system is often easier to sharpen the lens at medium focusing distances. This can be related to the step of the focusing ring. When focusing in the infinity region, the focus ring pitch is very small, which may cause more problems with focus accuracy in this range. When using an FX lens on a crop, focusing is shifted toward infinity, which generally degrades the accuracy and smoothness of focusing. This is a very subtle nuance that can not always be traced. It takes a lot of practice to feel the difference.

And also an important point - the shorter the focusing distance, the visually the subject appears sharper (although the depth of field decreases).

Crop weight

Crop weight

It is often said that cropped cameras weigh less than full frame cameras. This is not always true. For example, full frame cameras Nikon D700, D800, Nikon D800E, Nikon D600 weigh less than the cropped Nikon D1, Nikon D1h, Nikon D1x, Nikon D2x, Nikon D2xs, Nikon D2h, Nikon D2hs. Also full frame Nikon D600 weighs about the same as Nikon's cropped ruler D500, D300, D300s, D200, D100. In the general case, the weight of the camera is determined not by the size of the sensor, but by the belonging of the camera to a certain level, for example, professional or amateur. The weight of the camera is very dependent on the materials of which the housing is made. Typically, professional cameras have an all-metal body, unlike amateur cameras that use plastic. So it turns out that professional flagship (with a combo body) cropped cameras of the Nikon D1, D2 series weigh more than an amateur full-frame Nikon D600 or professional Nikon D810, D800, D800E. The weight of the camera can be both a plus and a minus, like everything else in matters of crop.

Crop speed

Crop speed

The implicit advantage of the reduced sensor on cropped cameras is the ability to quickly read the signal from the cells of the matrix and lower power consumption. In fact, this greatly affects the video. So, the first Nikon camera that could shoot video was not Nikon D3s, Nikon D90. Now Nikon D7100, D7200, D5200, D5300, D5500 can shoot Full HD at 60 frames per second, and more expensive cameras Nikon D600, D610, D800,D800E, D4 can squeeze a maximum of only 30 frames per second in Full HD mode. This also affects the photo shooting speed. So cameras with interchangeable lenses Nikon 1 J1, Nikon 1 S1, Nikon 1 V2, Nikon 1 V1, Nikon 1 J2, Nikn 1 J3 and  Nikon 1 AW1 can take pictures at a speed of 60 (sixty) photos in one second. It turns out that crumbs Nikon 1 s crop factor 2.7X shoots 5 times faster than Nikon D4s or Canon 1DX. Such speed is possible due to fast reading and signal processing from a 'small' matrix.

Crop cutting

Crop cutting

Unlike Canon cameras, Nikon full-frame CCMs can operate in DX image mode. This means that any full-frame camera can only use the central part of its sensor, which is completely identical in size to the classic Nikon DX crop. To do this, simply select the DX image area in the camera menu. Thus, using any Nikon FX cameras, you can simultaneously have at hand an analogue of a cropped camera. For example, in Nikon DX mode, the camera Nikon D800 takes 16MP pictures, in size and quality almost the same as when using cropped cameras Nikon D7000 or D5100. True, in Nikon DX mode it is inconvenient to sight through JVI. By the way, some Nikon DX cropped cameras can work in their specific optional cropped mode. These cameras include Nikon D2x и D2xs with an additional crop for high-speed shooting Kf = 2X and Nikon D7100 with the possibility of additional crop Kf = 1.3X.

The future of crop

The future of crop

Of course, crop cameras have been and always will be. But here in the professional segment, cropped cameras no longer have a place... For example, Nikon no longer releases TOP cropped 'combo monsters', the last of which was Nikon D2xsreleased way back in 2006. In 2007, Nikon's line of TOP professional cameras was replaced by a full-frame line, the first of which was Nikon D3. In the future, the entire range of such cameras includes exclusively full-frame models.

The same fate befell the line of cropped TOP cameras Canon with an APS-H sensor. Latest model, Canon 1D Mark IV, was released in 2009, replaced by a full-frame camera in 2012 Canon 1D X.

Crop quality

Crop quality

All the previous ones are just flowers :) (which are on screensavers). For me, as a photographer, full-frame cameras are valued more than cropped cameras due to lower noise at equivalent ISO values. Full-frame cameras have higher ISO values ​​that allow you to take pictures of acceptable quality. If we take cropped and full-frame cameras of the same generation, then full-frame shots will always be more flexible in post-processing, they are much simpler 'draw out'and finalize (especially when shooting in RAW).

Let's take the latest full-frame model among Nikon cameras - D4s, and the latest advanced cropped - D7100, even according to synthetic tests, it is easy to see that the 'working' ISOs of Nikon D4s are 2-3 times higher than those of Nikon D7100 (link dxomark.com). I can say with confidence that no Nikon cropped camera has yet grown in terms of noise at high ISOs even to the very first full-frame Nikon D3. The same situation can be observed with Sony and Pentax cameras. And if you do not take into account Canon EOS-1DS then Canon has exactly the same situation :).

Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.

Global output:

Crop is insidious. Now you know that:

  • A full frame can be considered crop from medium format cameras;
  • Crop has the advantage of greater depth of field with the same F number and the same viewing angle. This is important for shooting using wide-angle optics;
  • For crop there is no line of professional lenses with convenient focal length. In my opinion, this is a very serious drawback of crop;
  • Cropped cameras cannot be used properly with a huge number of good old full-frame lenses;
  • When using full-frame lenses on crop, the smoothness and convenience of focusing changes;
  • Cropped cameras are not always lighter than full frame cameras;
  • Full-frame cameras have a significantly lower noise level at high ISO;
  • Among professional cameras, there is less and less space for crop.

Extension here.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram

Add a comment: B. R. P.

 

 

Comments: 321, on the topic: Identification of crop

  • Alexander

    Please correct the typo 'Nikn D90' in the article

    PS Maybe you should add a little to the article about the following:
    You can get a 'free crop advantage' on a full frame, you can shoot in DX compatibility mode by setting the same 17-55 f / 2.8 and get the same deep depth of field as with a crop. Or then trim the black margins in the editor. The resolution of the D600 / D610 / D800 cameras allows you to do this. Although for a full-frame camera, the 17-55 is almost useless.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Fixed
      Damn awkward to shoot through the JVI in DX mode.

      • Alexander

        Honestly, I haven't tried shooting in DX mode, but the D600 shows a "frame", I don't know if I can only trust it.

        • Arkady Shapoval

          You can trust the frame. I have shot in this mode more than once, I constantly forget about the limitations and catch on black corners the necessary details in the frame. This creates a huge moral discontent.

  • Alex de Kairoy

    Great article, Arkasha thanks!
    I especially liked the interpretation of the Bourne)))))

  • Sergei

    Arkady, good afternoon. You have indicated that you often film baptisms, weddings, etc. by 28mm. I have a similar situation and I need a “shirik” for the D300 crop. What can you advise?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      For the d300, you need something wider than 28mm, a long time ago I shot on Tamron 17-50 / 2,8

  • sAs

    Arkady, tormented by the choice of lens to crop D90. Vibor between Nikon 28 f / 2.8D Nikkor and Tamron 17-50 / 2,8, while Tamron is a little afraid after Tamron 18-200. I rent weddings and stuff, climb the walls in the studio with 50 f / 1.8D.
    Nikon 28 f / 2.8D Nikkor - will the D90 be a normal portrait lens? And can it be used as the main one for reportage shooting on the same D90?
    Thank you!

    • Anna

      Good evening sAs!
      If you find answers to your questions, please share the info. I am looking for a good portrait on the D90.
      Thank you!

  • Dmitriy

    Everything written in relation to Nikon, right? What about canon? There are also completely objective lenses exclusively for crop:
    EF-S 10-22mm f / 3.5-4.5 USM
    EF-S 15-85mm f / 3.5-5.6 IS USM
    EF-S 17-55mm f / 2.8 IS USM
    EF-S 60mm f / 2.8 Macro USM
    Yes the same pancake Canon EF 40mm f / 2.8 STM than bad on crop

    • Arkady Shapoval

      If you do not take into account 17-55 where are the professional lenses? Everything is the same here.

  • Rita

    Hello, tell me if my Nikon 5100 camera will fit the Tamron 24 70 f 2.8, I just saved up only for the lens' and would like more professional photos, I have a whale and 50 mm f 1.4. I plan to buy Nikon 6100, thanks in advance for your answer!

  • Vladimir

    Hello. Thanks to the author for starting this article - a reference to the correct concepts of “large” and “small” format. In this sense, I want to add important details. For the entire more than 150 years history of the development of photographic camera construction and photography, the formats of photographic materials have been constantly changing. Our “favorite full frame,” by the way, is not a photographic achievement. Photographic equipment at one time (the 20th) borrowed the frame size 35 by 24 from the cinema. Such a frame size is primarily convenient for demonstrating a sufficiently detailed image of a “picture” on a screen in a cinema ... The arrival in photography of such a small format was then perceived by the photographic world as hackneyed and began to be used exclusively in reporting work for newspapers. Until the 50s, serious photographers - reporters for very large publishers continued to work hard on 3 "by 5" sheet photographs. … .. To be honest, I don't see a fundamental difference between “cropped” and “full-frame” DSLRs, especially after the Nikon D71000 appeared. There is a difference between such a small matrix size, but against the background of the beloved “studio” format 6 by 6 cm, this is practically nothing.

  • Loko

    I am looking for a portrait on the Nikon d7100. The fact that on the crop the optical distortion does not change, it just cuts the frame. I’m thinking about 50mm for a long time which will turn the angle of view of the lens into a 75mm angle, but the faces will not be perfect, and besides, I’ll have to run. I also thought about 85mm, but I think if it will become too uncomfortable telephoto on the crop. What advise? Take 50mm and not bother?

  • Sandy

    Is it possible to compensate for the crop factor by moving it further away from the subject? After all, if you move further somewhere just a distance 1.5 times larger than the original, will the lens suck in a normal, almost correct picture?

  • Oleg

    Another important point is the accuracy of the focusing system when used on a crop and on a full frame of FX lenses. This is due to the hyperfocal distance and the peculiarity of the focusing system of each lens separately. For example, in order to shoot the same subject with the same full-format lens on the crop and on the full frame with the same framing, you need to come closer or further to the subject. The focusing system is often easier to sharpen the lens at medium focusing distances.

    - this is only true for DSLRs. there are no such problems in mirrorless cameras

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Disable autofocus on the mirrorless and all the same difficulties will appear due to the progress of the focus ring at the indicated distances.

  • Oleg Muravitsky

    The best choice of crop lenses is from Pentax. There is a figure with interchangeable optics - either APS-C, or already at once the medium format. Accordingly, all lenses for cropped cameras were originally designed for crop, there are fixes with FF 15, 21, 40, 43, 70, 77 mm and zoom 50-135 / 2,8 (analogous to 75-200 for FF). And the cameras themselves are interesting, the K-3 has a very pleasant impression.

  • Dmitry K

    yes, apparently the camera manufacturers realized this before the mass audience and realized that professional crops are a way to nowhere, and glasses for them need to be developed separately (for the same big money people will take ff), and you can't organize high ISO in a small matrix ... which means d400 and 7d mark 2 will remain only in dreams.

  • Sergei

    Please tell me what to choose after Nikon D80? Nikon D300s or Nikon D610.
    Lenses are both. I can’t decide if I need an Amateur full frame. I rent mostly repoptazhku rarely portraits.
    Thank you.

    • Dmitry K

      As the owner of the d300s, I will say the following - after a professional carcass with a bunch of buttons on an all-metal case, any semi-plastic in your hands looks like a toy. I have never shot a full frame and therefore I know the advantages of it only on paper, but the advantages of the d300s are undeniable against any “unwanted” carcass

      • Valery

        Dmitry. I purchased the d300. You can talk somewhere about the undeniable advantages. Maybe through VK somehow?

  • Sergei

    Well, what is everyone so eager for in a full frame?
    Who would still explain to me how full-frame shots differ from crop shots.
    They say about some volume on a full flame, about depth ...

    • Arkady Shapoval

      If you want to know - shoot, process.

      • Sergei

        sorry for the potion (money) for the experiment.

    • Paul

      The only difference is in the higher working ISO (d.range and color depth do not change significantly). And “Volume”, “Depth” are all poetry.

      • Alexander

        …I beg to differ. Not only is the “higher ISO” difference, although it is quite significant. The large dynamic range of full-format matrices significantly expands the photographer's capabilities, makes it possible to realize more complex creative ideas, to convey the very “depth and volume” that you call abstract “poetry”, and which, judging by your feedback, you cannot see. There are also technical aspects associated with fewer artifacts as a result of intensive post-processing, which also greatly expands the possibilities for creativity of the photographer. The shallow depth of RIP as an artistic tool, in combination with the above-mentioned features of shooting and post-processing, multiplied by good glass, gives a much wider field for realizing your Brilliant ideas, if any)))

  • Julia

    Good evening! but can you tell me what the "incident" is? With the same settings on both devices, the image on the Nikon D5300 with a 50 /1.8 lens turns out to be much lighter than on the Nikon D600 with the 80 /1.8 lens (the distance is the same and the picture is identical) ... As far as I thought, the full-size picture should have made the picture lighter than the cropped one ... but it turned out the other way around ...

  • Igor D

    Read above ”... But in the case of a full-frame lens, this will entail not only an increase in depth of field, but also a decrease in exposure. Exposure will have to be compensated for with either a slower shutter speed, a higher ISO or higher flash output. … ”Hence the answer to your question… ie the picture is darker at full format.

  • Vladimir

    Maybe somewhere I will repeat myself with existing comments. But…
    I read a lot of information on this topic. Everything is drawn in its own way, and in crop (mainly the price and the ability to get good photos with a lower budget, and to buy a good lens for the money saved), and in the full frame (after all, the quality of the same photos in any situation is higher, and it’s even not in the lens park, but also in the matrix itself and the pixel size of the same) there are pluses.
    I made a conclusion for myself - a full frame itself is better in all respects, if you do not take into account the price. But for a person who wants to start somewhere, but there is no money, only the crop remains. Moreover, it makes no sense to take a top crop and spend a lot of money on it. There will be no breakthrough as correlated with the price difference. It is better to invest this money in lenses and it is very desirable in your education in this regard. There are very sensible courses that will raise the quality of images received by a person much higher than just a more expensive crop carcass.
    If there is an opportunity to earn money with the help of a crop, then buy FF on them. If there is no such opportunity, there will be enough crop for non-commercial photography for yourself. FF for the amateur is only for the very rich, who earn more per month than the same FF with good lenses.

    • Alexey

      “I made a conclusion for myself - a full frame itself is better in all respects, if you do not take into account the price. "
      =====================
      no. where small DOF crop is better than FF. as well as where less weight is needed.

      “Moreover, there is no point in taking a top crop and spending a lot of money on it. There will not be a breakthrough as correlated with the price difference. "
      =====================
      top crop made for very specific tasks. For example, for sports and hunting photos, 7DM2 is today the best. and better including 5DM3. precisely because of the density / size of pixels, AF, and greater DOF.

      "For non-commercial photography, there is enough for yourself and a crop."
      ======================
      for these purposes, a lot of the best choice mirrorless. that is why the budget crop segment is dying today. Kenon finally recognized this by re-introducing her crop base BZ M3 and planning a sharp increase in investment in the new M4 and, in general, in the M system.

      in fact, kenon confirmed the obvious fact - the market was segmented into smartphones, superzoom, premium compacts and systems with interchangeable lenses - mirrorless crop and FF, top-end Crop DSLRs and FF SLRs. budget ZK crop is unprofitable, poorly sold.
      tomorrow he will not disappear, but they no longer invest money in him.

      • Alexey

        “Where there is a small depth of field” - an amendment, where a larger depth of field is needed, the crop is better. FF provides less depth of field.

  • anonym

    I will join the conclusions of Vladimir.
    For non-profit shooting for yourself and crop enough. If you do not make money in photography, then you need to buy based on the camera + lens = monthly salary. If you drop, then you will not have a heart attack. My Canon 60D was already falling from the table and was falling in the rain. ;)
    If they ask me what to buy, then Canon 650 + Sigma AF 17-70 / 2.8-4.5 (or Canon 60D - if there is nowhere to go for money) or Nikon 5100 (Nikon 7000 - too). mm 17-70 covers all distances for an amateur like me, even in the gym.
    Lens Canon EF 40mm F / 2.8 STM is for video, and it is written on the market “Canon EF 40mm -… The built-in STM motor is ideal for smooth and silent focusing when shooting video”.
    Canon 18-55 kit, 18-135, 55-200 Tamron AF 28-300mm f / 3.5-6.3 XR Di VC LD and so on are just rubbish. Yes, even they can take a good photo on a sunny day.
    Sigma AF 30mm f / 1.4 or so on - not bad for a museum or exhibition (when it's dark or using a CPL polarizing filter) Everything I recommend is very budget.
    But with a long focus, the problem. Only buying a used box will save your budget.
    Maybe recommend something telephoto.

  • Sergei

    “It is easy to see that the 'working' ISO of Nikon D4s is 2-3 times higher than that of Nikon D7100” - maybe this is a mistake and was meant 2-3 times lower?

    • The Hedgehog

      Become familiar with the concept of "Working ISO" before correcting :-))

  • SONY

    > Crop has the advantage of more depth of field with the same F number and the same viewing angle. Important for shooting with wide-angle optics

    Of course, this is formally so. BUT, what prevents you from closing the aperture on full frame more? .. Diffraction? So the pixel there is "fatter", respectively, the permissible scattering circle is larger. Little light? So FF has more working ISOs.
    Any frame that can be obtained with a crop can be obtained with a full frame. But on the contrary, it doesn't always work ...

    • Arkady Shapoval

      It is logical that when closing, you lose the aperture with everyone coming up from there. Bikes to poison, that you can shoot on anything and whatever, and I can poison.

  • Alexey

    Arkady, thanks for the article, I liked it very much. Advise me in choosing the first SLR in my life. I’ve been 50 years old, but I haven’t learned how to photograph correctly to get beautiful and high-quality images. In the future I plan to switch to a more professional technique, in t .h with a full frame.

    • Ivan

      I would advise, in principle, if you plan to shoot only with native autofocus lenses, then there is not much difference, take a cheaper carcass (D3100, 3200, 3300, 5100, 5200, 5300 and similarly Canon - 500d and above) a good lens for it (zoom and fast fix)
      Well, if you plan to use manual optics, then the convenience of focusing on the screen and competent metering of exposure pairs in the aperture priority mode already play a role, here you already need devices from the top line, I understand that you are aiming at the crop, which means D7100 or 70d, well, or similar in other systems, they have good displays, respectively, it is more convenient to aim, I have a Panasonic GH3 crop 2 (I took it for photos and videos, as an amateur, everything suits me in it) - metering the exposure pair and focusing is just a fairy tale, except autofocus - there is a solid park of manual high-aperture optics, no problems, good luck.

    • Alexey

      Buy better mirrorless.

  • Ivan

    Here is an example shot from the hands of the GH3 + Pentacon 200mm f / 4
    http://images.vfl.ru/ii/1410548821/0fb803cf/6315707.jpg

  • Andrew_

    I read to the end :-)
    Arkady, thank you! (as well as for other articles, they help to put concepts on the shelves, even if you have any knowledge and experience in shooting on film and digital)
    IMHO, the prefinal phrase sounds a bit incorrect:
    “- Full-frame cameras are many times better than crop cameras in terms of noise level at high ISO values;”
    It is evident that I wanted to say exactly the opposite.
    something like ... uh ... "many times surpass cropped noise levels in terms of low noise levels"
    well, or something like that.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      fixed

  • anonym

    ... Nikon D7100, Nikon D5200 can shoot Full HD at 60 frames per second ...
    Only not frames, but fields. And not 60, but 59,94. Each frame consists of two fields, as a result, about 30 frames per second come out.

  • Sandy

    I read the review. Is it really necessary to give up the sprinkled central defense complex over time and buy, say, Kiev-88 for a start?

Add a comment

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2023

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2013/05/the-crop-identity/comment-page-3/?replytocom=541717

Versión en español de este artículo https://radojuva.com/es/2013/05/the-crop-identity/comment-page-3/?replytocom=541717