What changes in image characteristics, image quality, and light handling when one goes from full frame to aps-c? I know this is discussed in passing in various threads, but the information is not in one place.
I am seriously thinking about building a small aps-c kit for the sake of the smallness and lightness and for purposes of travel and easy-carry in everyday circumstances, e.g. just going for a walk. The appeal of the aps-c to me is that it gets closer to the experience of carrying a Leica or Contax G-2 or other small rangefinder, and that is very appealing.
I know the rough outline of what changes: FOV, obviously, by a factor of 1.5; more depth of field; less dynamic range, less light on the sensor and thus less amenable to low-light shooting. But I would like have more precision and detail in my understanding of the differences and how much they matter to the final result (in the various opinions of those who have shot both).
Especially I would be interested in views of how much or how little difference the differences make in the final photograph's characteristics and image quality in actual practice. I know this is a soft issue, but I would live to know what others think and what their experiences have been in shooting and seeing their own work in both formats.
The A7rii / Riii sensor has spoiled me in this respect. I have bought the A6400 twice now and sold them. Not because anything is wrong with it. It is a fantastic camera. I love the size and form factor. The issue for me is stupid really (between my ears). I shoot alot in low light and although the A6400 with right glass can achieve good results I know my Riii can do better. Is the average person going to know, probably not. So at least for for me the struggle is self inflicted. Ideally I could see myself carrying a small 3 lens kit for when I really want to travel light like the 18-135mm, 16mm and 56mm sigma's. If they just added IBIS to the 6400 that would have helped. I'm holding out hope someday Sony will stick a high MP sensor like 60mp in an A6500 body with better EVF and LCD. That is my dream camera
nhsonyshooter wrote:
The A7rii / Riii sensor has spoiled me in this respect. I have bought the A6400 twice now and sold them. Not because anything is wrong with it. It is a fantastic camera. I love the size and form factor. The issue for me is stupid really (between my ears). I shoot alot in low light and although the A6400 with right glass can achieve good results I know my Riii can do better. Is the average person going to know, probably not. So at least for for me the struggle is self inflicted. Ideally I could see myself carrying a small 3 lens kit for when I really want to travel light like the 18-135mm, 16mm and 56mm sigma's. If they just added IBIS to the 6400 that would have helped. I'm holding out hope someday Sony will stick a high MP sensor like 60mp in an A6500 body with better EVF and LCD. That is my dream camera...Show more →
Yes, the absence of IS on the 6400 is a real limitation for me too--I also like to shoot in dim light. I do think that by giving the 6400 a number below the 6500, Sony was signalling that there is still a successor to the 6500 yet to come in the near future. My current thought is that if Sony is going to intro an a9II sometime late this year, that that camera will have some features ( like a global shutter or at least a very fast electronic shutter) that the 6500-successor will also have--so they don't want to intro the 6500-successor until the a9II is also out.
This subject has been discussed many, many times both here and all over the Web. When taking a photo from the same distance with both formats, then processing so the subject is equal size in the final output, hardly anyone would be able to tell which format was used.
e.g. My A9 and A6400 images in these cases look the same, and I don't need IBIS in ether body.
Imagemaster wrote:
This subject has been discussed many, many times both here and all over the Web. When taking a photo from the same distance with both formats, then processing so the subject is equal size in the final output, hardly anyone would be able to tell which format was used.
e.g. My A9 and A6400 images in these cases look the same, and I don't need IBIS in ether body.
Sure , but the A9 is the weakest Sony FF in IQ. So no surprise there.
I haven't shot with FF a lot, but the main advantage is high iso. I feel like 100 tends to equalize things, but past 1600 you can probably see a major difference, 1.5 stops or so. How much depends on the bodies you are comparing.
But I shoot 3200 and sometimes higher on crop.
If you get the 45-50 mp bodies, I think you'd see an increase in resolution, as well, vs aps. But you can still print large using aps.
chiron wrote:
I am seriously thinking about building a small aps-c kit for the sake of the smallness and lightness and for purposes of travel and easy-carry in everyday circumstances, e.g. just going for a walk.
I just did this exact thing. I got a 6500* along with the 10-18mm and 18-135mm. A very capable and compact kit. It's just a joy to carry it on my daily walks, compared to my full-frame stuff. And the image quality is great. It's obviously not as ultimately capable in low light as the A7Riii, and the lens options aren't as diverse, but my for typical stuff there is little difference in the end result (typically displayed on a 42-inch 4K monitor.)
All it took was for me to start to embrace the idea that I don't always have to have the technically 'best' gear with me. The current state of Sony cameras is so good, that even a few steps down from the best is still fantastically good.
I can recommend it.
*chosen over the 6400 as IBIS is more important to me than fast focusing
I have a small Fuji kit with their tiny primes (16/2.8, 23/2, 35/2, 50/2), as well as an a6400 with the Rokinon 12/2 and the Sigma 30/1.4 and 56/1.4. Both are very good. The Fuji gives that classic feeling and great small size, the Sony kit has amazingly good focusing and the lenses I have are very good, especially given the price. You lose about a stop of noise and a bit of dynamic range, but I'm most situations it's not a huge difference. My A7 III does produce better images, but I use the APS-C kits a fair bit.
Try for yourself... but a used a6000 body for peanuts and see what you think.
I have an X100F and Ricoh Gr II which are both aspc with fine sensors but my A7R3 clearly exceeds them in any marginal shooting conditions. I am coming around to compromising on focal lengths to get a better sensor and better glass vs a smaller format. Something like the GM 24 and FE 55 plus A7R3 is an amazing combo and really not that big. In crop you are still almost 18mp. The FE 35/2.8 and A7R3 is a tiny high IQ combo almost as easy to travel with as my X100F.
realVivek wrote:
Have you considered the first A7 series? Compactness with decent quality.
They are quite cheap (cheaper than A6400/500) as well while nearly about the same size.
That's a possibility, but I tend to like the newer tech for AF, etc., in the late model 6 series camera bodies. I no longer have a six series body or aps-c lenses, so I am trying to review what the image quality differences would be and how much of a difference they make in practice.
darrellc wrote:
Try for yourself... but a used a6000 body for peanuts and see what you think.
I have an X100F and Ricoh Gr II which are both aspc with fine sensors but my A7R3 clearly exceeds them in any marginal shooting conditions. I am coming around to compromising on focal lengths to get a better sensor and better glass vs a smaller format. Something like the GM 24 and FE 55 plus A7R3 is an amazing combo and really not that big. In crop you are still almost 18mp. The FE 35/2.8 and A7R3 is a tiny high IQ combo almost as easy to travel with as my X100F.
Yes, this makes sense to me. One can keep the lenses small. It would be very nice if Sony produced a full frame body with IBIS and excellent AF that was significantly smaller than the current bodies. There are some small full frame lenses, and sony could probbly make a few more--like a small wide and mid-zoom.
Jman13 wrote:
I have a small Fuji kit with their tiny primes (16/2.8, 23/2, 35/2, 50/2), as well as an a6400 with the Rokinon 12/2 and the Sigma 30/1.4 and 56/1.4. Both are very good. The Fuji gives that classic feeling and great small size, the Sony kit has amazingly good focusing and the lenses I have are very good, especially given the price. You lose about a stop of noise and a bit of dynamic range, but I'm most situations it's not a huge difference. My A7 III does produce better images, but I use the APS-C kits a fair bit....Show more →
Be interesting to see some side by side shots with FF and aps-c in the same situation and lighting.
AmbientMike wrote:
I haven't shot with FF a lot, but the main advantage is high iso. I feel like 100 tends to equalize things, but past 1600 you can probably see a major difference, 1.5 stops or so. How much depends on the bodies you are comparing.
But I shoot 3200 and sometimes higher on crop.
If you get the 45-50 mp bodies, I think you'd see an increase in resolution, as well, vs aps. But you can still print large using aps.
Software processing of noise has also gotten better, which helps the case for aps-c.
MikeEvangelist wrote:
I just did this exact thing. I got a 6500* along with the 10-18mm and 18-135mm. A very capable and compact kit. It's just a joy to carry it on my daily walks, compared to my full-frame stuff. And the image quality is great. It's obviously not as ultimately capable in low light as the A7Riii, and the lens options aren't as diverse, but my for typical stuff there is little difference in the end result (typically displayed on a 42-inch 4K monitor.)
All it took was for me to start to embrace the idea that I don't always have to have the technically 'best' gear with me. The current state of Sony cameras is so good, that even a few steps down from the best is still fantastically good.
I can recommend it.
*chosen over the 6400 as IBIS is more important to me than fast focusing...Show more →
This is exactly what I am thinking. I would love to see some side by side images of the two formats with the sames subjects and lighting--the kind of thing Fred does when he compares lenses. I'm not sure I have ever seen that done here on the forum.
I started with the a6000. My reason for switching was the better image quality for ISO 1600 and higher, and the wider availability of fast glass. Shooting indoor family pictures now yields much better quality. Having super 35 option in video and fast a9 focus was welcomed too.
I've bought and sold two full A6XXX kits. I replaced the most recent A6500 and lenses with an original RX1. For me it is the ideal camera for small/daily/walkaround. I realized I either want the size/simplicity of the RX1 or I want my full A7RIII kit. If I'm committing to carrying a body and 3 lenses it might as well be the best. If I just want something small/pocketable/easy its the RX1.
ratchfordphoto wrote:
I've bought and sold two full A6XXX kits. I replaced the most recent A6500 and lenses with an original RX1. For me it is the ideal camera for small/daily/walkaround. I realized I either want the size/simplicity of the RX1 or I want my full A7RIII kit. If I'm committing to carrying a body and 3 lenses it might as well be the best. If I just want something small/pocketable/easy its the RX1.
Serendipity. Immediately before I read your comment, I had just finished watching a video with Miguel Quiles interviewing and shooting with Ben Lowy. Lowy was using the RX1 for street shooting (along with an a9 with an 50/1.4) and the RX1 looked so appealing that I started to price them and read about the specs. The camera is small with an excellent lens and a full frame sensor. Seems ideal. Now if Sony would only make an interchangeable FF body that size and release an f/2 35mm lens that good! That size body is just what I am looking for.
One is a joy to carry, the other is 67 grams heavier.
This is very helpful, Philip. A big part of what I was looking for was those hard numbers and equations spelling out what is gained and what is lost in various configurations. Are you actually ever shooting with an a6400 also now, or sticking solely with your A7R?
