D
Deleted member 115
Guest
Why not medium format?
APS-C Why?
- Thread starter pfinfante
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
I agree with the OP. I have a D850 and D500 and I much prefer the D850. I need to get my lazy butt in gear and sell the D500. I don't see the desire to use anything other than full frame sensors at this point. I still would rather crop on the D850.
Since sensors have improved so much, APS-C cameras produce very high quality photos. Whether DX or FX is better choice depends on the buyer's budget, types of photos taken, uses of the photos and other needs.
The big advantages of the D500 are frame rate, AF performance, and smaller files for volume work. I agree with all that. You can also add the benefit of a magnified viewfinder making the image larger while framing. The D500 is a top-end APS-C camera, so price is comparable to other cameras at that level. Other APS-C cameras in the D3000, D5000, and D7000 series lack the AF performance and frame rate, but they do provide a lower price point.
But I don't think anyone with an FX camera is choosing to use DX crop mode. The D850 and Z7 offer the same pixels on subject or more compared to APS-C, and the D800 and D810 provided 16 megapixels in crop mode. The frame rate of the Z6, D4, D5, and D6 is about the same or faster than the D500.
The file size of high resolution cameras does matter for some situations - especially when you generate lots of images and the output is for web or medium prints. I use a Z6 more than a D850 for that reason, particularly for events, charity work, and web only jobs. I view the Z6/D780 as being standard resolution cameras - like the D500 and D4,5,6. I like having the option of standard or high resolution cameras.
The big advantages of full frame cover a lot of ground. For high resolution cameras, it's only when you get to DX crop or beyond that the crop factor is a benefit - and maybe not then. For standard resolution cameras, the benefit is less noise until you get to a 1.25 crop. If you have enough focal length to frame the shot without cropping, the FX cameras have cleaner backgrounds from a shallower DOF. For equivalent DOF, you need to use a lens 1.2 stops faster on an APS-C camera - something that is often cost prohibitive or impossible. FX cameras also benefit from a stop lower noise in low light.
Outside of wildlife, APS-C lenses are usually geared more to the consumer end, so there are lots of less expensive options. But most of these lenses also reduce quality to achieve smaller size and lower price. Pro level DX lenses - like the older 17-55 f/2.8 - were comparably priced to FX lenses. There are plenty of small, economy lenses for FX from third party manufacturers. The Z system has both full size and small options.
If you go the APS-C route - or crop a full frame image - technique is paramount. The more you magnify the subject, the harder it is to frame a moving subject or even find a subject. We all recognize the challenges of getting sharp images, and cropping with an APS-C sensor can make that more difficult.
If you photograph a lot of wildlife, an APS-C camera with a high frame rate and more magnified viewfinder has some merit, but it's often as a pair of cameras that includes FX.
I found the D850 and Z6 combination was much better for me, so I sold my D500. I originally bought the D500 because of AF performance. The performance of the D500 was much better than my D810 for action (25% better keeper rate for my equestrian work), but not better than the D850 when it was released. The Z6 replaced the D500 for standard resolution work. So the D500 no longer had a place outside of being a backup camera for action.
But I don't think anyone with an FX camera is choosing to use DX crop mode. The D850 and Z7 offer the same pixels on subject or more compared to APS-C, and the D800 and D810 provided 16 megapixels in crop mode. The frame rate of the Z6, D4, D5, and D6 is about the same or faster than the D500.
The file size of high resolution cameras does matter for some situations - especially when you generate lots of images and the output is for web or medium prints. I use a Z6 more than a D850 for that reason, particularly for events, charity work, and web only jobs. I view the Z6/D780 as being standard resolution cameras - like the D500 and D4,5,6. I like having the option of standard or high resolution cameras.
The big advantages of full frame cover a lot of ground. For high resolution cameras, it's only when you get to DX crop or beyond that the crop factor is a benefit - and maybe not then. For standard resolution cameras, the benefit is less noise until you get to a 1.25 crop. If you have enough focal length to frame the shot without cropping, the FX cameras have cleaner backgrounds from a shallower DOF. For equivalent DOF, you need to use a lens 1.2 stops faster on an APS-C camera - something that is often cost prohibitive or impossible. FX cameras also benefit from a stop lower noise in low light.
Outside of wildlife, APS-C lenses are usually geared more to the consumer end, so there are lots of less expensive options. But most of these lenses also reduce quality to achieve smaller size and lower price. Pro level DX lenses - like the older 17-55 f/2.8 - were comparably priced to FX lenses. There are plenty of small, economy lenses for FX from third party manufacturers. The Z system has both full size and small options.
If you go the APS-C route - or crop a full frame image - technique is paramount. The more you magnify the subject, the harder it is to frame a moving subject or even find a subject. We all recognize the challenges of getting sharp images, and cropping with an APS-C sensor can make that more difficult.
If you photograph a lot of wildlife, an APS-C camera with a high frame rate and more magnified viewfinder has some merit, but it's often as a pair of cameras that includes FX.
I found the D850 and Z6 combination was much better for me, so I sold my D500. I originally bought the D500 because of AF performance. The performance of the D500 was much better than my D810 for action (25% better keeper rate for my equestrian work), but not better than the D850 when it was released. The Z6 replaced the D500 for standard resolution work. So the D500 no longer had a place outside of being a backup camera for action.
Sxot
Member
It’s cost. In the case of unlimited money no one would buy crop sensor. They would just by longer faster glass and get all the benefits of full frame. They’d also buy a bigger faster computer.
I guess the main reason is still "reach", i.e. the crop factor of 1.5 and subsequently the impact on weight of your gear. If you try to carry a D750 with 500 f4 G and TC14 giving you 700mm @ f5.6 instead of a D7200 with the 500 PF giving the same resolution with an equivalent of 750mm @ f5.6 in your hand luggage in the plain, you know wha I mean
.However there are still arguments for the FX side, like better SNR if comparing FX and DX at the same resolution and the fact that subject isolation via DOF tends to be more difficult with DX, because a f5.6 FX lens will give you a smaller DOF compared with what the lens gives you on a DX body. It's just physics. Like many people in the forum I have both formats and I take DX only if I need extreme reach with the lenses I have or if I need to be really agile. But as I said before, it comes at a price:
- praying for good light due to the reduced IQ with high ISO (the smaler the pixel the more prone to noise),
- having to live with the increase in DOF and
- having to be more careful regarding motion blur (the smaller the pixel the more sensitive for instability/motion blur)
I have a D850 and I have 2 D500's one with the battery grip and one without it has a Tamron 18-400 on it all the time and is the camera I use in steep rough country and photographing my friends falconry and gun chukar hunts. The second D500 has a 150-600 G2 Tamron on most of the time. I do very little landscape or portrait photography mostly birds for ID or for photography and in flight. D850 with battery grip and big D6 battery mostly wears 500 PF for low light birding or a variety of Tamrons for landscape or portraits etc.. As noted by others my bottom line for me with D500 is more density of pixels being hit with the light coming out of the back of the lens when shooting birds. Weaker low light performance of the D500 and the huge file size produced by the overkill of the 45.7mp D850 makes me regret selling my D4s on some days.
I use my full frame D750 90% of the time, but I have a D7200 for wildlife to get the extra reach. I also have an APS-C Sony A6000 for when I want a smaller camera, and a 1" sensor Canon G9 X when I want a REALLY small camera. I also have an APS-C Ricoh GR for street photography. They all suit a purpose and perform well for that purpose. There are many reasons to buy an APS-C or smaller sensor camera. As I tell my wife....bigger isn't always better..... j/k
j/k
Graham Clark
gc-graphs
Think it comes down to using the right kit for the task.
For action work I grab the D5, for static stuff its the D850 but if I need more "reach" the D500 comes out.
For action work I grab the D5, for static stuff its the D850 but if I need more "reach" the D500 comes out.
Exactly the right tool for the situation...