he used a cheaper/lower quality lens on the APS. I think the main difference is what he disclosed when he took the first picture with the APS camera. With today’s full frame and APS-C sensors, the noise will be imperceptible at either 160 or even 400. The amount of noise created by an APS-C at ISO 160 will be equal to or less than the noise of a full frame at ISO 400. it would most likely require stacking a multiple of images, which introduces its' own challenges/issues. The equivalent ISO value on an APS-C camera with 1.6 crop factor would be approximately 160. That is not to say I could not do better using FF, I probably could but to do better using FF is very difficult. These are all single image captures taken with the Nikon 1 V2 + Sigma 150/2.8. diffraction is a loss of recorded resolution, but that does not mean the result is less recorded resolution than a lower resolution sensor would achieve. Even if the lens cannot resolve down to the level of the smaller pixels it does not necessarily mean less resolution. Using a smaller sensor of the same resolution (different compositions) IS more resolution of the subject, which is the same end result as using a lens of greater magnification assuming the lens can resolve more than the larger pixel sensor can. Both APS-C and full-frame sensors produce images with a standard aspect ratio of 3:2, and APS-C sensors can have the same number of megapixels as full-frame sensors. It's also easier to use supplemental lighting when the lens is not in the way.Īs above, you don't have to get as close with a crop sensor, which is a bit less prone to cause insects to flush/hide.Īs above, you don't have to get as close, so you don't have to stop down as much for DOF. With the crop sensor you don't have to get as close, which often lets more light reach the subject. Larger sensors do get more light, but with macro a big problem with light is the lens/camera/your shadow. With smaller pixels diffraction is more of an issue, but a crop sensor gives more DOF for a given composition/settings so you don't have to stop down so far. In fact, the area of an APS-C sensor is about 1.6 times the area of a micro four thirds sensor, albeit with an aspect ratio of 3:2 for APS-C rather than 4:3 for micro four thirds. One was taken on a full frame Nikon D850 45 mega pixel camera, and the other was taken on a Fuji XT-4 APS-C 26 mega pixel crop sensor camera. As you can see, the difference between APS-C and micro four thirds is a bit less than the difference between full frame an APS-C. The first pictures we will use to test image quality are the two below. Everything is a trade-off, but my preferred choice is the 1" sensor (16MP Nikon 1 V2) with a high quality macro lens adapted to it (Sigma 150/2.8). Full frame vs APS-C sensors Test 1 Good Lighting Conditions. APS-C vs Full-Frame: What’s the difference Full-frame sensors measure the same as 35mm film, which is 36 x 24mm. And I have used them all for macro at one time or another. I have/have owned LF, FF, APS, 1", 2/3, and more.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |