Less Dynamic Range When You Shoot FF Camera in Super-35 Mode?

[TheOwl360]

Do full-frame cameras in the Sony lineup lose dynamic range when they are shot in super-35 mode?

If so, why?

Thanks in advance for any constructive feedback.

 

[Snowfella]

To the best of my knowledge no.
The active pixels capture exactly the same scene as they would if the camera was using the whole sensor.

 

[Beatsy]

For stills, there is no difference at all. The pixels capture exactly the same data as they would if they were part of a larger full-frame capture.

Video is different because there is down-sampling with pixels being combined, which will affect DR accordingly (presumably at both pixel and image levels).

 

[TheOwl360]

Thanks for the constructive feedback @Snowfella and @Beatsy, and anyone else who can provide some credible insight.

 

[alphaZ]

Thanks for the constructive feedback @Snowfella and @Beatsy, and anyone else who can provide some credible insight.

Yes, you lose a stop, more noise too!

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm

See here, use 1:1 ratio is the answer :?

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65332599

 

[QuietOC]

Do full-frame cameras in the Sony lineup lose dynamic range when they are shot in super-35 mode?

If so, why?

Thanks in advance for any constructive feedback.

It depends on how you measure the dynamic range. If you measure per area it doesn't change. For example you can measure the dynamic range of a single pixel.

DXOMark and photonstophotos don't do that and effectively scale by capture area. Photonstophotos has the APS-C crop measurements using their method for most full-frame Sony cameras. The cropped dynamic range is proportionally lower because of the smaller sensor area.

But capturing a similar looking image using a smaller area requires using a proportionally different ISO. So you pretty much get the same dynamic range when cropping as you would have using optics with greater magnification to capture a similar looking image.

More sensor area allows longer exposures and/or shallower depth-of-field with more pixels values over the same portion of an image. Summing multiple exposures with a small sensor can match that.

 

[alphaZ]

Do full-frame cameras in the Sony lineup lose dynamic range when they are shot in super-35 mode?

If so, why?

Thanks in advance for any constructive feedback.

It depends on how you measure the dynamic range. If you measure per area it doesn't change. For example you can measure the dynamic range of a single pixel.

DXOMark and photonstophotos don't do that and effectively scale by capture area. Photonstophotos has the APS-C crop measurements using their method for most full-frame Sony cameras. The cropped dynamic range is proportionally lower because of the smaller sensor area.

But capturing a similar looking image using a smaller area requires using a proportionally different ISO. So you pretty much get the same dynamic range when cropping as you would have using optics with greater magnification to capture a similar looking image.

More sensor area allows longer exposures and/or shallower depth-of-field with more pixels values over the same portion of an image. Summing multiple exposures with a small sensor can match that.

If you shoot in aps-c crop mode expect a6600/a6400 results with reduced resolution/dr/dof/noise etc, pretty pointless. For crop mode, use 1:1 ratio of the FF setting!

On the A1 you also have heif, lossless compressed too and no aa filter, so the 1:1 is preferable to aps-c and you can open the full raw in post too in case you've clipped a wing etc, but using the 1:1 will force your brain to compose within the aps-c width with hopefully some fall back in raw.

 

[Snowfella]

How can using crop mode just throw away whatever the individual pixel well captures? Sure you loose some of the overall light that the sensor captures but not what it catches on the pixel level.

 

[alphaZ]

How can using crop mode just throw away whatever the individual pixel well captures? Sure you loose some of the overall light that the sensor captures but not what it catches on the pixel level.

Because you are now shooting with the a6400 sensor, what dr/noise does that have?

 

[AlephNull]

Do full-frame cameras in the Sony lineup lose dynamic range when they are shot in super-35 mode?

If so, why?

Thanks in advance for any constructive feedback.

It depends on how you measure the dynamic range. If you measure per area it doesn't change. For example you can measure the dynamic range of a single pixel.

DXOMark and photonstophotos don't do that and effectively scale by capture area. Photonstophotos has the APS-C crop measurements using their method for most full-frame Sony cameras. The cropped dynamic range is proportionally lower because of the smaller sensor area.

But capturing a similar looking image using a smaller area requires using a proportionally different ISO. So you pretty much get the same dynamic range when cropping as you would have using optics with greater magnification to capture a similar looking image.

More sensor area allows longer exposures and/or shallower depth-of-field with more pixels values over the same portion of an image. Summing multiple exposures with a small sensor can match that.

If you shoot in aps-c crop mode expect a6600/a6400 results with reduced resolution/dr/dof/noise etc, pretty pointless. For crop mode, use 1:1 ratio of the FF setting!

On the A1 you also have heif, lossless compressed too and no aa filter, so the 1:1 is preferable to aps-c and you can open the full raw in post too in case you've clipped a wing etc, but using the 1:1 will force your brain to compose within the aps-c width with hopefully some fall back in raw.

You are pushing your 1:1 crop very heavily. Starting to get a bit monotonous...

 

[alphaZ]

Do full-frame cameras in the Sony lineup lose dynamic range when they are shot in super-35 mode?

If so, why?

Thanks in advance for any constructive feedback.

It depends on how you measure the dynamic range. If you measure per area it doesn't change. For example you can measure the dynamic range of a single pixel.

DXOMark and photonstophotos don't do that and effectively scale by capture area. Photonstophotos has the APS-C crop measurements using their method for most full-frame Sony cameras. The cropped dynamic range is proportionally lower because of the smaller sensor area.

But capturing a similar looking image using a smaller area requires using a proportionally different ISO. So you pretty much get the same dynamic range when cropping as you would have using optics with greater magnification to capture a similar looking image.

More sensor area allows longer exposures and/or shallower depth-of-field with more pixels values over the same portion of an image. Summing multiple exposures with a small sensor can match that.

If you shoot in aps-c crop mode expect a6600/a6400 results with reduced resolution/dr/dof/noise etc, pretty pointless. For crop mode, use 1:1 ratio of the FF setting!

On the A1 you also have heif, lossless compressed too and no aa filter, so the 1:1 is preferable to aps-c and you can open the full raw in post too in case you've clipped a wing etc, but using the 1:1 will force your brain to compose within the aps-c width with hopefully some fall back in raw.

You are pushing your 1:1 crop very heavily. Starting to get a bit monotonous...

It's very useful feature, never seen anyone anywhere mention this except me! I thinking when something is that useful it should be widely known and appreciated! Applies to any camera as well pretty much irrespective of sensor size too!

You don't have to use it, not forcing anyone!

 

[pollup]

The DR is the same but people use a normalized DR to a SNR=1 or SNR=2.

Once you go into super-35 mode, you lose a little bit over a stop of signal but keep the same noise, so normally the normalized DR in that mode will be a stop lower.

 

[Beatsy]

These conversations always descend into a bun fight. I'm pretty sure it's because of one very important assumption about what "use crop mode" means (or "super-35 mode" to use the OP's phrasing) .

For those, like me, who say it makes no difference to DR, we stand in the same place when we take the crop shot as we did when we took the FF shot. Our image is literally a crop from the middle of the original full frame. DR is the same.

For others, who say DR is reduced, I think they assume we back off some distance to include the exact same FoV in the crop view as we had for the FF shot. In that case, there are fewer pixels covering the same scene, so overall DR does drop in that definition.

In summary.

Stand still - crop shot has same DR as the same area cropped from the FF shot

Move back and reframe the same - crop shot has lower overall DR than the FF shot

Is it that? (He asks, expecting a ton of incoming opprobrium for trying to be helpful ).

 

[Tristimulus]

These conversations always descend into a bun fight. I'm pretty sure it's because of one very important assumption about what "use crop mode" means (or "super-35 mode" to use the OP's phrasing) .

For those, like me, who say it makes no difference to DR, we stand in the same place when we take the crop shot as we did when we took the FF shot. Our image is literally a crop from the middle of the original full frame. DR is the same.

For others, who say DR is reduced, I think they assume we back off some distance to include the exact same FoV in the crop view as we had for the FF shot. In that case, there are fewer pixels covering the same scene, so overall DR does drop in that definition.

In summary.

Stand still - crop shot has same DR as the same (smaller) area cropped from the FF shot

Move back and reframe the same - crop shot has lower overall DR than the FF shot

+1001

The dynamic range is obviously the same over the entire image sensor.

Is it that? (He asks, expecting a ton of incoming opprobrium for trying to be helpful ).

 

[alphaZ]

These conversations always descend into a bun fight. I'm pretty sure it's because of one very important assumption about what "use crop mode" means (or "super-35 mode" to use the OP's phrasing) .

For those, like me, who say it makes no difference to DR, we stand in the same place when we take the crop shot as we did when we took the FF shot. Our image is literally a crop from the middle of the original full frame. DR is the same.

For others, who say DR is reduced, I think they assume we back off some distance to include the exact same FoV in the crop view as we had for the FF shot. In that case, there are fewer pixels covering the same scene, so overall DR does drop in that definition.

In summary.

Stand still - crop shot has same DR as the same (smaller) area cropped from the FF shot

Move back and reframe the same - crop shot has lower overall DR than the FF shot

Is it that? (He asks, expecting a ton of incoming opprobrium for trying to be helpful ).

The reason you use crop mode is presumably to increase focal length? Or is it to utilise aps lens?

Personally, I would avoid it unless it is to utilize an aps lens, if you use 1:1 you get exactly the same width as aps crop and you can even crop the jpg further if desired to further aspect ratios

 

[alphaZ]

These conversations always descend into a bun fight. I'm pretty sure it's because of one very important assumption about what "use crop mode" means (or "super-35 mode" to use the OP's phrasing) .

For those, like me, who say it makes no difference to DR, we stand in the same place when we take the crop shot as we did when we took the FF shot. Our image is literally a crop from the middle of the original full frame. DR is the same.

For others, who say DR is reduced, I think they assume we back off some distance to include the exact same FoV in the crop view as we had for the FF shot. In that case, there are fewer pixels covering the same scene, so overall DR does drop in that definition.

In summary.

Stand still - crop shot has same DR as the same (smaller) area cropped from the FF shot

Move back and reframe the same - crop shot has lower overall DR than the FF shot

+1001

The dynamic range is obviously the same over the entire image sensor.

Nope, the dr is the cumulative of the entire surface area, smaller sensors, ie aps crop mode in this case, have less dr period! As soon as you use crop mode you throw dr/noise/snr/bit depth away, lost forever

Is it that? (He asks, expecting a ton of incoming opprobrium for trying to be helpful ).

 

[Beatsy]

These conversations always descend into a bun fight. I'm pretty sure it's because of one very important assumption about what "use crop mode" means (or "super-35 mode" to use the OP's phrasing) .

For those, like me, who say it makes no difference to DR, we stand in the same place when we take the crop shot as we did when we took the FF shot. Our image is literally a crop from the middle of the original full frame. DR is the same.

For others, who say DR is reduced, I think they assume we back off some distance to include the exact same FoV in the crop view as we had for the FF shot. In that case, there are fewer pixels covering the same scene, so overall DR does drop in that definition.

In summary.

Stand still - crop shot has same DR as the same (smaller) area cropped from the FF shot

Move back and reframe the same - crop shot has lower overall DR than the FF shot

Is it that? (He asks, expecting a ton of incoming opprobrium for trying to be helpful ).

The reason you use crop mode is presumably to increase focal length? Or is it to utilise aps lens?

Personally, I would avoid it unless it is to utilize an aps lens, if you use 1:1 you get exactly the same width as aps crop and you can even crop the jpg further if desired to further aspect ratios

No, the reason I use crop mode is because I can't get any closer to a tiny subject to make it larger in the view. I need that so I can better judge if I nailed focus. Furthermore, you can't zoom in on a moving insect to focus AND compose the whole frame at the same time. You kinda want to see the whole frame you're capturing, but as large as possible in the view so you can see fine detail to judge focus too.

Crop mode achieves that when needed. Or at least moves towards that ideal.

 

[Tristimulus]

These conversations always descend into a bun fight. I'm pretty sure it's because of one very important assumption about what "use crop mode" means (or "super-35 mode" to use the OP's phrasing) .

For those, like me, who say it makes no difference to DR, we stand in the same place when we take the crop shot as we did when we took the FF shot. Our image is literally a crop from the middle of the original full frame. DR is the same.

For others, who say DR is reduced, I think they assume we back off some distance to include the exact same FoV in the crop view as we had for the FF shot. In that case, there are fewer pixels covering the same scene, so overall DR does drop in that definition.

In summary.

Stand still - crop shot has same DR as the same (smaller) area cropped from the FF shot

Move back and reframe the same - crop shot has lower overall DR than the FF shot

+1001

The dynamic range is obviously the same over the entire image sensor.

Nope, the dr is the cumulative of the entire surface area, smaller sensors, ie aps crop mode in this case, have less dr period! As soon as you use crop mode you throw dr/noise/snr/bit depth away, lost forever

Well - the APS-C image sensor also has the same dynamic range over the entire area.

Your answer seems to indicate that the dynamic range of the image sensor suddenly changes in the cropped area. It does not.

Images (assuming the same field of view) from smaller image sensors must be magnified more for a given final image size. That is the key...

Is it that? (He asks, expecting a ton of incoming opprobrium for trying to be helpful ).

 

[the49er]

These conversations always descend into a bun fight. I'm pretty sure it's because of one very important assumption about what "use crop mode" means (or "super-35 mode" to use the OP's phrasing) .

For those, like me, who say it makes no difference to DR, we stand in the same place when we take the crop shot as we did when we took the FF shot. Our image is literally a crop from the middle of the original full frame. DR is the same.

For others, who say DR is reduced, I think they assume we back off some distance to include the exact same FoV in the crop view as we had for the FF shot. In that case, there are fewer pixels covering the same scene, so overall DR does drop in that definition.

In summary.

Stand still - crop shot has same DR as the same area cropped from the FF shot

Move back and reframe the same - crop shot has lower overall DR than the FF shot

Is it that? (He asks, expecting a ton of incoming opprobrium for trying to be helpful ).

I have to thank you for using the word opprobrium, as I learned a new word today.

I knew I should have attended college.

 

[b00mer]

Could anyone point me to an actual example of losing dynamic range when in crop mode? I saw similar posts regarding DOF, light gathering, noise etc changing and I feel like it’s all just misconceptions. Actual examples or any sort of realistic measurement obviously would help dispel/prove these points.