Started Feb 8, 2014 | Questions thread
Euell Senior Member • Posts: 2,881
Re: APSC vs FF

SQLGuy wrote:

You really should have searched and read some threads here. This has been discussed extensively.


A full frame sensor is about twice the area of an APS-C sensor. That means it needs twice as much light to illuminate it. Correspondingly, a lens of the same field of view, and similar physical size, will probably be a stop slower. In terms of noise and IQ, you get a good one stop advantage on FF over APS-C, so it's a wash.

For me, the big advantages are in using legacy lenses. I get full use out of a 55/1.2, instead of wasting half the light that comes through it, and my 14mm is once again an ultra-wide-angle instead of a 21mm equivalent. A full frame sensor also allows for shorter depth of field for better subject isolation. A lot of fast lenses, especially the more affordable ones, get soft and glowy wide open. Full frame allows you to stop these down a bit for better sharpness and still have good subject isolation and low light capability.

If you're shooting more telephoto, you may be less interested in these benefits, as the APS-C crop factor is a cheaper and (IMO) better way of extending the reach of a long lens than a focal multiplier; and long, fast, full frame lenses are big and expensive.

-- hide signature --

A7 with kit lens and a number of legacy lenses (mostly Canon FD)

A full frame lens can be used with a tilting adapter for an APSC camera, but not generally on a full frame camera. This, of course, only applies to non-emount lenses, E-mount lenses do not require an adapter.

 Euell's gear list:Euell's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS 7D Sony a6000 Sony a6500 Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM +13 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow