R6 II, R5 - Anybody use crop mode?

[Ephemeris]

Nobody has pointed out the 1.6x crop mode does actually crop the RAW image. This is different to the other “format” modes, which still leave the whole full frame RAW image available.

I did. I said it saves a 17.3MP image.

Also it appears to meter for that 17.3 of 45. I would assume that is also different to the other format modes.

I find crop mode useful when out and about with one lens, giving me an “equivalent” focal length that is longer. For example with a 24-105 on my R5, I get an equivalent of 168mm, quite useful. And the resulting 17.3 MP image is still very usable for almost any purpose. If you shot on full frame with the intention of cropping later, you might not remember your intended composition when reviewing. And not all lenses are suitable for teleconverters. For example the RF 70-200 L lenses - equivalent to 320mm in crop mode, very useful.

But - ”only 17.3 MP ??? !!!” - I hear the cry. Well I’ve just been to the Wildlife Photographer of the Year exhibition in London - several of the images there were shot on 18-20MP (Canon 7D and 1DX3 and other bodies both crop and full frame) and some on just 12MP (drones). And these were displayed on back-lit panels 3 ft x 2 ft, all beautifully sharp and detailed. So yes, 17.3 is often “enough”.

 

[boldcolors]

This thread got me bit curious so I set my R8 into crop mode just for the sake of it. I took some pictures and noticed that the cropped version is just a tad brighter than the original file. Same settings of course, fully manual and same light and target. I guess that the file is being processed by the camera and is not a 100% true RAW file then?

That said many brands do fiddle with the image before the RAW data is written to a file anyway so....

Have you checked the difference in exposure?

If we expose for 40% of the frame rather than 100% it's likely a different answer. It's one of the reasons I use crop mode.

As I said, fully manual. Must be some internal processing.

 

[Ephemeris]

This thread got me bit curious so I set my R8 into crop mode just for the sake of it. I took some pictures and noticed that the cropped version is just a tad brighter than the original file. Same settings of course, fully manual and same light and target. I guess that the file is being processed by the camera and is not a 100% true RAW file then?

That said many brands do fiddle with the image before the RAW data is written to a file anyway so....

Have you checked the difference in exposure?

If we expose for 40% of the frame rather than 100% it's likely a different answer. It's one of the reasons I use crop mode.

As I said, fully manual. Must be some internal processing.

Fully manual doesn't mean same exposure.

So does the exif show the same exposure?

Could the scene have changed?

 

[boldcolors]

This thread got me bit curious so I set my R8 into crop mode just for the sake of it. I took some pictures and noticed that the cropped version is just a tad brighter than the original file. Same settings of course, fully manual and same light and target. I guess that the file is being processed by the camera and is not a 100% true RAW file then?

That said many brands do fiddle with the image before the RAW data is written to a file anyway so....

Have you checked the difference in exposure?

If we expose for 40% of the frame rather than 100% it's likely a different answer. It's one of the reasons I use crop mode.

As I said, fully manual. Must be some internal processing.

Fully manual doesn't mean same exposure.

So does the exif show the same exposure?

Could the scene have changed?

I am not sure how you define manual but when I shoot manual...I mean manual (with fixed ISO of course). So yes the exif is the same for both images. If you are referring to the ambient light and that it could difffer between the shots I agree. I was probably a bit unclear but I took two testshots with 2 seconds between them.

 

[Ephemeris]

This thread got me bit curious so I set my R8 into crop mode just for the sake of it. I took some pictures and noticed that the cropped version is just a tad brighter than the original file. Same settings of course, fully manual and same light and target. I guess that the file is being processed by the camera and is not a 100% true RAW file then?

That said many brands do fiddle with the image before the RAW data is written to a file anyway so....

Have you checked the difference in exposure?

If we expose for 40% of the frame rather than 100% it's likely a different answer. It's one of the reasons I use crop mode.

As I said, fully manual. Must be some internal processing.

Fully manual doesn't mean same exposure.

So does the exif show the same exposure?

Could the scene have changed?

I am not sure how you define manual but when I shoot manual...I mean manual (with fixed ISO of course). So yes the exif is the same for both images. If you are referring to the ambient light and that it could difffer between the shots I agree. I was probably a bit unclear but I took two testshots with 2 seconds between them.

Thanks I think it's clear now. Perhaps this now requires some further experimentation and to be able to share the files.

My assumption has been that when I shoot crop it's metering for the crop not the whole scene and I don't normally shoot manual.

Perhaps more is at play here than meets the eye.

 

[R2D2]

Some people have hypothesized that it could improve AF but the AF areas of the sensor wouldn't change. I personally haven't managed to prove either way.

I have found that crop mode improves Subject Recognition/ Identification (which can then improve autofocus). Especially for more distant and/or partially obscured subjects.

Where I'm likely to crop that much anyway I think it's a helpful tool to have and helps me see my target more easily.

This can definitely be a big help too.

R2

 

[Leigh A]

This thread got me bit curious so I set my R8 into crop mode just for the sake of it. I took some pictures and noticed that the cropped version is just a tad brighter than the original file. Same settings of course, fully manual and same light and target. I guess that the file is being processed by the camera and is not a 100% true RAW file then?

That said many brands do fiddle with the image before the RAW data is written to a file anyway so....

Have you checked the difference in exposure?

If we expose for 40% of the frame rather than 100% it's likely a different answer. It's one of the reasons I use crop mode.

As I said, fully manual. Must be some internal processing.

Entered in error--Couldn't delete.

 

[Rudy Pohl]

I use my R5 in crop mode for both stills and video.

I use it for stills for all the reasons people have listed above, and I use it for videos for extending the effective reach and for getting super sharp details. 4K60p in crop mode is oversampled from 5.1K giving fabulous fines details. The details are so good they look virtually as good as videos shot in 4KHQ.

Rudy

--
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/rudypohl/
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Rudy.Pohl.Ottawa
Astrobin: https://www.astrobin.com/users/Rudy_Pohl/

 

[Ephemeris]

I use my R5 in crop mode for both stills and video.

I use it for stills for all the reasons people have listed above, and I use it for videos for extending the effective reach and for getting super sharp details. 4K60p in crop mode is oversampled from 5.1K giving fabulous fines details. The details are so good they look virtually as good as videos shot in 4KHQ.

Rudy

 

[Rudy Pohl]

I use my R5 in crop mode for both stills and video.

I use it for stills for all the reasons people have listed above, and I use it for videos for extending the effective reach and for getting super sharp details. 4K60p in crop mode is oversampled from 5.1K giving fabulous fines details. The details are so good they look virtually as good as videos shot in 4KHQ.

Rudy

... To add some of the video crop modes improve rolling shutter significantly, to below 9ms.

Hi Empheris,

Would you mind giving me the source for this info so I can see the readout speeds of all the other modes too?

Thanks,
Rudy

 

[Ephemeris]

I use my R5 in crop mode for both stills and video.

I use it for stills for all the reasons people have listed above, and I use it for videos for extending the effective reach and for getting super sharp details. 4K60p in crop mode is oversampled from 5.1K giving fabulous fines details. The details are so good they look virtually as good as videos shot in 4KHQ.

Rudy

... To add some of the video crop modes improve rolling shutter significantly, to below 9ms.

Hi Empheris,

Would you mind giving me the source for this info so I can see the readout speeds of all the other modes too?

Thanks,
Rudy

Hey Rudy.

From CineD

R5 – we measure 15.5ms for 8K DCI full frame modeIn APS-C 5.9K CRAW mode, the Canon R5 C exhibits 11.5ms rolling shutter.

From DpR

8K/30p /oversampled 4K 15.4ms

Sub-sampled 4K/30 9.7ms

4K/60p 9.7ms

1080/60p 8.7ms

4K/120p 9.7ms

 

[Rudy Pohl]

I use my R5 in crop mode for both stills and video.

I use it for stills for all the reasons people have listed above, and I use it for videos for extending the effective reach and for getting super sharp details. 4K60p in crop mode is oversampled from 5.1K giving fabulous fines details. The details are so good they look virtually as good as videos shot in 4KHQ.

Rudy

... To add some of the video crop modes improve rolling shutter significantly, to below 9ms.

Hi Empheris,

Would you mind giving me the source for this info so I can see the readout speeds of all the other modes too?

Thanks,
Rudy

Hey Rudy.

From CineD

R5 – we measure 15.5ms for 8K DCI full frame modeIn APS-C 5.9K CRAW mode, the Canon R5 C exhibits 11.5ms rolling shutter.

From DpR

8K/30p /oversampled 4K 15.4ms

Sub-sampled 4K/30 9.7ms

4K/60p 9.7ms

1080/60p 8.7ms

4K/120p 9.7ms

Thanks a lot, this is great!

Rudy

 

[Chris Wolfgram]

Cutious about how using crop mode on these cameras compares to using a TC or just plain cropping full-frame.

I had the R5 for about a year, and I almost had no choice but to use it in crop mode most of the time..... which dropped my mp's from 45, to a measly 17 ! That sucked. But even so, I was often not pulling my subjects up as much as I wanted too.... and 17mp didn't leave me a lot of room for cropping either.

The R5 is a fantastic camera for a lot of things, but my 32mp R7's are WAY better for the small, skittish birds I often chase. By default "always" in the crop mode, but twice the pixel density as the 45mp, R5.

 

[Rudy Pohl]

Cutious about how using crop mode on these cameras compares to using a TC or just plain cropping full-frame.

I had the R5 for about a year, and I almost had no choice but to use it in crop mode most of the time..... which dropped my mp's from 45, to a measly 17 ! That sucked. But even so, I was often not pulling my subjects up as much as I wanted too.... and 17mp didn't leave me a lot of room for cropping either.

The R5 is a fantastic camera for a lot of things, but my 32mp R7's are WAY better for the small, skittish birds I often chase. By default "always" in the crop mode, but twice the pixel density as the 45mp, R5.

Hi Chris,

There is no question that for the type of shooting that you mainly do—small skittish birds from a considerable distance—the R5 is not the best choice of camera from the Canon R lineup. However, for many of us, myself included, who are looking for the ultimate all-rounder, the R5 is a winner over and over.

For active hybrid shooters like myself who do not only stills photography, but also lots and lots of videos, especially in 4K120p format, nothing Canon offers can beat the R5. While the R3 has a stacked sensor and better AF it doesn't have the high resolution sensor that so many photographers want. And for those when we do want or need to use the R5's crop mode, 17 megapixels can do the job not too shabbily.

There are many reasons why after being 3 1/2 years old the R5 is still being favorably compared to class-leading cameras from other brands that are much newer. And now that its price has dropped it's even more attractive.

Cheers,
Rudy

--
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/rudypohl/
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Rudy.Pohl.Ottawa
Astrobin: https://www.astrobin.com/users/Rudy_Pohl/

 

[Chris Wolfgram]

Cutious about how using crop mode on these cameras compares to using a TC or just plain cropping full-frame.

I had the R5 for about a year, and I almost had no choice but to use it in crop mode most of the time..... which dropped my mp's from 45, to a measly 17 ! That sucked. But even so, I was often not pulling my subjects up as much as I wanted too.... and 17mp didn't leave me a lot of room for cropping either.

The R5 is a fantastic camera for a lot of things, but my 32mp R7's are WAY better for the small, skittish birds I often chase. By default "always" in the crop mode, but twice the pixel density as the 45mp, R5.

Hi Chris,

There is no question that for the type of shooting that you mainly do—small skittish birds from a considerable distance—the R5 is not the best choice of camera from the Canon R lineup. However, for many of us, myself included, who are looking for the ultimate all-rounder, the R5 is a winner over and over.

For active hybrid shooters like myself who do not only stills photography, but also lots and lots of videos, especially in 4K120p format, nothing Canon offers can beat the R5. While the R3 has a stacked sensor and better AF it doesn't have the high resolution sensor that so many photographers want.

There are many reasons why after being 3 1/2 years old the R5 is still being favorably compared to class-leading cameras from other brands that are much newer. And now that its price has dropped it's even more attractive.

Cheers,
Rudy

100% Rudy. The R5 is a fantastic all around'er

--
Every day in the field is a blessing. Nice photos, of beautiful birds and wildlife are just a bonus.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/161603079@N02/page1
No time or attention given for negativity or trolls.

 

[Rudy Pohl]

Cutious about how using crop mode on these cameras compares to using a TC or just plain cropping full-frame.

I had the R5 for about a year, and I almost had no choice but to use it in crop mode most of the time..... which dropped my mp's from 45, to a measly 17 ! That sucked. But even so, I was often not pulling my subjects up as much as I wanted too.... and 17mp didn't leave me a lot of room for cropping either.

The R5 is a fantastic camera for a lot of things, but my 32mp R7's are WAY better for the small, skittish birds I often chase. By default "always" in the crop mode, but twice the pixel density as the 45mp, R5.

Hi Chris,

There is no question that for the type of shooting that you mainly do—small skittish birds from a considerable distance—the R5 is not the best choice of camera from the Canon R lineup. However, for many of us, myself included, who are looking for the ultimate all-rounder, the R5 is a winner over and over.

For active hybrid shooters like myself who do not only stills photography, but also lots and lots of videos, especially in 4K120p format, nothing Canon offers can beat the R5. While the R3 has a stacked sensor and better AF it doesn't have the high resolution sensor that so many photographers want.

There are many reasons why after being 3 1/2 years old the R5 is still being favorably compared to class-leading cameras from other brands that are much newer. And now that its price has dropped it's even more attractive.

Cheers,
Rudy

100% Rudy. The R.5 is a fantastic all around'er

Chris,

By the way, I totally agree with your other posts where you say that what's needed is for Canon to produce a professional grade crop sensor camera.

I was in the Nikon world for many years before coming to Canon for the R5 in 2022 and I owned the Nikon D500 which is a pro-grade crop sensor camera that is fabulous in every way. An upgraded pro-level R7 would be a runaway success!

Rudy

 

[Myer]

Cutious about how using crop mode on these cameras compares to using a TC or just plain cropping full-frame.

I had the R5 for about a year, and I almost had no choice but to use it in crop mode most of the time..... which dropped my mp's from 45, to a measly 17 ! That sucked. But even so, I was often not pulling my subjects up as much as I wanted too.... and 17mp didn't leave me a lot of room for cropping either.

The R5 is a fantastic camera for a lot of things, but my 32mp R7's are WAY better for the small, skittish birds I often chase. By default "always" in the crop mode, but twice the pixel density as the 45mp, R5.

Hi Chris,

There is no question that for the type of shooting that you mainly do—small skittish birds from a considerable distance—the R5 is not the best choice of camera from the Canon R lineup. However, for many of us, myself included, who are looking for the ultimate all-rounder, the R5 is a winner over and over.

For active hybrid shooters like myself who do not only stills photography, but also lots and lots of videos, especially in 4K120p format, nothing Canon offers can beat the R5. While the R3 has a stacked sensor and better AF it doesn't have the high resolution sensor that so many photographers want.

There are many reasons why after being 3 1/2 years old the R5 is still being favorably compared to class-leading cameras from other brands that are much newer. And now that its price has dropped it's even more attractive.

Cheers,
Rudy

100% Rudy. The R.5 is a fantastic all around'er

Chris,

By the way, I totally agree with your other posts where you say that what's needed is for Canon to produce a professional grade crop sensor camera.

I was in the Nikon world for many years before coming to Canon for the R5 in 2022 and I owned the Nikon D500 which is a pro-grade crop sensor camera that is fabulous in every way. An upgraded pro-level R7 would be a runaway success!

Rudy

So now we're back to the 7D II and then the R7 II which you/we hope is more of a pro level R7.

 

[Ephemeris]

Cutious about how using crop mode on these cameras compares to using a TC or just plain cropping full-frame.

I had the R5 for about a year, and I almost had no choice but to use it in crop mode most of the time..... which dropped my mp's from 45, to a measly 17 ! That sucked. But even so, I was often not pulling my subjects up as much as I wanted too.... and 17mp didn't leave me a lot of room for cropping either.

The R5 is a fantastic camera for a lot of things, but my 32mp R7's are WAY better for the small, skittish birds I often chase. By default "always" in the crop mode, but twice the pixel density as the 45mp, R5.

Hi Chris,

There is no question that for the type of shooting that you mainly do—small skittish birds from a considerable distance—the R5 is not the best choice of camera from the Canon R lineup. However, for many of us, myself included, who are looking for the ultimate all-rounder, the R5 is a winner over and over.

For active hybrid shooters like myself who do not only stills photography, but also lots and lots of videos, especially in 4K120p format, nothing Canon offers can beat the R5. While the R3 has a stacked sensor and better AF it doesn't have the high resolution sensor that so many photographers want. And for those when we do want or need to use the R5's crop mode, 17 megapixels can do the job not too shabbily.

There are many reasons why after being 3 1/2 years old the R5 is still being favorably compared to class-leading cameras from other brands that are much newer. And now that its price has dropped it's even more attractive.

Cheers,
Rudy

--

Continuing our rolling shutter conversation the 9.5ms for the R3 we often see in print comes from a measurement in one of its 6k video modes. I haven't found data for other modes of the r3.

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/rudypohl/
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Rudy.Pohl.Ottawa
Astrobin: https://www.astrobin.com/users/Rudy_Pohl/

 

[JoeSchmoe007]

I don't own a TC so for me it is either crop in camera or crop in post. I only ever cropped in camera once when I decided I wanted to shoot a video at US Open and I was too far. I knew if I didn't crop in camera I would have to edit the video later and I am not knowledgeable about video editing at all.

 

[John Sheehy]

Cutious about how using crop mode on these cameras compares to using a TC or just plain cropping full-frame.

Crop mode is just like center-cropping in post-processing, except that the crop fills the EVF and the attention of metering and AF, and many people believe that crop mode allows the camera's AF to see smaller heads and eyes and lock on them better, as the final phase of AF seems to use the video feed to the EVF for object identification. You also get a lot more images in a card, and the buffer takes over twice as many images before filling. FF mode and crop mode put exactly the same number of pixels on-subject, from the same distance.

A TC will put more pixels-on-subject, but a TC might reduce AF sensitivity in marginal light, despite the subjects being resolved better in the EVF.

If you need the fastest possible rolling shutter speed in e-shutter mode, the shutter will roll through a moving subject faster without a TC, as the TC makes things move faster through the frame.

Personally, when the R5 was my go-to camera a couple of years back, I would use crop mode mainly only when the subject was so small or distant that I'd still be cropping in post from a crop mode file.

A potential problem with both TCs and crop modes, when using zoom lenses, is that zooming out to a needed wider angle of view zooms out to a smaller entrance pupil when a TC and/or crop mode is used.