- Messages
- 2,214
- Name
- Craig
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I was unsure wether to put this in the equipment sub forum or this one, it kind of applies to both but I wanted to discuss the use of the different formats specific to landscapes so it's here.
For many years I have shot landscapes with full frame cameras, convinced it was the right thing to do. I think in part it was down to seeing the large difference in image quality between Canon crop cameras and Canon full frame cameras. Even at base ISO there was a difference in the noise, dynamic range and the colours. There was a smoothness to the way the highlights rolled off softly rather than abruptly and when looking at the images at 100% they had a 'wow' factor with increased sharpness. Crucially the files could handle more manipulation in post processing.
Moving to Nikon I jumped right in with full frame, shooting a D750 which I love. (Not looking to start a debate but the step up to Nikon FF from Canon FF was larger than the step up from Canon crop to Canon FF...) I assumed the Nikon crop sensors would be a step down in IQ compared to the Nikon full frame sensors, much the same as the Canon ones were.
As a backup camera, and to give me something different I went for a D500 Nikon 1.5x crop camera. Now, it is noisier than the D750, and when boosted the larger pixels clearly gather more light even at the same exposure, but here is the thing, there is hardly anything in it from an IQ point of view.
I have shot some real life landscape test shots with a 20mm lens on the D500 and a 35mm lens on the D750, in demanding situations at various matching exposures then tortured the RAW files. Honestly, when you account for the fact that the D500 does not have an optical low pass filter (AA) and you apply less sharpening than you do with the D750 the noise at ISO100 is very similar. If you apply the same sharpening the D500 shows more noise, understandably. From an exposure latitude point of view there is nothing in it. The colours are as near the same as makes no difference.
The only difference I can find is that the D500 images are pin sharp into the corners, where the D750 is soft(er) in the corners. Arguably the crop sensor is using the best bit of the glass only.
So my question is, when you are shooting landscapes and able to take control of the ideal settings, by using a tripod and base ISO, which I very rarely deviate from, do you need a full frame camera? Or, are you better off with a crop sensor giving you sharper corners and arguably lighter/cheaper lenses for carrying around...?
I get if you are going handheld, and/or want to up the ISO the full frame will pull ahead, and I have not downsized the 24MP D750 files to 20MP and then tried printing big yet. I think diffraction may still have a part to play in this, as it kicks in earlier with the higher pixel density of the crop sensor, but they we are using the sharper centre of the lens which affects blur level in the corners...
Just interested if anyone else has contemplated any of the above. Maybe I am only thinking it due to these 2 specific cameras?
Caveat - photography is more about subject, light, composition and post processing than sensor choice
For many years I have shot landscapes with full frame cameras, convinced it was the right thing to do. I think in part it was down to seeing the large difference in image quality between Canon crop cameras and Canon full frame cameras. Even at base ISO there was a difference in the noise, dynamic range and the colours. There was a smoothness to the way the highlights rolled off softly rather than abruptly and when looking at the images at 100% they had a 'wow' factor with increased sharpness. Crucially the files could handle more manipulation in post processing.
Moving to Nikon I jumped right in with full frame, shooting a D750 which I love. (Not looking to start a debate but the step up to Nikon FF from Canon FF was larger than the step up from Canon crop to Canon FF...) I assumed the Nikon crop sensors would be a step down in IQ compared to the Nikon full frame sensors, much the same as the Canon ones were.
As a backup camera, and to give me something different I went for a D500 Nikon 1.5x crop camera. Now, it is noisier than the D750, and when boosted the larger pixels clearly gather more light even at the same exposure, but here is the thing, there is hardly anything in it from an IQ point of view.
I have shot some real life landscape test shots with a 20mm lens on the D500 and a 35mm lens on the D750, in demanding situations at various matching exposures then tortured the RAW files. Honestly, when you account for the fact that the D500 does not have an optical low pass filter (AA) and you apply less sharpening than you do with the D750 the noise at ISO100 is very similar. If you apply the same sharpening the D500 shows more noise, understandably. From an exposure latitude point of view there is nothing in it. The colours are as near the same as makes no difference.
The only difference I can find is that the D500 images are pin sharp into the corners, where the D750 is soft(er) in the corners. Arguably the crop sensor is using the best bit of the glass only.
So my question is, when you are shooting landscapes and able to take control of the ideal settings, by using a tripod and base ISO, which I very rarely deviate from, do you need a full frame camera? Or, are you better off with a crop sensor giving you sharper corners and arguably lighter/cheaper lenses for carrying around...?
I get if you are going handheld, and/or want to up the ISO the full frame will pull ahead, and I have not downsized the 24MP D750 files to 20MP and then tried printing big yet. I think diffraction may still have a part to play in this, as it kicks in earlier with the higher pixel density of the crop sensor, but they we are using the sharper centre of the lens which affects blur level in the corners...
Just interested if anyone else has contemplated any of the above. Maybe I am only thinking it due to these 2 specific cameras?
Caveat - photography is more about subject, light, composition and post processing than sensor choice
Last edited: