With so many great options in different formats now, the real key as an artist is to weigh your options and decide what attributes are the most important to you. Is it portability, lens options, absolute image quality, price? For the last 10 years or so, the go-to sensor format for most serious and professional photographers has been full-frame, which closely resembles the size of the 35mm film many of us had been shooting prior to switching to digital.
In the early days of digital, most of us were shooting cameras from Canon or Nikon that had cropped APS-C sensors, which were very limited in terms of dynamic range and high ISO ability. Like many others shooting at the time, when I got my first full-frame camera a Nikon D3 in my case , it blew me away with its ability to produce quality images at high ISOs in light I had never previously even bothered to shoot in. At the time, switching to full-frame sensor size was a game changer that gave us an edge over shooting smaller sensors.
This image of Dusy Basin, Kings Canyon National Park, California, is from the very last time I carried a heavy full-frame kit on a long backcountry adventure. My camera system without the tripod weighed close to 10 pounds. Fast forward plus years, and full-frame is still the primary choice of most professionals like myself.
But in these intervening years, camera makers have really been pushing the limits of what smaller sensor cameras can do, allowing for less-expensive and lighter-weight cameras and lenses and sensors that, though smaller, are still capable of professional-level work.
While Canon, Nikon and Sony have been mainly focused on their flagship full-frame camera systems and have relatively limited collections of lenses designed for smaller sensors especially fast primes , companies like Fujifilm, Olympus and Panasonic have gone all-in on smaller sensor systems and have each developed large if not thoroughly comprehensive lens lineups with many options equal to the quality of those available for the larger full-frame systems.
The real question becomes, with so many systems from which to choose, which one is best for your needs? Much of the decision comes down to your planned end use for the images you produce. This sunset image was taken during one of my Alaskan Eagle workshops. I found it to be quite impressive from such a small sensor. Where things start to separate is when you are shooting in less-than-ideal conditions. Larger sensor cameras are going to beat out the smaller sensors when using higher ISOs to compensate for dim light.
While the ISO breaking point of each camera is slightly different, if you mainly shoot in good light, this is a non-issue. The lens itself may also be more or less susceptible to diffraction, depending on its ability to resolve fine detail. More expensive lenses tend to be better performers. Because they are able to capture more photons of light, larger photosites can generally also record a wider dynamic range with lower noise levels.
Dynamic range describes the range of tones which a sensor can capture while retaining details in both highlights and shadows. The recordable dynamic range depends on the number of photons received during an exposure and how that data is processed.
Larger photosites will capture more light than smaller ones and the image processors used in cameras with larger sensors can generally extract more data. Note the blown-out highlights circled in red and the blocked-up shadows circled in yellow in the smartphone image.
This is the reason photos taken in bright outdoor lighting with compact digicams and smartphones tend to have blown-out highlights and blocked-up shadows. This is because the degree of enlargement required for a given print size is less with a higher pixel count sensor so any associated noise has a higher frequency will appear finer grained.
In summary: even though they cost more and are heavier to carry around, cameras with larger sensors generally provide more control and greater shooting flexibility, particularly for shooting with a shallow depth of field.
However, cameras with smaller sensors can be capable of achieving a comparable depth of field provided you remain within their limitations. For anyone wanting the best possible quality from their images and the ability to print them out large for hanging on the wall, the quality of the digital file is very important.
This is why DSLRs and mirrorless cameras with their larger sensors are the choice of keen photographers everywhere. In general, full frame DSLRs and mirrorless cameras are the most desirable, but smaller format APS-C and Micro Four Thirds cameras will still yield image quality that's far better than a smartphone or a point and shoot camera. Smaller format APS-C and Micro Four Thirds sensors are sometimes called 'crop sensors' because the full frame field of view is effectively being cropped to a smaller sensor area.
This means that lenses have a 'crop factor' applied when used on these cameras. My goal, however, was to show camera sensor size explained in a digestible and easy way. Before choosing which is the best for you, make sure you are familiar with the different camera sensor sizes in the market, what are the pros and cons of each sensor size , and try to make a balance between your budget and your photographic goals.
Please let me know any questions related to digital camera sensor size on the comments! Dan Zafra. Dan is a professional nature and landscape photographer, photography educator, and co-founder of Capture the Atlas.
His base camp is in Philadelphia, USA, but he spends long periods of time exploring and photographing new locations around the world. Apart from shooting the Milky Way , the Northern Lights , and any landscape that can stir powerful emotions, he enjoys leading photo tours to some of the most remote places on Earth.
You can find more about Dan here. A smaller sensor will have less field of view when the aperture F and lens zoom mm, using 35mm lens scale are the same. But a smaller sensor has a greater depth of view when the lens is zoomed to the same field of view angle and the same aperture. Please bear in mind that we are considering that the aperture, focal length, and focusing distance is the same. Would you hold the same opinion now with the GFX s and faster lenses in medium format? The full frame area is not necessarily as clearly the defined all around winner now?
I mean … the new GFXs with a F1. In terms of low light surely this a good all rounder now? Interested to know your thoughts. I am looking to invest in the best image quality for Architectural images and low light concert shots, going through the minefield of available options is overwhelming now…! I am on full frame and notice the light capturing is better than APC-S mostly, but surely I would get significant gains on a Medium format slightly cropped with faster lenses and the advantage of smaller camera body.
Taking a camera like the Sony A7SIII with just 12 mpx on a Full-frame sensor, will render more quality in low-light since the size of the pixels is much larger. Photos of milkyway for comparison are misleading. As regards the Aurora shots, both are raw files taken with a similar flat color profile.
In the camera sensor size vs. As I mention in the note below the Depth of field infographic, if we consider the same angle of view, then the DoF will be narrower in larger sensors. Search for:. What does camera sensor size mean? Image taken with a Nikon Full-frame sensor. What is My Camera Sensor Size?
Is a Bigger Camera Sensor Better? How is Sensor Size Measured? How Big is a Full-Frame Sensor? What is the Largest Camera Sensor?
Share on Pinterest. Share with your friends.
0コメント