If cropping, pixel peeping, or printing large, these differences are even more obvious, making full frame a worthy investment. Still, to the critical eye, the full frame sensor consistently produced better images. The aps-c sensor was very close to the full frame sensor in terms of shadow and highlight recovery at low and medium ISOs. Honestly, the differences between full frame and APS-C shooting were not as extreme as I expected, at least when shooting with the Sony A6300 and Sony A7riii. But if we aren’t pixel peeping, then these differences are indeed very minor. The full frame 42 megapixel A7riii, even downsized, still produces better detail and contrast in the final processed image. APSC SENSOR VS FULL FRAME ISOISO 320 full frame processed To me, the difference is obvious in the pixel peeped images but still not an earth shattering difference. (Though you will find some cropped and pixel peeped comparisons below). I re-sized them in order to better evaluate “real world” differences instead of pixel peeping at 42 megapixels. You can see larger images by clicking each set. When exporting final images, I re-sized them to about 15 megapixels. For each pair of images, I applied identical post-processing. Though you will find a couple of jpegs below, I primarily processed RAW files in lightroom. In theory, there were slight differences in depth of field due to the focal length differences but as I shot everything at small aperture (around F8), the depth of field differences simply weren’t significant. I shot both the A6300 and A7riii at the same aperture, ISO and shutter speed, so they were getting the same amount of light. I set both cameras manually, to always use identical settings. For landscapes, I shoot raw and I tend to slightly underexpose images in order to protect highlights. I equipped the Sony A6300 with the Sony 35mm F/1.8 lens while equipping the Sony A7riii with Sony 55mm F/1.8 lens ( my review here), so that both cameras would give nearly equivalent field of view. I went for a late afternoon of landscape shooting. Have I been wasting my money investing heavily in full frame? Despite the “score” differences, are there differences in real world shooting? Or will there be night and day differences, which should convince all serious shooters to switch to full frame? The Experiment Better noise and color performance should produce images with better detail and color rendition at higher ISO.Īs I created an experiment, I didn’t know what the results would be. Dynamic range should give more ability to manipulate shadows and highlights in post processing raw files. In theory, the greater dynamic range and noise performance should give visible advantages. When shooting landscapes, especially as the light gets lower, one would expect full frame advantages to really shine. But he was shooting portraits at low ISO. Sony Artisan Manny Ortiz put together a great video shooting aps-c side by side with full frame and demonstrated that except for depth of field differences, image quality could be identical. In theory, full frame starts to shine in more challenging lighting situations. With enough light, shooting at ISO 100, you should be able to get equally spectacular image quality out of just about any camera. When you have plenty of light, sensor size actually means little. I’ve always “felt” like I was getting better image quality out of full frame, but I never really did a side by side test before. I’ve primarily shot full frame for over 5 years now. Looking at the score differences, one might expect pretty dramatic differences in the results. Click the image below to see their full comparison of the full frame Sony A7riii and the aps-c Sony A6300: DXOMark Sony A7riii vs A6300 You can find much written about the image quality superiority of full frame over aps-c cameras. Tweet Sony A6300 vs A7riii Real World APS-C vs Full Frame IQ Differences
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |