![]() If you do not plan to make enormous prints (enlarging image from R7 20 times will give you 12"x17" print at 300 dpi and you will need to enlarge the image from full frame only 13 times for the same size print) or if you do not really need better battery life of DSLR I see no reason to chose 5DM4. If R7 have fully electronic shutter mode - meaning no use of the mechanical one in this mode - this is also in most cases a plus: no vibrations, no wear and tear, faster frame rate. In-body stabilization if you do not always use tripod is a blessing too. I am guessing here (and you have to check) but R7 should be smaller and lighter - no mirror and crop sensor are the clues here - which is preferable in most cases.Įlectronic viewfinder will allow for better focusing. and the framing difference (for the same field of view) between full frame and crop sensor will be a plus for the crop.Īt about the same pixel count crop sensor will have more pixels per area so it can capture more details.Īnother plus for the crop is that you will be using only the central portion of the full frame lenses - less vignette, less distortion, more sharpness. In macro DOF and diffraction are almost always an issue. And there are ways around these obstacles, especially in studio settings. I am not familiar with R7 maybe it is with newer sensor and the technology could narrow or completely eliminate the difference. But difference is not really so big and may not be a real issue for most people. if the choice is between R7 and 5Dm4 you probably will be wiser to spend the money on newer system.Īs a general rule the smaller sensor is losing some dynamic range and noise levels are higher - this is for sensors made with the same technology. The R7 (APS-C sensor & 1.6 crop factor) has EFCS and the 5D has silent mode (full-frame CMOS sensor & mirror lockup continuous shooting). Im leaning more towards the R7 because its a newer system or the 5D for image quality. Im not planning on upgrading my ef lenses. The bodies are within the same price range + on ebay. I just have 2 macro lenses an EOS ef100mm f2.8 L and the EOS MP-e65 f2.8 1-5x, also extension tubes and teleconverter. I was looking at a Canon R7 but a friend suggested a R6 might be better, or the 5D Mark 4. I think the conclusion of the thread was the crop sensor was probably better in the long run but could not find the thread again to confirm. I seem to recall discussion about more light needed to cover the larger FF sensor, better suited with FF lenses and cropping reducing pixel density. ![]() I had read an article or some discussion about the advantages/disadvantages of full frame vs crop sensors for Macro. I’m considering upgrading my Canon 1DM4 (1.3x crop, APS-H sensor) to a newer body for macro but not for micro. Rik suggested I start a new thread for discussion. I thought I had read a thread here recently about the difference between full frame vs crop sensors for macro photography but can’t seem to find it. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |