Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

studio crop verses full frame

T

thleeal

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jun 24, 2009
106
0
Hi guys....

now here is the question....
with studio lighting,

would i see the difference between Crop and FF sensor...
5D mark 2 VS a 7D
24-70- vs 17-55 (both 2.8 equiv focal length for sensors),

all variables the same....

would i even notice the difference..... scratch that would customers notice the difference on prints... not on a big screen pixel peeping...

I'm self taught so if any of you can bring in knowledge from being taught photography please do...
Photoshop... my head is wrapped around it... couple of holes but nothing i can't learn....
 
It really depends on the end use. Do you need the extra resolution of the 5D Mark II? Will you be printing very large? Since you'll be doing your own lighting, then you won't have much need for high-ISO, where the 5D Mark II can be a about a stop better. Aside from those two issues, the benefits of the 5D Mark II are pretty nominal. You'll be able to get slightly more shallow depth of field with it, the color depth and dynamic range are a little bit better, and the viewfinder is larger.

The 7D, on the other hand, has some nice features that make it more pleasurable to use (e.g. the electronic level, the better build quality, updated buttons, etc.). It also has far superior auto-focus than the 5D2 and a much faster burst rate, both of which can be great boons for portraiture (if that's what you intend to do in your studio).

Unless you have some very discerning clients, are intending to reproduce artworks in your studio (which would require every little bit of color depth and dynamic range you can muster), or you intend to make large prints, then you'll probably be very happy with a 7D.
 
mulo said:
when talking about equivalence...
the 7d has a denser pixels/inch, and thus it out resolves the 5d mk II
Click to expand...

No expert, but no so sure about this, 5d has a bigger sensor and larger pixels.

Also the 5d is full frame whereas the 7d crop. So to take the same picture with the same composition with the same lens, you must be stood further away with the 7d, and therefore get less detail
 
Last edited:
thleeal said:
Hi guys....

now here is the question....
with studio lighting,

would i see the difference between Crop and FF sensor...
5D mark 2 VS a 7D
24-70- vs 17-55 (both 2.8 equiv focal length for sensors),

all variables the same....

would i even notice the difference..... scratch that would customers notice the difference on prints... not on a big screen pixel peeping...
Click to expand...

No, how you process the images (raw converter, etc.) will have a more discernible difference outside of the the potential difference for DoF as already mentioned.

Paul
 
thleeal said:
Hi guys....

now here is the question....
with studio lighting,

would i see the difference between Crop and FF sensor...
5D mark 2 VS a 7D
24-70- vs 17-55 (both 2.8 equiv focal length for sensors),

.
Click to expand...

I agree with Paul, you won't see any discernible difference. As for the DOF I can't remember the last time I shot wide open with lights. If I'm shooting wide open I'd rather just set up by a window and use the "natural light".

Of course there's always the Nikon D800E which I'd assume would be fantastic in the studio. From what I've seen the D800E does produce quite a substantial amount more detail.
 
The Mad Kiwi said:
I agree with Paul, you won't see any discernible difference. As for the DOF I can't remember the last time I shot wide open with lights. If I'm shooting wide open I'd rather just set up by a window and use the "natural light".
Click to expand...

I shoot wide open, with strobes, on occasion… but I'm a weirdo.
 
The Mad Kiwi said:
I agree with Paul, you won't see any discernible difference. As for the DOF I can't remember the last time I shot wide open with lights. If I'm shooting wide open I'd rather just set up by a window and use the "natural light".

Of course there's always the Nikon D800E which I'd assume would be fantastic in the studio. From what I've seen the D800E does produce quite a substantial amount more detail.
Click to expand...

The 800E does produce more detail, but you can get moire patterns in clothing. Depending on the clothing, it might be minimal, or it might be quite heavy.

I'd say the normal 800 is good enough for studio work. Anyhow, this message is about Canon, and I'd go with the 5D Mk.II - it produces such lovely images for studio photography with very high resolution. I've used that camera a couple of times myself with a pocketwizard and some external lights. Lovely results.
 
Last edited:
I shot studio with 50d and if you have the space to work it, this can work for you. I however prefer my new full frame body as it allows not just DOF it also makes my work space significantly smaller foot print. I can use high focal length lens for a nice crisp portrait and not have to be so far away.
 
TheDrift- said:
Also the 5d is full frame whereas the 7d crop. So to take the same picture with the same composition with the same lens, you must be stood further away with the 7d, and therefore get less detail
Click to expand...

Stood further away and therefore get less detail?

If the subject is the same size in each picture why would you get less detail?
 
acearchie said:
Stood further away and therefore get less detail?

If the subject is the same size in each picture why would you get less detail?
Click to expand...

The subject wouldn't be the same same the 5d would be slightly bigger, (as the whole picture is bigger 5616x3744 versus 5184x3456

Further away = less detail right? Eg haze and smog in the atmosphere in landscape shots, & don't larger sensors suffer less from diffraction at higher apertures?

But good point as the OP was interested in studio work, I suspect there will be very little real word difference in quality. Although FF will allow you to be closer to your subject and interact better.

**Edit good review here with some shot comparisons from both
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-7D-Digital-SLR-Camera-Review.aspx
 
Last edited:
TheDrift- said:
Further away = less detail right? Eg haze and smog in the atmosphere in landscape shots, & don't larger sensors suffer less from diffraction at higher apertures?

But good point as the OP was interested in studio work, I suspect there will be very little real word difference in quality. Although FF will allow you to be closer to your subject and interact better.
Click to expand...

I see where you are coming from. But, I would still expect for the bottle neck to be in the glass or sensor before the atmosphere is affecting an indoor photography shoot.

On your other note about being closer I have worked with people who are more comfortable when the camera is further away from them but I suppose it just comes down to the photographer and the subject!
 
acearchie said:
On your other note about being closer I have worked with people who are more comfortable when the camera is further away from them but I suppose it just comes down to the photographer and the subject!
Click to expand...

Not only do you not want to be close for comfort levels, the wider angle lens you use could tend to cause distortion. 70-200 f/2.8 for portraiture all day. Unless of course you rock the 85 f/1.4 :)
 
The Mad Kiwi said:
Of course there's always the Nikon D800E which I'd assume would be fantastic in the studio. From what I've seen the D800E does produce quite a substantial amount more detail.
Click to expand...

For portraits, that's likely a *bad* thing- while you want things like lashes to show up, you don't want every pore, bump, wayward hair and blemish on the skin to be obvious- that just makes for more post-processing work "cleaning" the files up.

Ever shot a portrait of an older lady? A half-hour of retouching just to get it to publishable.

Paul
 
WRP said:
Not only do you not want to be close for comfort levels, the wider angle lens you use could tend to cause distortion. 70-200 f/2.8 for portraiture all day. Unless of course you rock the 85 f/1.4 :)
Click to expand...

I’m not a portrait photographer but when I take photo’s of people that are more posed I tend to use an old hasselblad with a 150mm equating to a 0.5x crop factor ish. Turns out that’s about 75mm-85mm equiv. and that distance feels nice. Not to in their face and not so far that you have to shout! I have a 350mm and even on a MF body that needs a bit of shouting!

On the digital side I think a 70-200mm will be my next purchase. Then I’ll be covered at both ends of the spectrum.
 
I have both a 7D and a 5D Mark II. I would say for your type of work...invest more heavily in prime lens. Either camera will be more than sufficient. However, many photographers still do prefer the 5D over the 7D for portrait work.

Also, as already discussed in this thread, make sure you take the crop sensor into consideration when purchasing lenses if you go the 7D route. A 50mm would be closer to an 85mm on a crop. So do research on the lenses you want to see if they'll be ideal for what you are doing.

I primarily use my 5D2 for landscape and low lighting conditions. It excels for those things. Otherwise the 7D is the superior camera for reach, auto focus and weather sealing. It also has the built in flash too, which is nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back