After years of using the Auto mode I've finally decided to learn more on the subject of digital photography. I've been following the basic tutorials on this site and I still have a (beginner) question regarding the crop factor.
I've recently bought a Pentax K-70 DSLR camera and I've learned that it has a crop factor of 1.5. According to what I've read so far, this factor should be applied to correct the focal length of the lenses I'm using and this is where I'm a little bit confused. This means that I will never be able to have an F1.4 apperture value because the lens should have a max apperture of F1 that will have to be corrected by a 1.5 factor. Secondly, I should never be able to have an apperture smaller than F16 which is F24 after correction.
Short question, is anything else than a full frame camera worthless ? How about those with even smaller sensors, are they even worse ?
Welcome to this forum!
Short question, is anything else than a full frame camera worthless ?
Nope - it's a debate that goes around the internet for as long as crop sensors (and trolls) exist, but they are definitely not worthless compared to full frame. They can have a lot of benefits compared to full frame, but that's a whole other topic :)
As far I have always understood this: f/1.4 is f/1.4, it's a specification of the attached lens (the aperture), not the sensor. But, the depth of field (how much "separation" / "blur" / "bokeh" you get) is different so - please someone correct me if I'm wrong - f/1.4 with a 1.5x crop sensor should give you an equivalent depth of field when you would use f/2 on a full frame sensor (or f/2.8 if you have a 2x crop sensor like micro four-thirds).
How about those with even smaller sensors, are they even worse ?
Thing with smaller sensors is that the individual pixels are smaller, so less sensitive to light / more prone to 'noise' compared to bigger sensors. It gets worse if manufacturers then try to increase the number of pixels (24Mp, 40Mp, 100Mp etc).
Your average smartphone for example has a teeny-tiny sensor (even compared to a 1.5x crop sensor) - and then they try to squeeze 30-40-50 Megapixels on them. Sure, in that case this is much more worse compared to your Pentax 24Mpixel camera for example :) But comparing a 24Mp crop-sensor to a 24Mp full frame sensor ... then the difference might not be so obvious, unless you shoot with high ISO settings (that's the "sensitivity" of the sensor, where full frame is better) or you like to look at your images at 200%, also known as the "pixel peeper" (like yours truly sometimes I confess ;-))
Hope this makes any sense? Otherwise just ask!
Here is a good article on your question.
https://photographylife.com/equivalence-also-includes-aperture-and-iso
Thank you very much for your replies and for your patience with me.
The opinions you expressed here are balanced and reasonable. I will continue learning and exploring this fascinating domain with the equipment I have right now, but armed with a better understanding of these concepts.
While at it, don't forget that "full frame" is itself an arbitrary term. 35 mm. was once considered "miniature" when most cameras were 120 or larger sizes.
It's true, of course, that the total light in a cropped image is less than the total light in a larger image. Well, yeah. It's cropped. The part you cut out isn't there any more. But the part that's left is exactly what would appear if you cropped the full frame. It's also true that the apparent depth of field in a cropped image is less than that of a full frame image, but only because when viewed or printed, it's enlarged more to fill an also arbitrary screen or paper size. If you took a full frame image, cropped it to crop frame size, then blew it up again to fill the screen, you'd have the equivalent of a crop frame image.
It is true that a larger frame size will likely give you better high ISO noise performance, but I agree that this depends a bit on how hard you push things, and how sensitive you are to it, and a good bit on what you're doing. If you're shooting fashion shots for a magazine, the rules are different from what most of us need to concern us. I think people tend to worry more than they really have to, and that if you get a compelling image, most people are not going to quibble if there's a little noise.
The crop factor does not "correct" anything. It "should be applied" only when you are making a side-by-side comparison between a crop sensor and a full frame camera.
I've recently bought a Pentax K-70 DSLR camera and I've learned that it has a crop factor of 1.5. According to what I've read so far, this factor should be applied to correct the focal length of the lenses I'm using and this is where I'm a little bit confused.
This means that I will never be able to have an F1.4 apperture value because the lens should have a max apperture of F1 that will have to be corrected by a 1.5 factor.First, there are plenty F/0.95 lenses. They are harder to make and might not be as good as F/1.4 lenses, but they are not impossible. Second, if you really "need" a razor-thin DOF, why stop at full frame? Look into medium format or even large format.
Secondly, I should never be able to have an apperture smaller than F16 which is F24 after correction.An f-number is just a number. Just like focal length. Images shot on full frame with a 100 mm lens at f/22 will be virtually indistinguishable from the images shot on m43 with a 50 mm lens at f/11.
Short question, is anything else than a full frame camera worthless ? How about those with even smaller sensors, are they even worse ?
After years of using the Auto mode I've finally decided to learn more on the subject of digital photography. I've been following the basic tutorials on this site and I still have a (beginner) question regarding the crop factor.
I've recently bought a Pentax K-70 DSLR camera and I've learned that it has a crop factor of 1.5. According to what I've read so far, this factor should be applied to correct the focal length of the lenses I'm using and this is where I'm a little bit confused. This means that I will never be able to have an F1.4 apperture value because the lens should have a max apperture of F1 that will have to be corrected by a 1.5 factor. Secondly, I should never be able to have an apperture smaller than F16 which is F24 after correction.
Short question, is anything else than a full frame camera worthless ? How about those with even smaller sensors, are they even worse ?
In front of large format ,so called "full format/frame" is a crop one but when I shoot I never think what means my f/2.8 in large format or vice versa. I am not the best person to give advice,but please to think at the subject of the photo and not at all at the crop factor.Thank You.