As interchangeable lens cameras have developed, digicam sensors have settled into three frequent sizes: Micro 4 Thirds (MFT), APS-C, and Full Body. Particularly for the novice photographer, the sensor sizes will be complicated. Even for superior photographers, not all of the variations are easy. Since I’m primarily a hen photographer, I’ve all the time wished to do a sensible comparability between these three sizes from a wildlife photographer’s perspective. I’m completely happy to say that my want got here true, and on this article, I’ll clarify the variations between these three sensors from my real-world exams.
Sensor Dimension Overview
Micro 4 Thirds
That is the smallest of the three hottest sensor sizes for wildlife images. These sensors measure 17.4 x 13 mm. The most important producer of those cameras is OM System (previously Olympus), whereas Panasonic is their important competitor.
The smaller sensor makes it doable for Micro 4 Thirds cameras to be smaller. (Lots of their lenses are smaller as effectively, however that’s much less true of telephotos.) One other result’s that the crop sensor is, fairly actually, like cropping a picture from a bigger digicam sensor. This has execs and cons – extra on this later – however for wildlife images, it has the potential to help with the objective of placing as many pixels as doable on a distant topic. In particular phrases, Micro 4 Thirds has a 2x crop issue. This implies, for instance, {that a} 400mm telephoto lens on Micro 4 Thirds will match the framing of an 800mm lens on a Full Body digicam (other than the marginally completely different facet ratio of the sensors).
APS-C
These sensors will be present in cameras from most main digicam firms. They’re bigger than Micro 4 Thirds sensors and measure roughly 23 x 15 mm in measurement. (Canon’s APS-C sensors are a bit smaller than this, and most different firms are a bit bigger, however the disparity is slight.)
As with MFT cameras, the largest theoretical benefit for wildlife photographers is the smaller measurement and weight in comparison with Full Body cameras (and probably lower cost). Nevertheless, the burden benefit for APS-C is commonly smaller than anticipated, primarily as a result of there aren’t very many devoted APS-C supertelephoto lenses for wildlife images. Most APS-C photographers select to connect Full Body lenses as a substitute, which are typically a bit heavier.
The crop issue for APS-C cameras in comparison with Full Body is about 1.5x. Once more, extra on that in a second.
Full Body
Full Body has been with us longer than any of us can keep in mind – effectively over 100 years. It started because the “35mm format” of celluloid movie, and at present, 36 x 24 mm Full Body digital sensors will be present in cameras from at the very least 9 manufacturers. In fashionable images, Full Body has all the time been one thing of a benchmark and a longtime gold commonplace.
However is there a sensible purpose for the recognition of this format, or is the primary purpose for its widespread adoption merely inertia and adherence to custom? The most important arguments in favor of Full Body are the excessive picture high quality, the management over depth of discipline, and the massive vary of lenses and different equipment. By definition, it has no crop issue other than 1x.
Is Larger All the time Higher?
To introduce the professionals and cons of every digicam sensor measurement, it helps to do a brief thought experiment. Take into account three photographers, all capturing with cameras which have the identical decision and all utilizing lenses with the identical nominal focal size and aperture.
This isn’t only a hypothetical. For instance, three well-known cameras representing these three sensor sizes – the OM System OM-1 Mark II, the Nikon D500, and the Nikon D5 – all have a decision of about 20 megapixels. And for all three cameras, it’s doable to buy a 300mm f/4 lens (the M.Zuiko 300mm f/4.0 IS PRO for Micro 4 Thirds, and the Nikon AF-S 300mm f/4E PF for each APS-C and Full Body). What would be the variations between these techniques?
First are weight and measurement. For these explicit cameras and lenses, the weights the photographers should carry are as follows:
- Micro 4 Thirds – 2074 grams (4.57 kilos)
- APS-C – 1615 grams (3.64 kilos)
- Full Body – 2205 grams (4.86 kilos)
Curiously, it’s APS-C and never Micro 4 Thirds that’s lightest this time! It goes to point out the significance of lens choice – the Nikon 300mm f/4 PF was designed to be as light-weight as doable, whereas the OM System 300mm f/4 PRO is a bit on the heavy facet. Nevertheless, on common, Micro 4 Thirds lenses are smaller and lighter than lenses for APS-C and Full Body.
However extra importantly, what in regards to the images these three photographers will get? Let’s share these cameras between three photographers and inform them to {photograph} the identical topic with the identical digicam settings. Say, a hen sitting on a rock in the midst of a stream – and ensure they’re the identical distance away from the topic. Attempt to suppose how these three photographs will end up. I’ll reveal after the picture.
First, the picture on Micro 4 Thirds can have the hen filling extra of the body. The picture is prone to have extra seen noise than the images from the opposite two cameras.
Second, the picture on APS-C can have a bit extra setting across the hen. Noise might be much less seen by comparability, however there more than likely will nonetheless be some.
Lastly, the photographer with the Full Body digicam. This time, the hen might be by far the smallest within the body. (If it took up your complete picture on Micro 4 Thirds, it can solely fill 1/4th of the picture on Full Body). There might be extra setting within the picture. And the picture can have the least noise of all three images.
What about depth of discipline? Effectively, the background can have the identical stage of blur in all three images. It is because every smaller sensor’s picture is sort of a crop from the bigger sensor, and cropping doesn’t change depth of discipline.
And what if the photographer with the Full Body digicam determined to crop the picture to look the identical because the APS-C or Micro 4 Thirds picture? It might be doable, however on the expense of shedding numerous pixels! The photographs would look largely the identical, however cropping to an APS-C stage would cut back the decision from 20 megapixels to about 8.5 megapixels, and cropping to a Micro 4 Thirds stage would cut back the decision to about 5 megapixels.
What’s the lesson right here? With the identical sensor decision, focal size, and distance from the topic, the picture with Micro 4 Thirds will place the best variety of pixels on the topic (leading to probably the most element). A lot for the bigger digicam sensor all the time being higher!
In apply, the scenario would in all probability be considerably completely different. For instance, most Full Body cameras these days have greater than 20 megapixels. Should you shoot with a forty five megapixel Nikon D850 or Nikon Z8, then you are able to do some critical cropping and nonetheless maintain numerous decision. Much more so with a 60+ megapixel Full Body digicam just like the Sony a7R V. The best decision APS-C digicam has about 40 megapixels, whereas the best decision Micro 4 Thirds cameras has about 25 megapixels.
Additionally, photographers have a tendency to face wherever is required to take their images. Stand nearer with Full Body, or farther again with Micro 4 Thirds, and you may get no matter framing you need. The photographer with the OM-1 (Micro 4 Thirds) would in all probability be a number of meters again from the photographer with the Nikon D5 (Full Body). Or maybe the Full Body photographer would use an extended lens, like a 600mm, to match the specified composition.
As quickly as you introduce completely different lenses and completely different camera-to-subject distances, different variables come up between the completely different sensor sizes. For instance, getting nearer to your topic leads to a shallower depth of discipline. So does utilizing an extended focal size lens. Because of this, if two images have the identical framing regardless of completely different digicam sensors, the bigger sensor can have much less depth of discipline. (This assumes all digicam settings are stored similar throughout cameras, and no cropping is finished to match the compositions.)
In actual fact, you need to use the crop issue to search out each the equal focal size and the equal depth of discipline between two digicam sensors. Need to match a Micro 4 Thirds digicam with a 300mm f/4 lens, and you’ve got a Full Body digicam? Recall that there’s a 2x crop issue between these techniques. So, so long as you don’t transfer ahead or backward, you’ll be able to shoot with a 600mm lens at f/8 on Full Body to get a comparable framing and depth of discipline.
An vital sensible distinction is which lenses can be found for which techniques. In concept, it’s good that you would all the time match the composition and depth of discipline between two techniques – simply multiply or divide by the crop issue. However digicam firms solely make so many lenses. A 200mm f/2 lens on Full Body may solely be matched by a (nonexistent) 100mm f/1.0 lens on Micro 4 Thirds, for instance.
Usually talking, Micro 4 Thirds presents extra alternative for lighter-weight supertelephoto lenses. Full Body presents extra telephotos with shallow depth of discipline and vibrant apertures. (APS-C photographers often simply use Full Body lenses, apart from Fuji shooters who’ve extra devoted APS-C choices.)
Nevertheless, “typically talking” solely issues in the event you’re nonetheless unsure which lens to purchase. Each firm makes some distinctive lenses. And in the event you don’t just like the native choices, it could be doable to adapt a lens or discover a third-party lens that fits your wants. You might also be capable of use a teleconverter to vary the focal size and most aperture of a lens, akin to turning a 400mm f/2.8 lens into an 800mm f/5.6 with a 2x teleconverter.
Now, what about picture high quality?
It’s true that bigger sensors have a bonus right here. Particularly if we return to the instance of three 20-megapixel cameras, after which think about capturing all three at a excessive ISO worth and cropping or doing heavy post-processing to the pictures. The Full Body picture might be cleaner than the APS-C picture, which might be cleaner than the Micro 4 Thirds picture.
Nevertheless, the picture high quality benefits to Full Body go away if it is advisable to crop the picture extensively. Should you crop it to match the sector of view of an APS-C digicam, you’ll get APS-C picture high quality (or a bit higher or worse, relying on how a lot decision you began with, and on particular person digicam sensor variations). And cropping to a Micro 4 Thirds discipline of view will get you Micro 4 Thirds picture high quality at finest (in actuality, more than likely worse, as a result of there are not any 80 megapixel Full Body cameras that may let you retain 20 megapixels after cropping so extensively).
Since wildlife photographers typically crop their images, it is a huge argument in favor of smaller digicam sensors. Should you had been already going to crop your Full Body images a lot, then you would have merely used lighter, inexpensive tools and gotten the identical outcomes.
In actual fact, the largest picture high quality benefits of Full Body solely happen in the event you’re ready to restrict how a lot you crop! And until you’re primarily capturing animalscapes, this typically means an extended focal size lens might be essential on Full Body, probably together with getting nearer to your topic. This leads to a better expense and a heavier package, and typically a better probability of scaring away your topic.
In the end, Full Body does have some clear benefits – however you typically must pay extra, and also you undoubtedly must optimize your strategies, otherwise you received’t see them. Provided that smaller digicam sensors nonetheless are able to nice picture high quality, you’ll be able to see why APS-C and Micro 4 Thirds stay well-liked for wildlife images.
Small Sensor, Massive Noise?
I’ve defined how bigger digicam sensors have the potential for higher picture high quality. Should you don’t crop your photographs, and you utilize the identical digicam settings, the enhancements are (very roughly) one cease of noise efficiency for APS-C over Micro 4 Thirds, and one extra cease of noise efficiency for Full Body over APS-C. All else equal – which it will not be, relying on the noise efficiency of every particular person digicam sensor – a photograph at ISO 1600 on Micro 4 Thirds can have related noise as a photograph at ISO 6400 on Full Body (representing two stops of distinction: ISO 1600 to ISO 3200 to ISO 6400).
Nevertheless, noise discount software program has improved tremendously over time. It permits us to make use of ridiculously excessive ISOs with out dramatically lowering the standard of the images. So though bigger sensors have a transparent benefit in low mild on paper, post-processing could make most photographs taken in affordable mild look good (in addition to many photographs taken in unreasonable mild)!
Even with Micro 4 Thirds, I discovered myself in a position to make use of ISOs round 5000-6400 and typically greater, if the topic required it. And these weren’t “break glass in case of emergency” ISO values; I used them repeatedly and with out concern, understanding that it could be doable to scale back probably the most objectionable noise in post-processing.
So sure, the benefits nonetheless persist (about one cease higher noise efficiency as you leap from Micro 4 Thirds to APS-C, and roughly one extra cease once you leap to Full Body). However in the event you’re capable of keep on with ISO 6400 and decrease, then you’ll be able to convincingly get away with any of those three sensor sizes at present.
Is the Micro 4 Thirds System Lighter?
For many photographers, the quick reply to this query is “sure, after all.” However is it actually the case?
I’ve hinted at this query already, once I confirmed that the Micro 4 Thirds package with the OM System 300mm f/4 was heavier than the APS-C package with the Nikon 300mm f/4 PF. Now, I can discover loads of examples the place the Micro 4 Thirds package comes out forward. However many of the apparent advantages of Micro 4 Thirds for measurement and weight happen with non-telephoto lenses, like a wide-angle or regular prime lens.
The unlucky truth is that, in case your important photographic curiosity is wildlife, your again and shoulders will undergo equally, no matter sensor measurement. It is because supertelephoto lens is commonly many occasions heavier than the digicam it’s connected to. An extended focal size with a vibrant most aperture – thought of splendid for wildlife images – is all the time going to be heavy.
Keep in mind that in order for you the identical framing and depth of discipline between digicam techniques, it is advisable to multiply each the focal size and the utmost aperture by the crop issue. A (hypothetical) 400mm f/5.6 lens on APS-C could also be tremendous mild and seem to be an ideal alternative, however multiply that by the crop issue of 1.5, and also you see you can match it with one thing like a 600mm f/8.4 on Full Body. One thing like Canon’s 600mm f/8 can be shut sufficient, and that lens is already good and light-weight, so the hypothetical 400mm f/5.6 on APS-C won’t be as interesting as you first thought!
I’m nonetheless inclined to say that the reply to this query – “Is the Micro 4 Thirds system lighter?” – is sure. Nevertheless, it’s a very conditional reply that relies upon far more on the particular digicam and lens you select.
(For the document, I might say the identical factor about mirrorless versus DSLR. Talking as somebody who makes use of an tailored 500mm f/4 F-mount lens on my Nikon Z9, I’m fairly assured that my mirrorless package is heavier than my outdated DSLR package!)
Conclusion
I spent three stunning mornings photographing the White-throated Dipper household, throughout which I had the chance to watch and {photograph} these distinctive birds (by the way in which, there are solely 5 species of dippers in the entire world). The pair I photographed had constructed their nest in considered one of Prague’s parks, in an unusually busy spot, below a boulder subsequent to a stream. Because of this, they had been accustomed to human presence and paid no consideration to the truth that I used to be sitting in “their” stream for lengthy hours.
This allowed me to shoot them with not one, and even three cameras, however 4. I had two Full Body cameras (Nikon D850 and Z9), one APS-C mannequin (Nikon D500), and even in all probability the perfect Micro 4 Thirds combo for wildlife, the OM System OM-1 Mark II with a 150-400mm f/4.5 lens. My objective was to strive three completely different techniques on the identical topic in order that you would evaluate how the completely different sensor sizes would have an effect on the ensuing images.
My objective wasn’t to select a winner, as each photographer has their very own particular wants. In actual fact, my important feeling is that it’s actually arduous to make a nasty alternative as of late. No matter sensor measurement, all 4 of the cameras had been able to taking nice, detailed images. With cautious processing, even the dreaded Achilles heel of small sensors – noise at excessive ISOs – was not a considerable drawback.
If I needed to identify one sensible good thing about Full Body, it will not be one that you’d anticipate. My reply isn’t the excessive ISO efficiency and even the broader vary of lens choices. What I discovered probably the most useful was the higher freedom in cropping images in post-processing. Sure, I already mentioned how an excessive amount of cropping on Full Body negates the advantages, and that’s true – however cropping an excessive amount of on APS-C or Micro 4 Thirds is worse. Fairly than merely negating the advantages, you would find yourself with an unusable picture in the event you attempt to crop too far.
This, nevertheless, is one thing that may be overcome with good method and self-discipline within the first place. It merely implies that it is advisable to body your topics extra rigorously on smaller sensors in order to not require intensive cropping in post-processing. Maybe that is even a profit in the long term; a Full Body digicam helps you to be a bit lazy together with your framing, and that may harm your images expertise.
It jogged my memory how far more vital it’s to know your digicam and set it appropriately than to chase after a selected sensor measurement, and even to chase after a selected lens.
A Remaining Train
On the very finish, I’ve 10 pattern images taken with three completely different sensor sizes. Are you able to inform them aside?
I hope you loved this text! Digicam sensor sizes and equivalence will be controversial matters, so I request that in the event you depart a remark, allow us to be civil and do not forget that there is no such thing as a purpose to speak badly a couple of photographer’s alternative of drugs.