There must be tons of articles etc on the subject of full frame Vs other formats, but I’m coming at it from a different angle, as in real world usage. No doubt full frame is better in low light, and probably better image quality. However there are so many variables at play that will counteract this. But firstly, I can’t remember the last time I was struggling in the dark to get a low light image, if I wanted to do some low light photography I would use my Lumix LX100 and a tripod, leaving the camera on ISO 100. With my 7D I don’t like to go above ISO 800, though 1600 is usable. Using my Sigma f2.8 wide open I have done some low light portraits and managed to end up with good results at ISO 800. Most of the time I am shooting in daylight, or twilight.
People I know with full frame cameras tend to crop a lot, even when they show me images on their screens it’s zoomed in, cropped. Ergo, its not full frame! This practice also doesn’t make full use of various focal lengths...for example if you crop an image taken with a 28mm, it might end up looking like it was taken with a 50mm? One of the reasons I got a 7D was because of the 100% viewfinder, what you see is what you get. I have gone right off cropping, I love the discipline of getting it right at the time of taking, (right as in framing) and that way it isn’t losing anything from the image in terms of resolution/size. So it’s quite possible that images from my 7D are more “full frame” than some images taken by photographers with a “full frame” sensor camera? Do the math.
Lots of other variables at play too, the photographers skills, knowledge when it comes to processing, and the most important variable of all is the photographer themselves. What’s the point of having a perfectly exposed, sharp, top quality image of a boring, badly framed, uninteresting subject? And how exactly can image quality make said image any better? And how much “image quality” is enough? Is there such thing as peak image quality? Probably yes, considering people don’t have perfect vision. A foggy, unsharp image may have more artistic merits, be more captivationg than something with excellent image quality…have you got the picture yet? (Pun intended 😂) “The photographer is the instrument not the camera”
Also most people these days simply share images online, and hardly ever make any actual prints! Making all of the above meaningless! My first dslr was a 6.3mp Canon 10D and the A3 size prints from it were beautiful in terms of image quality (it was just a slow camera to use in terms of its processing engine, especially compared to modern cameras) and I’m sure it would be capable of printing larger than A3.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFncHWMuWX0
Heres another good video on the subject by Joris Hermans...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOx3Y52EPNI
I like this one even better, by Craig Roberts, e6Vlogs
