Full Frame vs. 1.6 Crop.

[Karl Egressy]

I'm still trying to make up my mind as to sell the 7D and buy the 5D Mark III or keep the 7D.I shoot with 1D Mark IV.I bought the 7D to replace the 1D M III that was used as a backup as well.My question is very simple; Does crop factor count when it comes to Avian Photography?I take the pictures in RAW convert it to TIFF, crop it anywhere between 0-75 percent, but most of the time 15-50 percent.I intend to use the 5D Mark III more as the 7D and mainly to Avian Photography.Please give me an answer if you could in layman's terms; Yes, No.Your help is valued and greatly appreciated.

[ericbowles]

There are some situations where the crop body makes sense and others where the full frame is better. It depends a bit on your lenses and what your plans are for future upgrades.

Your direct question is about how many pixels you can put on the subject, and the resulting image quality. The 1.6 crop factor is just that - a crop from the full frame image. There are advantages of a full frame camera, but only if you you can fill the frame without cropping. Once you start cropping you might as well go with the crop body since it will probably have more pixels on the subject.

Now there are situations where a full frame excels. For example, if you have enough reach, the issue becomes creating subject isolation and a smooth background. That's a lot easier with a full frame body and a longer lens. The full frame cameras also can have large pixels - which translates into better low light performance. If you photograph subjects in low light that may be more important than any other factor.

Generally the full frame lenses are heavier and more expensive. Put them on the full frame body and corners can become soft, so high end glass can be more important. The same lens on a crop body eliminates the corners allowing better image quality. On the other hand, if you need a light weight kit, a crop body with teh lighter lenses might be a better choice.

At the end of the day, I would be reluctant to go with a full frame body if you typically are cropping by 15-50%. If your lens kit provides enough reach, a two camera kit with a full frame and a crop body could make sense.

[Robert Hardy]

if you could always fill the frame then the mk3 IF the mk 3 was 40mp and you always had to crop around 50% then that would be great too as it is the 7d has the mps on the subject just about every time when you need to crop.
just my thoughts on it.
Rob.

[Karl Egressy]

There are some situations where the crop body makes sense and others where the full frame is better. It depends a bit on your lenses and what your plans are for future upgrades.

Your direct question is about how many pixels you can put on the subject, and the resulting image quality. The 1.6 crop factor is just that - a crop from the full frame image. There are advantages of a full frame camera, but only if you you can fill the frame without cropping. Once you start cropping you might as well go with the crop body since it will probably have more pixels on the subject.

Now there are situations where a full frame excels. For example, if you have enough reach, the issue becomes creating subject isolation and a smooth background. That's a lot easier with a full frame body and a longer lens. The full frame cameras also can have large pixels - which translates into better low light performance. If you photograph subjects in low light that may be more important than any other factor.

Generally the full frame lenses are heavier and more expensive. Put them on the full frame body and corners can become soft, so high end glass can be more important. The same lens on a crop body eliminates the corners allowing better image quality. On the other hand, if you need a light weight kit, a crop body with teh lighter lenses might be a better choice.

At the end of the day, I would be reluctant to go with a full frame body if you typically are cropping by 15-50%. If your lens kit provides enough reach, a two camera kit with a full frame and a crop body could make sense.

Thank you Eric.
I only have L series lenses; 500 f4.0 L IS being the longest. I also use a Canon 300 f2.8 L IS plus 1.4x for flight shots. (Lighter lens). I just sold my second copy of a 400 f5.6 L that I also used for BIF shots ocassionally.
My main camera body is Canon 1D Mark IV for mostly everything.
I thought that the new full frame camera body could be a light alternative to the 1D MarkIV and would work better with my 24-105 F 4.0 L IS and 70-200 f4.0 L IS for landscape and extreme close shooting of birds.
Well it is a hard decision.
I wish I could keep the 7D and buy the 5D MIII as well.
But again, who needs three camera bodies.
Thanks again.

[arash_hazeghi]

the 5D3 produces much better results for bird photography, especially flight (and any kind of photography) in the hands of a competent photographer IMO.

[Colin Knight]

My recommendation would be to sell the 7D and get the 5D III. You'll have some real diversity with it and the 1D IV- great crop body and full frame. Both with excellent AF to top it off.

[Karl Egressy]

Thanks Arash and thanks Colin.
I posted the same thread on NSN as well.
It seems to me that the majority of people suggests to sell the 7D and buy the 5D Mark III.
I'm pretty good at approaching small birds without chasing them away so the full frame should work for me.
I also noticed that when I go to Bosque del Apache, Bonaventure Island, Florida and the like, I don't really need the reach that much.
I'll always have the 1D Mark IV for reach.
So I have one year old 7D for sale. The shutter count was; 6855 as of Wednesday.:S3:

[Kaustubh Deshpande]

Karl, since you have 1D mark IV and 500 f/4, I'd say good call to swap 7D with 5D mark3. If you need reach for perched birds, you can always add 2x to the 500 and still do AF on the 1D mark IV.

[Karl Egressy]

Karl, since you have 1D mark IV and 500 f/4, I'd say good call to swap 7D with 5D mark3. If you need reach for perched birds, you can always add 2x to the 500 and still do AF on the 1D mark IV.

Thanks Kaustubh. I'll try hard to sell it.
I would still wait a little longer to see if there is any issue with the 5D MarkIII.

[arash_hazeghi]

Thanks Kaustubh. I'll try hard to sell it.
I would still wait a little longer to see if there is any issue with the 5D MarkIII.

I doubt if you can find a 5D3 now, there is a light leak issue and Canon is holding further shipments until they fix it. Existing cameras will need to go back to Canon for this fix as well. The 7D is due for replacement soon as Nikon is coming out with their pro-grade 24 Mpixel DX body. I would try to sell it while you can because it will not hold value when the new model comes out.

[Karl Egressy]

I doubt if you can find a 5D3 now, there is a light leak issue and Canon is holding further shipments until they fix it. Existing cameras will need to go back to Canon for this fix as well. The 7D is due for replacement soon as Nikon is coming out with their pro-grade 24 Mpixel DX body. I would try to sell it while you can because it will not hold value when the new model comes out.

Thanks Arash. It's a good info. I'll try hard.

[Colin Knight]

Arash- does your Mark III have that issue? Mine doesn't.

[arash_hazeghi]

Arash- does your Mark III have that issue? Mine doesn't.

All 5D3s are manufactured the same way so they all have this issue-it is not relevant to my photography though.

[Colin Knight]

There was some discussion on Canon Rumors about LCD construction variations. Some have hard plastic, others have a softer plastic protector. Not everyone has the issue, it seems the hard plastic LCD's do not have the issue in general.

[arash_hazeghi]

There was some discussion on Canon Rumors about LCD construction variations. Some have hard plastic, others have a softer plastic protector. Not everyone has the issue, it seems the hard plastic LCD's do not have the issue in general.

yup looks like the cameras with 6th digit serial number of 1 and 2 are affected. see Canon's service advisory.