When DSLRs started becoming affordable around 2005, I finally made the transition along with thousands of other film shooters into the realm of digital photography. It was an exciting time, and even though the best sensors at the time couldn’t truly compete with a drum scanned negative, the sheer convenience and capabilities of the cameras were clearly sufficient for the majority of photographers who predominantly posted their work online (not to mention that most people didn’t drum scan their negatives anyway).
The 1. 6x and 1. 5x lens crop factor for Canon and Nikon users respectively was an annoyance, but generally everyone understood that some sacrifices would have to be made as the technology improved. Even then, it was important that during the transition to digital the majority of lenses could still be used, although their purposes were slightly modified; our 24mm lenses became 35mm lenses, our nifty fifties became ideal portrait glass, and our ultra wides were now just standard wide angles.
However, the looming technology of full-frame in the years to come quickly put an end to the honeymoon period that we had with APS-C, and suddenly everyone wanted to go full-frame and ditch the crop factor.
My first DSLR was the Nikon D50, which even today would be sufficient for Instagram and prints up to A3.
Full-frame cameras could use old film-era lenses to their full capacity, and larger sensors meant improved noise performance and more resolution. Most professionals would have probably jumped to full-frame as soon as possible with cameras like the 5D and the 5D Mark II. When Nikon finally revealed an affordable full-frame camera of their own with the D700, the two major manufacturers were both quite dedicated to introducing more affordable full-frame bodies, and it looked like the end of APS-C.
But if we fast forward back 2016 and take a look at all the cameras that came out this year, there’s a pretty interesting trend – almost all the most exciting cameras to hit the market have been cameras using an APS-C sensor.
Sure we have the familiar Olympic Games behemoths like the Canon 1DX Mark II and the Nikon D5, but those are becoming even more niche than they were before. Not all pros need the speed of those cameras, and many opt for less power in a lighter body.
The last APS-C camera I owned before I went full-frame was the Fujifilm S3 Pro.
2016 saw the release of the Sony A6300 and A6500, the Fujifilm X-Pro 2 and X-T2, the Nikon D500, and even slightly less impressive cameras like the Canon M5 and 80D. All of them are APS-C, and each camera packs a remarkable amount of technology into a very compact package.
The cameras from Sony, Canon, and Fujifilm all feature 24MP sensors, while the D500 uses a 20. 9MP sensor. While this clearly pales in comparison to megapixel monsters like the full-frame Nikon D810, Sony A7R II, and Canon 5DS and 5DS R, the cameras are clearly good enough for almost every purpose imaginable.
There’s no longer any tangible sacrifice in terms of image quality, since even the smallest bodies possible such as the A6300/6500 simply have so much to offer in terms of both video and stills.
Heaven and hell all in one photo. Really fun shooting with the guys today though.
Embedded Javascript
It makes less and less sense to buy a large camera body anymore, because digital cameras have basically reached a saturation point in terms of their technological capability. That’s not to say that they can’t improve, or that all the cameras now are perfect – just that even the most basic camera released in 2016 is considerably more advanced than any professional camera in 2006.
APS-C sensors have improved to the point where there’s little difference separating them from full-frame, and even though their noise performances will be worse for example, cameras like the D500 and X-T2 show remarkable control at high ISOs.
Manufacturers will always need to keep selling cameras, so they will keep pushing improvements indefinitely. In the coming years we’ll most likely see full-frame cameras edge closer and closer to medium-format, and medium-format will soon reach stratospheric levels of resolution. At the moment it seems like everyone agrees APS-C cameras are pretty much at their limits at around 20-24MP, although a company like Sony might try to push the sensor to its limits in the next few years.
In all honesty however, right now I feel like it's the perfect time to make the step "back" to APS-C – even if you are a full-frame shooter. I own the D600, which makes great images, but it was so heavy I left it at home for most of the time I've owned it. Ever since I got an APS-C camera (and to be specific, a mirrorless one), I've found myself just bringing it out with me every day. Even though the quality may be a tiny bit worse, the differences aren't really discernable, and ultimately I've had no complaints with the quality of any images.
While the same argument can be made that 1" sensors and Micro Four Thirds is good enough for most web use, the perfect balance I believe is still APS-C. It's just our luck that 2016 brought so many fantastic cameras, so that users of all mounts have ample choice.
It's essentially impossible to tell the difference in photos from my full-frame D600 and APS-C X-Pro 2. Both have 24MP sensors.
Cover image by Ivana Vasilj
. digitalrev.com2016-11-24 03:00