Thanks a lot for this comparison. I believe it would have been slightly more useful it you had used the same shutter speed and auto-iso (shorter exposure time collects less light, which leads to worse signal to noise ratio, in addition to the light falling off the crop sensor because it's a full frame lens). That said, I also believe that instead of buying another camera or a TC, it might make more sense to combine the costs into a single camera, slightly older, with a BSI sensor, with higher pixel count, and without an anti-aliasing filter. That would give overall sharper images, and expand the ability to crop in post (instead of having to switch cameras).
I locked the ISO and Aperture and let the camera choose the shutter speed to show that the R8 with the extender was loosing approximately a stop of light. But yes a higher pixel count full frame sensor would be able to be cropped to the cropped sensor size with similar results.
Assuming you're using the same lens, a crop sensor camera does not give you the same reach as full frame camera with an extender. The R8 having greater reach should generally provide you with a somewhat better image. What might have been a better test was to compare the M50 with the R8 without the extender shooting in crop mode. Chances are since both cameras are 24 megapixels, the M50 may yield a better image as you essentially are using all the pixels in the M50 as opposed to the cropped R8.
The R50 without the extender gives a field of view equivalent to 480mm on a full frame camera using it's whole sensor of 24mp the R8 with extender is the same as a 420mm lens again using it's whole sensor of 24mp no crop on the sensor involved on either camera
The crop sensor gives you more reach without the extender than the full frame camera. The R50 has a 1.6X crop so the 300mm is equivalent to 480mm on the R8 while the extender is 1.4X which makes the 300mm on the R8 420mm but it’s not cropping the sensor you still are using all 24megapixels on the R8 like the R50.
Next time you compare these two setups you might want to consider keeping the shutter speed the same between both cameras. In all your tests, the R8 had an unfair advantage because it had double the exposure length over the crop sensor. There was no point in matching ISO levels between both cameras as ISO is just a tool to get a proper exposure for a given shutter speed. i.e. if you were taking a photo of a bird in flight would you try and photograph it with the R8 at half the shutter speed of the crop sensor camera? I think not, as you would risk motion blur on the R8.
I kept the iso fixed and let the camera set the shutter speed to show that the R8 with the extender had approximately one stop less light compared to the R50 without the extender I wasn’t trying to show how to correctly expose for any given situation.
@@GrandadsReviews If you are trying to compare image quality between both camera/lens setups you should be using the same shutter speed. ISO is just gain of the sensor and ISO values are not necessarily equivalent between cameras, especially between different sensor sizes. If you allowed the R50 to have the same length of exposure as the R8 it would have performed a lot better and in some cases may have outperformed the R8 due to higher pixel density (as long as the lens can resolve that high of pixel density).
@@GrandadsReviews For this test to have been fair, you should have chosen to have the aperture on both set ups wide open F4.0 and F5.6 (which you did), the shutter speed the same (i.e. 1/16s vs 1/16s), ISO set to Auto, and keep the exposure compensation at 0.0 on both setups to ensure equivalent exposures between setups.
Interesting results. And yet strangely enough the depth of field increases with smaller sensor cameras which can often result in sharper pictures, apertures being equal. I think the higher ISO had a lot to do with the images dropping off. I find with these kind of tests, it’s good to lock the exposure so the camera doesn’t meter differently for each photo.
I agree with the fact the greater noise made a difference regarding locking the exposure I wanted to show the loss of light using the extender giving the crop sensor a advantage.
Thanks a lot for this comparison. I believe it would have been slightly more useful it you had used the same shutter speed and auto-iso (shorter exposure time collects less light, which leads to worse signal to noise ratio, in addition to the light falling off the crop sensor because it's a full frame lens). That said, I also believe that instead of buying another camera or a TC, it might make more sense to combine the costs into a single camera, slightly older, with a BSI sensor, with higher pixel count, and without an anti-aliasing filter. That would give overall sharper images, and expand the ability to crop in post (instead of having to switch cameras).
I locked the ISO and Aperture and let the camera choose the shutter speed to show that the R8 with the extender was loosing approximately a stop of light. But yes a higher pixel count full frame sensor would be able to be cropped to the cropped sensor size with similar results.
Assuming you're using the same lens, a crop sensor camera does not give you the same reach as full frame camera with an extender. The R8 having greater reach should generally provide you with a somewhat better image. What might have been a better test was to compare the M50 with the R8 without the extender shooting in crop mode. Chances are since both cameras are 24 megapixels, the M50 may yield a better image as you essentially are using all the pixels in the M50 as opposed to the cropped R8.
The R50 without the extender gives a field of view equivalent to 480mm on a full frame camera using it's whole sensor of 24mp the R8 with extender is the same as a 420mm lens again using it's whole sensor of 24mp no crop on the sensor involved on either camera
I experienced the images from the crop sensor sharper but of course with a litle more noise.
The crop sensor gives you more reach without the extender than the full frame camera. The R50 has a 1.6X crop so the 300mm is equivalent to 480mm on the R8 while the extender is 1.4X which makes the 300mm on the R8 420mm but it’s not cropping the sensor you still are using all 24megapixels on the R8 like the R50.
🎉🎉🎉🎉
Next time you compare these two setups you might want to consider keeping the shutter speed the same between both cameras. In all your tests, the R8 had an unfair advantage because it had double the exposure length over the crop sensor. There was no point in matching ISO levels between both cameras as ISO is just a tool to get a proper exposure for a given shutter speed. i.e. if you were taking a photo of a bird in flight would you try and photograph it with the R8 at half the shutter speed of the crop sensor camera? I think not, as you would risk motion blur on the R8.
I kept the iso fixed and let the camera set the shutter speed to show that the R8 with the extender had approximately one stop less light compared to the R50 without the extender I wasn’t trying to show how to correctly expose for any given situation.
@@GrandadsReviews If you are trying to compare image quality between both camera/lens setups you should be using the same shutter speed. ISO is just gain of the sensor and ISO values are not necessarily equivalent between cameras, especially between different sensor sizes. If you allowed the R50 to have the same length of exposure as the R8 it would have performed a lot better and in some cases may have outperformed the R8 due to higher pixel density (as long as the lens can resolve that high of pixel density).
@@GrandadsReviews For this test to have been fair, you should have chosen to have the aperture on both set ups wide open F4.0 and F5.6 (which you did), the shutter speed the same (i.e. 1/16s vs 1/16s), ISO set to Auto, and keep the exposure compensation at 0.0 on both setups to ensure equivalent exposures between setups.
Interesting results.
And yet strangely enough the depth of field increases with smaller sensor cameras which can often result in sharper pictures, apertures being equal.
I think the higher ISO had a lot to do with the images dropping off.
I find with these kind of tests, it’s good to lock the exposure so the camera doesn’t meter differently for each photo.
I agree with the fact the greater noise made a difference regarding locking the exposure I wanted to show the loss of light using the extender giving the crop sensor a advantage.
Yes, you can see the that the R50’s images are brighter in this test.
Good experiment. I enjoyed the video.