D750 vs X-T1

AC016

AC016

Senior Member
Many people seem to think that FF has a huge advantage over APS-C. We will let them keep thinking that. Furthermore, some people say they can tell the difference between a photo shot with a FF camera and an APS-C camera. Okay, sure, they have a 50/50 chance of getting it right. Though, some people with very good eyes and good knowledge of DOF, will put some education into their guess.

So, here we go. In the photos below, which one was taken by the D750 and which one by the X-T1? Give reasons why you think your answer is correct.

gallery_3519_1672_11486.jpg
 
J

J-see

Senior Member
AC016 said:
Interesting conclusion.
Click to expand...

It's just the way the hardware works. When light is good, it all doesn't matter what sensor one has but the moment light gets low, differences show.

It's about pixel pitch. Basically the smaller the sensor pixel, the more advantage when it comes to detail but the larger, the better in low light. Since it can count more photons, its SNR is better which results in less noise.
 
Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
AC016 said:
Interesting conclusion.
Click to expand...
It's also an accurate one. Individual pixel-size matters.

Your test shot, IMO, is fine for a fun guessing game but if you want to get serious, do a similar test under less "ideal" conditions. In my experience with ASP-C and Full Frame sensor cameras, the differences come out when the shot isn't quite so "easy". Try this same test using low light, or under extreme dynamic range; put some distance between the subject and the background, put some objects IN the background, have a subject with fine detail, contrast and wide tonal gradient. And lets see pics that are more than 400 x 600 pixels that have been "Saved for Web". Lets look at some of those shots using 100% crops... I assure you, difference will appear.

....
 
AC016

AC016

Senior Member
Horoscope Fish said:
It's also an accurate one. Individual pixel-size matters.

Your test shot, IMO, is fine for a fun guessing game but if you want to get serious, do a similar test under less "ideal" conditions. In my experience with ASP-C and Full Frame sensor cameras, the differences come out when the shot isn't quite so "easy". Try this same test using low light, or under extreme dynamic range; put some distance between the subject and the background, put some objects IN the background, have a subject with fine detail, contrast and wide tonal gradient. And lets see pics that are more than 400 x 600 pixels that have been "Saved for Web". Lets look at some of those shots using 100% crops... I assure you, difference will appear.

....
Click to expand...

Oh, you're back..... and yes, it's for a bit of fun and discussion. At the end of the day, i will give all the details of the shoot.
 
T

TedG954

Senior Member
AC016...... There's always ONE.

2350605418_NoFun_answer_2_xlarge.gif


PS..... I've never seen a 100% Crop Gallery Show. But, I'll bet they're interesting.
 
Last edited:
B

Blade Canyon

Senior Member
J-see said:
It's about pixel pitch. Basically the smaller the sensor pixel, the more advantage when it comes to detail but the larger, the better in low light. Since it can count more photons, its SNR is better which results in less noise.
Click to expand...

I understand this concept, and it's why some folks say the D4S is better in low light than the D810, but that also means the D600 should perform better in low light than the D810, (pixel size 5.9 v. 4.8) and I don't see many people saying that's the case. Maybe I'll do my own test tonight.

Let me add that, if the aperture settings were the same, then I'd agree with Marcel that the D750 is the pic on the left. This is based almost exclusively on DoF.
 
Last edited:
Top