I like crop mode because my enjoyment of wildlife photography is as much watching the animals in the field as it is the photos. My longest lens is 400mm and I'm on a full frame body. I know I can crop in post, but for me it's simply more fun have the subject larger in the viewfinder. I use the camera as an observation tool as much as I use it for photography and I'll happily trade some resolution for a better observation experience while I'm out there.
I use crop mode when I need to mainly for small birds where I know I’m going to be cropping anyway (a) for the focus benefits you mentioned and (b) because it’s sometimes easier just to be able to see the subject larger in the frame.
You’ve really nailed the main point here in that it’s all about what is in the display when using crop mode. So many photographers seem to say it gives them “more reach” or a more telephoto lens. But they leave out “in the display.” Not on the card. You’ve made a good case for judicious use of crop mode - AF performance being the strongest.
Honestly speaking, considering how many people believe "MFT and APS-C gives you more reach", i'm sure many people forget that they loose resolution and can just crop in post, but i definitely agree it's biggest benefit is in the viewfinder or screen experience.
Great to hear somebody FINALLY mention auto focus as a benefit of crop mode. I have found it really useful for high school soccer with kids running in front of your subject. I have an R5 and find single point works best (on a 100-500)
Great video Brent👏🏻I too own a Canon R5 and use crop mode. It can be useful for certain situations where the subject is small in the frame to focus on 👍📸
I use the Sony a7RV and have it set up that with the push of a button I am able to go between 400 and 600 on my 100-400 zoom and get photos of 26 MP which is more than enough. Considering that I now have a photo that is 6240 on the long edge there is considerable room for cropping if needed before we approach the 2160 threshold you referenced. At the same time, I am able to maintain a f 5.6 aperture at 600 and that is fantastic in lower light situations. In fact, I find myself in lower light situations more times than I care to explain but it is always happening. In those situations, not only is my f stop better but I am able to shoot at higher shutter speeds which is a great help as I do almost all of my shooting handheld. In addition, the combination of lower shutter speeds and lower ISO's is a combination that cannot be beat. As I have aged the weight difference between a 100-400 zoom, which offers great flexibility, and say a 400 or 500 prime with a TC I am enjoying my shooting much more. Also, with a TC you need to shoot at higher ISO's because that f4 or 5.6 can become f8 or 11.2. So, give me a lighter weight combination that shoots at lower ISO's and at higher shutter speeds while still leaving me room to crop further. By the way I cannot say in my experience AF acquisition is better, but I do understand your logic and will look further into that issue.
I hope more new and growing photographers watch your channel for this objective, honest, accurate, and logical content. I've been making photographs for over 20 years and grew as a photog during the time when digital photo tech developed rapidly and these type of stigmas developed rapidly along with it. It hurt and slowed the progress of many photogs learning at that time. Fortunately, I didn't have the money to buy the next best camera body every year and had to stick with an old full-frame pro-sumer camera for a while (sadly, years past it's prime), and even with so many incredible cameras on the market, I still continued to get compliments on my work. That helped confirm for me that tech doesn't always supersede the final image...and frankly I feel like I became a better photographer for it. Having to be creative with what you have (significant limitations and all) is what I feel makes a better photographer and creative. So thank's for passing on the good knowledge, Brent. Lastly, (and I may sound old saying this) but I think it would be so valuable for all photographers that have only learned digitally to go out buy a K1000 with a nice 50mm prime on it (or something similar) and shoot on that at least once a week for a year. I guarantee it would improve their work...and perhaps their life.
Great video, coming from a cropped 7D to an R5 cropping has its advantages, especially in doing wildlife photography. You make a great point about just getting out there and experimenting and see what works for you. But videos like yours do a great job of explaining the concepts and how cropping works.
So, so very pleased to see this video as I have also found the AF aspect and ability to compose an advantage at times even if just an enthusiast when using my R5! What brought this home yesterday was when testing a gifted old Nikon D90 with a 170-500 Sigma lens for a relative, with its paltry 12.3 MP images. It was a good reminder that despite all the new tech advantages its the photographers skill and ability to compose and take the image that is still a differentiator...
I'm a believer in doing what I have to do (legally and ethically) to get the shot. Really good points regarding megapixels. I have never had a client, customer question megapixels. The only people obsessed with megapixels are other photographers. Do you want the shot or not? Assuming I am already using my biggest lens: First choice, get closer. Second, use an APS-C camera. Third, use a teleconverter. Fourth, use crop mode. Last, crop in post. The reason I put crop in post last is because I find I get better shots when I can "see" what I'm shooting. If the subject is far away in the viewfinder, it becomes increasingly more difficult to time bursts or visualize the final image. Also, crop mode is kind of an optical crop, while cropping in post is a digital crop. Whether it make a difference,?, but I feel it could.
Nice discussion of crop mode. I shot birds in rainforest. Going to teleconverter looses 1-2 stops. Ouch!! The crop mode (R5 w/ 100-500 RF) is good to help AF find and lock on target. If AF is not an issue, I use noraml full, as also with BIF.
I use crop mode on occasion on my R5 with the 100-500. For all the people debating it with numbers. Just try it is the best advice! In my experience, in low light with small subjects it really helps you get sharp images. IMO, it does assist the autofocus. I’m in the serious amateur category. I will never afford the big primes, and weight is an issue, so this option is another tool for me. The Post processing tools and AI are getting better and better, so who knows what we will be doing with our files over the next few years! I’d rather get a sharp image of the perfect behavior, or interaction, than worry about MP in the field!
Cropping is fine. I do crop when I have to. And the 45mp R5 works beautifully for that. I just don't agree with opinions like "if you crop a lot, then you better use a crop camera" or that crop cameras have any advantages over FF. I find such ability to crop a huge advantage itself. Plus, the 1.6x crop doesn't turn the 500F4 into 800F4. It is going to be 800F6.4 equivalent. And the crop ISO 100 is equivalent to FF ISO 250. So, no free lunch here! )) When we crop in post, the image quality drops, even if it still seems to be just as good, because there's plenty of it to begin with. But, this is very subjective and many people fall into this trap. Throwing away data means degrading image quality, unless you are not going to utilize it anyways. And, if you are not going to utilize the full potential of your camera gear, then perhaps you don't need it in the first place. Well, for me, the answer is - Get a larger screen with plenty of megapixels! )) Any modern camera is overkill for a phone screen, for a tablet, for a laptop, or even for a standard 27" monitor. They are just too small to show us the whole picture in full glory. Size matters!
I’ve shot close to 300,000 shots in the last 2 years, every single one in “crop mode” ! Oh wait, I shoot with the R7 😀 lol My first mirrorless camera was the Canon R5. It was a fine camera, but I almost never had the reach I needed, even with the 800 F11. Of course I tried the crop mode, but it dropped my mp’s from 45, to 17 ! Lame ☹️ That, plus there was just something lost in crop mode that I really can’t put into words. I finally “upgraded” to the R7, which has nearly twice the pixel density as the R5. Long story short, I love / hate my R7’s 😀 lol Sucks that they do not have an available grip. Slow readout means shutter roll, and some focus pulsing too. And the buffer should be larger. But in the end, 60% extra reach trumps all these negatives. I sure am anxious for a new and improved R7 Mk II though 🙂👍 For me, 1280mm seems pretty normal. And it’s great for the mostly smaller birds I chase.
Brett, I really appreciate this video. It shows us what the pro’s do in real life situations! Sometimes I think we can get caught up with technology and expensive gear analysis. It’s great to see this functionality used in the field. For me, it’s another tool in the box. I do get better autofocus results in low light and small subjects. Love your advice to “just try it”! Why miss a great opportunity for a sharp shot over a perceived issue with MP!
Hi Brent, Personally Great video! Believe it or not, I was thinking about buying the RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS USM. For trips where I don't want to take my RF 600mm f/4 and RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1 L IS USM with me. But if I would use the 1.6 crop mode I would have the perspective of an RF 160-800mm with f/4.5-7.1. Better aperture and 40mm larger focal length range. With 17 MP. RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS USM RF 160-800mm f/4.5-7.1 L IS USM Not to bad, I would think. I also would think it depends on how many MP a sensor has. The 45 MP of the R5 gives you good reserves. According to Canon you still have 17 MP if you use the 1.6 crop mode. But what hapepns, if you have 22 MP? I would definitely use the crop mode or crop the image if I have no other option. It also depends on what the images are used for. If the images are just being used for a website or just to show to family and/or friends, then the MP may not be such a big issue. It is clear that you no longer have as many reserves when editing if you crop a image of a 22 MP sensor with a factor of 1.6. I'm not saying there are no reserves left! I came from a EOS 5D Mark III and startet the digital photographing with a EOS 20D. But I see now what is possible with 45 MP. But I see now what is possible with 45 MP. Do I need this as a hobby photographer? No way. But do I want it? Absolutely, as long as I've the money it. Uwe Greetings from Germany near airport Frankfurt am Main
There really are a ton of people down here who completely misunderstand how F-stops work. F-stop is the focal lenght divided by the front diameter of the lens. It has nothing to do with the sensor size. So for a certain amount of light, and a certain iso sensitivity, and a certain shutter speed, you will get a given exposure. So small sensor sizes are not less sensitive to light. Small sensors have smaller photosights for the same rez. Therefore they will have more noise at low light levels. That is all. Also, if you use a shorter lens on a crop sensor in order to get the same image size, the depth of field will be deeper. So a 500mm F4 lens on a crop sensor will be F4 exposure, but the depth of field will be similar to a 800mm F5.6 on a full frame. So the image is NOT darker on the crop factor. Just like if you crop in post processing, it does not make the image go darker for crying in a bucket!
Definitely give it a try and see if it works out for you! But also, we're actually in Scotland right now, so no fire danger here, lol. And we live in Silver City, which is like 4 hours from ruidoso, so we're all good at home too... for now.
I really enjoyed the video. I have a couple of questions. How were you able to hand hold the 500mm lens in crop mode? Would you ever use crop mode for astro? If not, why not?
I usually have the 1.4 tc on and am in crop mode on top of that, for 1120mm effective focal length, always handheld. Just lots of practice I guess. You get used to it. As for your crop mode for astro question, same answer applies. If I know I'm going to crop anyway, and crop mode won't mess up my composition, then sure, I might use it for astro as well. I think I did actually do that in a video a while back but I don't remember which one, only that I was using my 70-200, probably for a smaller nebula or something and I knew I needed all the reach I could get.
It's always an option. For me, personally, though, the R7 was more frustrating than anything else. I had it for quite a while before finally selling it and going back to my R5.
Hello I shoot an a7R with 61 mpx with my trusty 300mmf2.8 GMaster (so light 1.470g) for wildlife so I try to fill the frame as possible and when I crop I can feel the soul of my subject through their eyes😉
I never use crop mode. There might be other ways to crop an image that I can take advantage of if I have all the pixels. I don't think using crop mode make the tracking better or worse.
Many commentators overlook the improved AF in crop mode, simply because the subject is larger in the frame. Thanks for emphasizing this important advantage. FWIW, I find the same is true with my 1.4x TC, which appears to make it easier for the AF to lock onto the larger eye. Thanks, too, for the balanced pros and cons.
i mean, it's not the case. The camera doesnt have to AF though the viewfinder. It uses the data directly from the sensor, and the only difference it makes is that in crop mode it ignores most of the pixels... well, just like a reduced af area would do. If the subject is 100 pixels on the sensor, it's still 100 pixels when you use crop mode. it doesnt change anything.
@@andreas_rr Thanks for the clarification. That makes sense. I use an R7, which is "permanently" in APSC crop mode, with 32MP on the sensor, and I am impressed by the AF performance. I may have been inadvertently extrapolating from my experience with the 1.4x TC, which does increase the image size on the sensor and (anecdotally) seems to improve the AF.
@@wellingtoncrescent2480 yes absolutely. The TC can improve the AF in terms of reliability etc, as the subject appears larger, but at the same time it comes with the downside that the camera communicates with the TC, which in it's turn communicates with the lens, thus slowing down the AF a little bit (it might not make a huge difference, but when you're shooting at lets say 40FPS, each frame has ideally 25ms to compute the AF, communicate it to the lens and then mechanically move the lenses. That's why at those high FPS it gets tight and a TC can get noticeable, even if it's "only" a delay of one or two ms. And this additional lag is typically the reason why the TC is considered to worsen the AF.
@@andreas_rr That makes sense. I try to avoid the maximum frame rate of 30 fps with the R7, which is only available with the electronic shutter (ES). This has to do mostly with the rolling shutter, which is striking with the ES (sensor readout 42 mS). So I try to restrict myself to electronic first curtain or mechanical shutter, where the maximum frame rates is 15 fps. In fact, I often shoot at 5-7 fps because I don't like sorting in post :). At these frame rates, the AF performance with the TC doesn't appear to suffer.
@@andreas_rrin practice I can attest the autofocus is better in crop mode when the subject is larger. You can try and debate with theory and science but if in actuality it performs better there must be something you’re not considering.
People obsess over MP which is fine but do the math for the 4k resolution it's only what 8-8.5mp? So yes use it but again use cropping isn't going to kill your photo.
I dont have a FF . Using crop mode simply crops to the centre APS-C section. How does this improve AF? Because I am sure you still use only those AF sensors in the APS-C area? Or does it not do this somehow?
yea it doesnt. All it changes is the area which the AF is searching the subject inside. And that can be done just as much by using a limited AF area, it should make the same effect. The only thing i can think of is that the processor is ignoring >50% of the pixels might free up some computing power that benefits the AF, but i hardly believe that would make a noticeable difference, as that would mean any high MP cameras (like 61MP) would have a noticeably slower AF than a low MP camera (like a 20MP), if they use the same processor.
So, if I took some tape and masked off all but the central 1mm x 1mm area of the sensor, I would have a 20,000mm f4 lens ? Wow !"Crop Mode" does not give you a longer focal length, or even effective focal length. It just crops the image. Let's rename Crop Mode, and call it Pretend Mode.
It allows you to visualize the image better. As others have mentioned, I like to "see" what I am photographing better. When a subject "looks" far away and small in the viewfinder it makes it more difficult to pre-visualize the final image. It becomes easier to miss behavioral nuances, facial expressions, movements that might be minute. Sure, I can digitally crop in post, but as he said, if I know I'm going to crop anyway, sometimes it can be advantagious to see the subject better in the camera. For some of us, getting a closeup view at the time is half the fun.
@@alansach8437 i mean, for the convenience, you're right, but that doesnt invalidate @edkaminski6355's very appropriate critique. Mix-matching physical units with "pretend" units should not be done and is very far from nescessary to make the point "crop mode can be more convenient in some situations".
Totally agree!. Those who claim crop mode extends reach do not understand optical zoom versus digital crop. Look out a window with multiple panes. Does just looking out a single pane zoom in the view? No, it's just a crop.
Speaking of megapixels in cameras My Pentax K10D is only a 10.4 megapixel The Pentax k-01 is 16.8 megapixels mirrorless The Pentax K-70 24.4 megapixels APSC And my full frame is a Pentax K1 Mark II 36.8 megapixels and both the K1 Mark II and the k-01 used the exact same battery I got lucky And I use all three of them at different times of course because I only use one camera at a time
Mr. Pedantic here! 1.6x crop mode is NOT equivalent to 800mm f/4, for the same reason slapping a x2 onto it does not make it a 1000mmm f/4. You're not using all the light the aperture is receiving, your effective aperture is also divided by 1.6. 125mm/1.6 = 78.125, which is f/6.4 at 500mm. So it's equivalent to a 800mm f/6.4.
You are wrong. The aperture does not change. The depth of field seems deeper- by about one stop. The total amount of light on the entire sensor does not matter. Wat matters is the light intensity - the amount of light per unit surface area. Thst remsins the same. And that is why we use the Fstop scheme
@@GerhardBothaWFF You are right, but by the same logic, the focal length does not change either, it is equivalent to cropping your image. What I'm saying is that if you want to use focal length equivalent to describe your reduced field of view, you also need to use the f/ratio equivalent. The f stop scheme describes the ratio between the focal length and the physical aperture. The aperture of the 500mm f/4 IS 125mm. If you want to pretend it's a 1000mm because you crop, you have to pretend the ratio is now f/8
@@GerhardBothaWFF photonics expert here (=graduated electrical engineer with a focus in photonics). @pocpoc47 is right. Please dont tell people they're wrong when you dont have the expertise in that subject. Photographers use Fstops because it's convenient, not because it's physically accurate. Because it's not. The total amount of light maters. fact. The amount per area doesnt. fact. the amount per pixel matters. and it matters werther you add pixels together. And to open up a rabbit hole that i'm not willing to go further into, ISO is physically not compareable from one camera to the other; it masks the reasons why it ends up being the same brightness on the screen; and most important of all ISO is very, very, very far from having any physical coherent meaning.
@@pocpoc47 very well said. Only correction i'd make is a TC does make it overall 1000mm, just a 1000mm F/8 (which is exactly what the camera sais though). You're adding lenses, thus increasing the physical focal length, while keeping the same 125mm=1000mm/8 aperture / front element.
@@andreas_rr ISO is basically signal amplification, which can be analog or digital, and is indeen another can of worms :p Very interesting though when you do astrophotography and need to optimize SNR
The megapixel debate will never going away as long as digital cameras and photographers exist. I am curious Brent if you had much experience with wildlife shooting using a medium format camera and your opinions? I understand the significant cost differences between full frame and medium format but what about the quality of the images, especially those that are cropped?
I'm not convinced that crop mode helps the camera to better autofocus. That would entail the autofocus algorithm scanning *only* the sensor's cropped area when looking for autofocus points. If it's scanning the entire sensor, then choosing the autofocus points that fall inside the cropping area, then no advantage will exist. Recall that crop mode isn't changing the size of the sensor. RAW files are still being generated. I'm not saying you're right ir wrong, I'm just pointing out the intuitive idea that a camera in crop mode will focus faster in reality depends on how the focusing algorithm works, on a full frame sensor.
Strange as it may seem . A Video by Simon D'tremont says the opposite of in camera cropping that he posted last week . Then a week later you say different lol Also video by Mr Paton he says that the pre capture in R7 isn't great basically not worth a chuff . Yet the images i have seen posted by Mr Arnott on fb are top quality and he uses the R7 , R6 mrk2 .. when i first saw them i presumed the images were taken with the new sony . They were that good !!! .
the only 2 benefits of in-camera cropping are: 1. convenience of seeing a larger subject in the viewfinder 2. less data and everything that comes with (buffer gets filled more slowly and so on) Neither of the two are wrong, and i wouldnt even go so far to say it's differing preferences. I would say a good photographer should understand the benefits and problems and know when to make the trade-ofs. If he needs to see the subject larger in the frame and is 100% sure that giving up the outer pixels won't be missed, even Simon would accept that a crop-mode might be beneficial. It might not be worth the effort for him to go in the settings and change it for a single shot, but it's just a scale how much the different benefits are valued, and there's a, even if very slim, point, at which he'd change to crop mode. Let me give you a very specific situation, so that you can think of it for yourself: You've been watching a bird for hours or days, waiting for the perfect shot of your life, that you're sure of it will bring you the first place in the competition you've dreamed of since your childhood. You know exactly how the bird behaves, and you know exactly where and when to make the shot. The only issue: you cant get close enough to see the bird very well. You forgot or left your TC at home (not knowing this situation will arise), which is 500km away, so that's not an option either. So, here's your choice: Have a mediocre vision on the bird but save some unnescessary peripheral pixels, or use crop mode, have a much better vision on the bird so that you wont miss the perfect moment, but you loose some peripheral pixels. What do you do? i'm sure 99,99% of Photographers realise that the crop-mode has it's benefits in this situation. And yes, having the possibility to zoom in the viewfinder while keeping the full sensor readout would probably be even better, but that's not how it is, and you have to live with the options you have. Crop mode is an option, with drawbacks and benefits, and even if the benefits are small, there can always be a situation where it's worth it. And noone can tell you, whats right or wrong. They can only help you understand what the benefits and risks are, so that you can make the right decisions yourself.
Yeah, that was definitely coincidental, because I filmed, uploaded and scheduled this video over 3 weeks ago, before Simon's video came out. I had no idea he was doing his. On another note concerning him saying the opposite about crop mode, just keep in mind, he said that with his own style of photography in mind, or at least as someone who wants to have the absolute best way of getting more reach with maximum benefits and minimum IQ loss. Not everyone shoots with that same intention, and everyone has different levels of acceptance for final image quality. So while he's certainly not wrong with anything he said in his video, he's also not completely right either, because not everyone wants the same results with their photography. All I'm trying to say in this video is when and why I personally use crop mode (and that I'm happy with my own results even at the expense of the downsides), and that you shouldn't be afraid to try it yourself and see if you're personally happy with the results you can get from it.
Young man I think you are very lucky to have an 800 mm F4 Yes they do exist but the company decided to up the price nearly 570% from normal and from what they should cost which really isn't that much I mean come on now 800 mm F4 prime should cost no more than $1,200 maximum but that's not what they're selling for or trying to for that matter and I think you are a lucky person to have one just keep on shooting
I know that you know crop mode doesnt make the lens a 800mm F/4, and i'm aware of how popular the misconception is and it makes up for a very clickable title, but please don't call it "800mm F/4" for the sakes of physics and sincerity
For the love of God, please! Stop mixing focal length equivalent values with non equivalent apertures. Cropped 400f4 cropped by 2 is equivalent to 800f8, *not* 800f4. A 800mm f4 would require a 200mm front lens. As would any equivalent crop system. You did not shoot that.
@@GerhardBothaWFF for the love of god, stop talking shit YOURSELF. Your argument is extremely poor. Does the focal length change when cropping? No. do you know what the F in F/4 is? no. does the apperture (diameter of the front lens) change? No. The aperture of a 500mm F/4 is 500mm divided by 4, which is 125mm. this does not change though cropping. repeat after me: this. does. not. change. though. cropping. Now repeat it again: this. does. not. change. though. cropping. If you have no idea of what you are talking about, FOR THE FKING LOVE OF GOD SHUT THE F*CK UP AND DONT INSULT SOMEONE WHO KNOWS HIS STUFF
@@GerhardBothaWFF No one said it would turn darker. Since you don't understand lens equivalence, feel free to look it up. E.g. google "What is equivalence and why should I care"
![Eminem - Fuel (feat. JID) [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/t5H_CewqpKA/mqdefault.jpg)
![Jack Harlow - Hello Miss Johnson [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Q86_nlRoIGw/mqdefault.jpg)
I like crop mode because my enjoyment of wildlife photography is as much watching the animals in the field as it is the photos. My longest lens is 400mm and I'm on a full frame body. I know I can crop in post, but for me it's simply more fun have the subject larger in the viewfinder. I use the camera as an observation tool as much as I use it for photography and I'll happily trade some resolution for a better observation experience while I'm out there.
I never use crop mode but the AF issue is a great point. I'll have to try it.
I use crop mode when I need to mainly for small birds where I know I’m going to be cropping anyway (a) for the focus benefits you mentioned and (b) because it’s sometimes easier just to be able to see the subject larger in the frame.
You’ve really nailed the main point here in that it’s all about what is in the display when using crop mode. So many photographers seem to say it gives them “more reach” or a more telephoto lens. But they leave out “in the display.” Not on the card. You’ve made a good case for judicious use of crop mode - AF performance being the strongest.
Honestly speaking, considering how many people believe "MFT and APS-C gives you more reach", i'm sure many people forget that they loose resolution and can just crop in post, but i definitely agree it's biggest benefit is in the viewfinder or screen experience.
I also use crop mode. I use my R7. And when the light gets low, I put on the speedbooster and I get a 550mm F2.8 equivalent lens
Agreed I use crop mode a lot when shooting small birds like warblers
Great to hear somebody FINALLY mention auto focus as a benefit of crop mode. I have found it really useful for high school soccer with kids running in front of your subject. I have an R5 and find single point works best (on a 100-500)
Your images make an excellent case for the technique.
Great video Brent👏🏻I too own a Canon R5 and use crop mode. It can be useful for certain situations where the subject is small in the frame to focus on 👍📸
I use the Sony a7RV and have it set up that with the push of a button I am able to go between 400 and 600 on my 100-400 zoom and get photos of 26 MP which is more than enough. Considering that I now have a photo that is 6240 on the long edge there is considerable room for cropping if needed before we approach the 2160 threshold you referenced. At the same time, I am able to maintain a f 5.6 aperture at 600 and that is fantastic in lower light situations. In fact, I find myself in lower light situations more times than I care to explain but it is always happening. In those situations, not only is my f stop better but I am able to shoot at higher shutter speeds which is a great help as I do almost all of my shooting handheld. In addition, the combination of lower shutter speeds and lower ISO's is a combination that cannot be beat.
As I have aged the weight difference between a 100-400 zoom, which offers great flexibility, and say a 400 or 500 prime with a TC I am enjoying my shooting much more. Also, with a TC you need to shoot at higher ISO's because that f4 or 5.6 can become f8 or 11.2. So, give me a lighter weight combination that shoots at lower ISO's and at higher shutter speeds while still leaving me room to crop further. By the way I cannot say in my experience AF acquisition is better, but I do understand your logic and will look further into that issue.
I hope more new and growing photographers watch your channel for this objective, honest, accurate, and logical content. I've been making photographs for over 20 years and grew as a photog during the time when digital photo tech developed rapidly and these type of stigmas developed rapidly along with it. It hurt and slowed the progress of many photogs learning at that time. Fortunately, I didn't have the money to buy the next best camera body every year and had to stick with an old full-frame pro-sumer camera for a while (sadly, years past it's prime), and even with so many incredible cameras on the market, I still continued to get compliments on my work. That helped confirm for me that tech doesn't always supersede the final image...and frankly I feel like I became a better photographer for it. Having to be creative with what you have (significant limitations and all) is what I feel makes a better photographer and creative. So thank's for passing on the good knowledge, Brent. Lastly, (and I may sound old saying this) but I think it would be so valuable for all photographers that have only learned digitally to go out buy a K1000 with a nice 50mm prime on it (or something similar) and shoot on that at least once a week for a year. I guarantee it would improve their work...and perhaps their life.
Great video, coming from a cropped 7D to an R5 cropping has its advantages, especially in doing wildlife photography. You make a great point about just getting out there and experimenting and see what works for you. But videos like yours do a great job of explaining the concepts and how cropping works.
Hey thanks for the kind words, I really appreciate it, and I'm glad the video helped!
I’m going to have to try this.
So, so very pleased to see this video as I have also found the AF aspect and ability to compose an advantage at times even if just an enthusiast when using my R5! What brought this home yesterday was when testing a gifted old Nikon D90 with a 170-500 Sigma lens for a relative, with its paltry 12.3 MP images. It was a good reminder that despite all the new tech advantages its the photographers skill and ability to compose and take the image that is still a differentiator...
I'm a believer in doing what I have to do (legally and ethically) to get the shot. Really good points regarding megapixels. I have never had a client, customer question megapixels. The only people obsessed with megapixels are other photographers. Do you want the shot or not? Assuming I am already using my biggest lens: First choice, get closer. Second, use an APS-C camera. Third, use a teleconverter. Fourth, use crop mode. Last, crop in post. The reason I put crop in post last is because I find I get better shots when I can "see" what I'm shooting. If the subject is far away in the viewfinder, it becomes increasingly more difficult to time bursts or visualize the final image. Also, crop mode is kind of an optical crop, while cropping in post is a digital crop. Whether it make a difference,?, but I feel it could.
Nice discussion of crop mode. I shot birds in rainforest. Going to teleconverter looses 1-2 stops. Ouch!! The crop mode (R5 w/ 100-500 RF) is good to help AF find and lock on target. If AF is not an issue, I use noraml full, as also with BIF.
Thank you, such a great breakdown.
I use crop mode on occasion on my R5 with the 100-500. For all the people debating it with numbers. Just try it is the best advice! In my experience, in low light with small subjects it really helps you get sharp images. IMO, it does assist the autofocus. I’m in the serious amateur category. I will never afford the big primes, and weight is an issue, so this option is another tool for me. The Post processing tools and AI are getting better and better, so who knows what we will be doing with our files over the next few years! I’d rather get a sharp image of the perfect behavior, or interaction, than worry about MP in the field!
Cropping is fine. I do crop when I have to. And the 45mp R5 works beautifully for that. I just don't agree with opinions like "if you crop a lot, then you better use a crop camera" or that crop cameras have any advantages over FF. I find such ability to crop a huge advantage itself. Plus, the 1.6x crop doesn't turn the 500F4 into 800F4. It is going to be 800F6.4 equivalent. And the crop ISO 100 is equivalent to FF ISO 250. So, no free lunch here! )) When we crop in post, the image quality drops, even if it still seems to be just as good, because there's plenty of it to begin with. But, this is very subjective and many people fall into this trap. Throwing away data means degrading image quality, unless you are not going to utilize it anyways. And, if you are not going to utilize the full potential of your camera gear, then perhaps you don't need it in the first place. Well, for me, the answer is - Get a larger screen with plenty of megapixels! )) Any modern camera is overkill for a phone screen, for a tablet, for a laptop, or even for a standard 27" monitor. They are just too small to show us the whole picture in full glory. Size matters!
I’ve shot close to 300,000 shots in the last 2 years, every single one in “crop mode” ! Oh wait, I shoot with the R7 😀 lol
My first mirrorless camera was the Canon R5. It was a fine camera, but I almost never had the reach I needed, even with the 800 F11. Of course I tried the crop mode, but it dropped my mp’s from 45, to 17 ! Lame ☹️ That, plus there was just something lost in crop mode that I really can’t put into words.
I finally “upgraded” to the R7, which has nearly twice the pixel density as the R5.
Long story short, I love / hate my R7’s 😀 lol Sucks that they do not have an available grip. Slow readout means shutter roll, and some focus pulsing too. And the buffer should be larger. But in the end, 60% extra reach trumps all these negatives. I sure am anxious for a new and improved R7 Mk II though 🙂👍
For me, 1280mm seems pretty normal. And it’s great for the mostly smaller birds I chase.
Brett, I really appreciate this video. It shows us what the pro’s do in real life situations! Sometimes I think we can get caught up with technology and expensive gear analysis. It’s great to see this functionality used in the field. For me, it’s another tool in the box. I do get better autofocus results in low light and small subjects. Love your advice to “just try it”! Why miss a great opportunity for a sharp shot over a perceived issue with MP!
Hi Brent, Personally Great video!
Believe it or not, I was thinking about buying the RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS USM. For trips where I don't want to take my RF 600mm f/4 and RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1 L IS USM with me.
But if I would use the 1.6 crop mode I would have the perspective of an RF 160-800mm with f/4.5-7.1.
Better aperture and 40mm larger focal length range. With 17 MP.
RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS USM
RF 160-800mm f/4.5-7.1 L IS USM
Not to bad, I would think.
I also would think it depends on how many MP a sensor has. The 45 MP of the R5 gives you good reserves. According to Canon you still have 17 MP if you use the 1.6 crop mode. But what hapepns, if you have 22 MP?
I would definitely use the crop mode or crop the image if I have no other option.
It also depends on what the images are used for. If the images are just being used for a website or just to show to family and/or friends, then the MP may not be such a big issue.
It is clear that you no longer have as many reserves when editing if you crop a image of a 22 MP sensor with a factor of 1.6.
I'm not saying there are no reserves left! I came from a EOS 5D Mark III and startet the digital photographing with a EOS 20D.
But I see now what is possible with 45 MP. But I see now what is possible with 45 MP.
Do I need this as a hobby photographer? No way.
But do I want it? Absolutely, as long as I've the money it.
Uwe
Greetings from Germany near airport Frankfurt am Main
There really are a ton of people down here who completely misunderstand how F-stops work. F-stop is the focal lenght divided by the front diameter of the lens. It has nothing to do with the sensor size. So for a certain amount of light, and a certain iso sensitivity, and a certain shutter speed, you will get a given exposure. So small sensor sizes are not less sensitive to light. Small sensors have smaller photosights for the same rez. Therefore they will have more noise at low light levels. That is all. Also, if you use a shorter lens on a crop sensor in order to get the same image size, the depth of field will be deeper. So a 500mm F4 lens on a crop sensor will be F4 exposure, but the depth of field will be similar to a 800mm F5.6 on a full frame. So the image is NOT darker on the crop factor. Just like if you crop in post processing, it does not make the image go darker for crying in a bucket!
Thanks Brent. I'll try it for sure. Have you survived the fires there? I've been worried about you and camera lady.
Definitely give it a try and see if it works out for you! But also, we're actually in Scotland right now, so no fire danger here, lol. And we live in Silver City, which is like 4 hours from ruidoso, so we're all good at home too... for now.
@@BrentHall Good!
Basically I have been in the camp of people saying "Why crop mode? I can crop later in post editing.". But after your video I will give it a shot.
I really enjoyed the video. I have a couple of questions. How were you able to hand hold the 500mm lens in crop mode? Would you ever use crop mode for astro? If not, why not?
I usually have the 1.4 tc on and am in crop mode on top of that, for 1120mm effective focal length, always handheld. Just lots of practice I guess. You get used to it.
As for your crop mode for astro question, same answer applies. If I know I'm going to crop anyway, and crop mode won't mess up my composition, then sure, I might use it for astro as well. I think I did actually do that in a video a while back but I don't remember which one, only that I was using my 70-200, probably for a smaller nebula or something and I knew I needed all the reach I could get.
I am conflicted about whether to upgrade from an R6 to an R5 or a lens. I do feel the need to crop for birds. I have the 100 to 400mm currently.
Wouldn’t a better solution to using crop mode be to use a crop sensor camera like the R7 if need more reach? That way you’re giving away pixels.
It's always an option. For me, personally, though, the R7 was more frustrating than anything else. I had it for quite a while before finally selling it and going back to my R5.
Hello I shoot an a7R with 61 mpx with my trusty 300mmf2.8 GMaster (so light 1.470g) for wildlife so I try to fill the frame as possible and when I crop I can feel the soul of my subject through their eyes😉
I never use crop mode. There might be other ways to crop an image that I can take advantage of if I have all the pixels. I don't think using crop mode make the tracking better or worse.
Many commentators overlook the improved AF in crop mode, simply because the subject is larger in the frame. Thanks for emphasizing this important advantage. FWIW, I find the same is true with my 1.4x TC, which appears to make it easier for the AF to lock onto the larger eye. Thanks, too, for the balanced pros and cons.
i mean, it's not the case. The camera doesnt have to AF though the viewfinder. It uses the data directly from the sensor, and the only difference it makes is that in crop mode it ignores most of the pixels... well, just like a reduced af area would do. If the subject is 100 pixels on the sensor, it's still 100 pixels when you use crop mode. it doesnt change anything.
@@andreas_rr Thanks for the clarification. That makes sense. I use an R7, which is "permanently" in APSC crop mode, with 32MP on the sensor, and I am impressed by the AF performance. I may have been inadvertently extrapolating from my experience with the 1.4x TC, which does increase the image size on the sensor and (anecdotally) seems to improve the AF.
@@wellingtoncrescent2480 yes absolutely. The TC can improve the AF in terms of reliability etc, as the subject appears larger, but at the same time it comes with the downside that the camera communicates with the TC, which in it's turn communicates with the lens, thus slowing down the AF a little bit (it might not make a huge difference, but when you're shooting at lets say 40FPS, each frame has ideally 25ms to compute the AF, communicate it to the lens and then mechanically move the lenses. That's why at those high FPS it gets tight and a TC can get noticeable, even if it's "only" a delay of one or two ms. And this additional lag is typically the reason why the TC is considered to worsen the AF.
@@andreas_rr That makes sense. I try to avoid the maximum frame rate of 30 fps with the R7, which is only available with the electronic shutter (ES). This has to do mostly with the rolling shutter, which is striking with the ES (sensor readout 42 mS). So I try to restrict myself to electronic first curtain or mechanical shutter, where the maximum frame rates is 15 fps. In fact, I often shoot at 5-7 fps because I don't like sorting in post :). At these frame rates, the AF performance with the TC doesn't appear to suffer.
@@andreas_rrin practice I can attest the autofocus is better in crop mode when the subject is larger. You can try and debate with theory and science but if in actuality it performs better there must be something you’re not considering.
People obsess over MP which is fine but do the math for the 4k resolution it's only what 8-8.5mp? So yes use it but again use cropping isn't going to kill your photo.
12 MP should be enough for everyone.... but sometimes 8mp are also enough :)
Btw, focus system on Canon works way better in crop mode, period.
Great images!
I dont have a FF . Using crop mode simply crops to the centre APS-C section. How does this improve AF? Because I am sure you still use only those AF sensors in the APS-C area? Or does it not do this somehow?
yea it doesnt. All it changes is the area which the AF is searching the subject inside. And that can be done just as much by using a limited AF area, it should make the same effect.
The only thing i can think of is that the processor is ignoring >50% of the pixels might free up some computing power that benefits the AF, but i hardly believe that would make a noticeable difference, as that would mean any high MP cameras (like 61MP) would have a noticeably slower AF than a low MP camera (like a 20MP), if they use the same processor.
So, if I took some tape and masked off all but the central 1mm x 1mm area of the sensor, I would have a 20,000mm f4 lens ? Wow !"Crop Mode" does not give you a longer focal length, or even effective focal length. It just crops the image. Let's rename Crop Mode, and call it Pretend Mode.
It allows you to visualize the image better. As others have mentioned, I like to "see" what I am photographing better. When a subject "looks" far away and small in the viewfinder it makes it more difficult to pre-visualize the final image. It becomes easier to miss behavioral nuances, facial expressions, movements that might be minute. Sure, I can digitally crop in post, but as he said, if I know I'm going to crop anyway, sometimes it can be advantagious to see the subject better in the camera. For some of us, getting a closeup view at the time is half the fun.
@@alansach8437 i mean, for the convenience, you're right, but that doesnt invalidate @edkaminski6355's very appropriate critique. Mix-matching physical units with "pretend" units should not be done and is very far from nescessary to make the point "crop mode can be more convenient in some situations".
Totally agree!. Those who claim crop mode extends reach do not understand optical zoom versus digital crop. Look out a window with multiple panes. Does just looking out a single pane zoom in the view? No, it's just a crop.
Speaking of megapixels in cameras
My Pentax K10D is only a 10.4 megapixel
The Pentax k-01 is 16.8 megapixels mirrorless
The Pentax K-70 24.4 megapixels APSC
And my full frame is a Pentax K1 Mark II 36.8 megapixels and both the K1 Mark II and the k-01 used the exact same battery I got lucky
And I use all three of them at different times of course because I only use one camera at a time
Mr. Pedantic here! 1.6x crop mode is NOT equivalent to 800mm f/4, for the same reason slapping a x2 onto it does not make it a 1000mmm f/4. You're not using all the light the aperture is receiving, your effective aperture is also divided by 1.6. 125mm/1.6 = 78.125, which is f/6.4 at 500mm. So it's equivalent to a 800mm f/6.4.
You are wrong. The aperture does not change. The depth of field seems deeper- by about one stop. The total amount of light on the entire sensor does not matter. Wat matters is the light intensity - the amount of light per unit surface area. Thst remsins the same. And that is why we use the Fstop scheme
@@GerhardBothaWFF You are right, but by the same logic, the focal length does not change either, it is equivalent to cropping your image. What I'm saying is that if you want to use focal length equivalent to describe your reduced field of view, you also need to use the f/ratio equivalent. The f stop scheme describes the ratio between the focal length and the physical aperture. The aperture of the 500mm f/4 IS 125mm. If you want to pretend it's a 1000mm because you crop, you have to pretend the ratio is now f/8
@@GerhardBothaWFF photonics expert here (=graduated electrical engineer with a focus in photonics). @pocpoc47 is right. Please dont tell people they're wrong when you dont have the expertise in that subject.
Photographers use Fstops because it's convenient, not because it's physically accurate. Because it's not.
The total amount of light maters. fact.
The amount per area doesnt. fact. the amount per pixel matters. and it matters werther you add pixels together.
And to open up a rabbit hole that i'm not willing to go further into, ISO is physically not compareable from one camera to the other; it masks the reasons why it ends up being the same brightness on the screen; and most important of all ISO is very, very, very far from having any physical coherent meaning.
@@pocpoc47 very well said.
Only correction i'd make is a TC does make it overall 1000mm, just a 1000mm F/8 (which is exactly what the camera sais though). You're adding lenses, thus increasing the physical focal length, while keeping the same 125mm=1000mm/8 aperture / front element.
@@andreas_rr ISO is basically signal amplification, which can be analog or digital, and is indeen another can of worms :p Very interesting though when you do astrophotography and need to optimize SNR
The megapixel debate will never going away as long as digital cameras and photographers exist. I am curious Brent if you had much experience with wildlife shooting using a medium format camera and your opinions? I understand the significant cost differences between full frame and medium format but what about the quality of the images, especially those that are cropped?
I'm not convinced that crop mode helps the camera to better autofocus. That would entail the autofocus algorithm scanning *only* the sensor's cropped area when looking for autofocus points. If it's scanning the entire sensor, then choosing the autofocus points that fall inside the cropping area, then no advantage will exist.
Recall that crop mode isn't changing the size of the sensor. RAW files are still being generated.
I'm not saying you're right ir wrong, I'm just pointing out the intuitive idea that a camera in crop mode will focus faster in reality depends on how the focusing algorithm works, on a full frame sensor.
Strange as it may seem . A Video by Simon D'tremont says the opposite of in camera cropping that he posted last week .
Then a week later you say different lol
Also video by Mr Paton he says that the pre capture in R7 isn't great basically not worth a chuff .
Yet the images i have seen posted by Mr Arnott on fb are top quality and he uses the R7 , R6 mrk2 .. when i first saw them i presumed the images were taken with the new sony . They were that good !!! .
the only 2 benefits of in-camera cropping are:
1. convenience of seeing a larger subject in the viewfinder
2. less data and everything that comes with (buffer gets filled more slowly and so on)
Neither of the two are wrong, and i wouldnt even go so far to say it's differing preferences. I would say a good photographer should understand the benefits and problems and know when to make the trade-ofs. If he needs to see the subject larger in the frame and is 100% sure that giving up the outer pixels won't be missed, even Simon would accept that a crop-mode might be beneficial. It might not be worth the effort for him to go in the settings and change it for a single shot, but it's just a scale how much the different benefits are valued, and there's a, even if very slim, point, at which he'd change to crop mode.
Let me give you a very specific situation, so that you can think of it for yourself: You've been watching a bird for hours or days, waiting for the perfect shot of your life, that you're sure of it will bring you the first place in the competition you've dreamed of since your childhood. You know exactly how the bird behaves, and you know exactly where and when to make the shot. The only issue: you cant get close enough to see the bird very well. You forgot or left your TC at home (not knowing this situation will arise), which is 500km away, so that's not an option either. So, here's your choice: Have a mediocre vision on the bird but save some unnescessary peripheral pixels, or use crop mode, have a much better vision on the bird so that you wont miss the perfect moment, but you loose some peripheral pixels. What do you do? i'm sure 99,99% of Photographers realise that the crop-mode has it's benefits in this situation.
And yes, having the possibility to zoom in the viewfinder while keeping the full sensor readout would probably be even better, but that's not how it is, and you have to live with the options you have. Crop mode is an option, with drawbacks and benefits, and even if the benefits are small, there can always be a situation where it's worth it. And noone can tell you, whats right or wrong. They can only help you understand what the benefits and risks are, so that you can make the right decisions yourself.
Yeah, that was definitely coincidental, because I filmed, uploaded and scheduled this video over 3 weeks ago, before Simon's video came out. I had no idea he was doing his.
On another note concerning him saying the opposite about crop mode, just keep in mind, he said that with his own style of photography in mind, or at least as someone who wants to have the absolute best way of getting more reach with maximum benefits and minimum IQ loss. Not everyone shoots with that same intention, and everyone has different levels of acceptance for final image quality. So while he's certainly not wrong with anything he said in his video, he's also not completely right either, because not everyone wants the same results with their photography.
All I'm trying to say in this video is when and why I personally use crop mode (and that I'm happy with my own results even at the expense of the downsides), and that you shouldn't be afraid to try it yourself and see if you're personally happy with the results you can get from it.
I bought a high MP camera BECAUSE I need to crop. 😁
Young man I think you are very lucky to have an 800 mm F4
Yes they do exist but the company decided to up the price nearly 570% from normal and from what they should cost which really isn't that much I mean come on now 800 mm F4 prime should cost no more than $1,200 maximum but that's not what they're selling for or trying to for that matter and I think you are a lucky person to have one
just keep on shooting
I know that you know crop mode doesnt make the lens a 800mm F/4, and i'm aware of how popular the misconception is and it makes up for a very clickable title, but please don't call it "800mm F/4" for the sakes of physics and sincerity
Amazing images! Go Crop or go home.
YAAASSS! 😁
Good tips Brent. I’ve sorta forgotten about crop mode but I’m going to give it a try at AirVenture air show in a few weeks. Have a great trip.
Good tips Brent. I’ve sorta forgotten about crop mode but I’m going to give it a try at AirVenture air show in a few weeks. Have a great trip.
hire a couple of guys and find a canon 1200mm. jk
Or sell your house and buy one.
For the love of God, please! Stop mixing focal length equivalent values with non equivalent apertures. Cropped 400f4 cropped by 2 is equivalent to 800f8, *not* 800f4. A 800mm f4 would require a 200mm front lens. As would any equivalent crop system. You did not shoot that.
For the loce of God stop talking shit. If you shoot at F4 in FF, and you crop, does the image go darker? No.
@daran0815 THANK YOU
@@GerhardBothaWFF for the love of god, stop talking shit YOURSELF. Your argument is extremely poor.
Does the focal length change when cropping? No.
do you know what the F in F/4 is? no.
does the apperture (diameter of the front lens) change? No. The aperture of a 500mm F/4 is 500mm divided by 4, which is 125mm. this does not change though cropping. repeat after me: this. does. not. change. though. cropping. Now repeat it again: this. does. not. change. though. cropping.
If you have no idea of what you are talking about, FOR THE FKING LOVE OF GOD SHUT THE F*CK UP AND DONT INSULT SOMEONE WHO KNOWS HIS STUFF
@@GerhardBothaWFF No one said it would turn darker. Since you don't understand lens equivalence, feel free to look it up. E.g. google "What is equivalence and why should I care"