• Home
  • Reviews Index
  • Best Gear
  • Inspiration
  • Learn
  • Disclaimer
  • Staff/Contact Info
  • Media Kit
  • Membership
Bridging Tech and Creative Photography
Bridging Tech and Creative Photography
Bridging Tech and Creative Photography
News

Why Pro Body, Crop Sensor Cameras Deserve More Credit in the World of Professional Photography.

Brett Day
10 Comments
12/12/2018
2 Mins read
Screenshot (6)

Crop sensor cameras are far more advanced than they used to be, and deserve much more credit in the professional photography world.

Just a few short years ago it was pretty easy to say that APS-C and Micro Four Thirds cameras could never be used by professional photographers. Crop sensors cameras of yesteryear were known for poor high ISO performance, lacked a lot of features their much more expensive Full Frame brothers had, and often produced images that were lack luster. Times have changed in a major way though. Current APS-C and Micro Four Thirds crop sensor cameras like the Fujifilm X-T3, the Nikon D500, the Olympus EM-1 Mk II, and the Panasonic G9 have been adopted by professional photographers around the globe, and for good reason. 

There will always be some that believe you cannot call yourself a professional photographer unless you use a Full Frame camera. This a real shame because the latest crop sensor cameras destroy older crop bodies, and often perform equally as well as some Full Frame cameras. It’s really about time we start giving crop sensor cameras more credit. Chris Nichols from DPReview TV recently put the four pro-body, crop sensor cameras mentioned above through their paces to see how they could handle different types of photography. You may be surprised by the results.

There is no doubt that current crop sensor cameras are more than capable of being used in professional settings. Thanks to their vastly improved low light performance, enhanced autofocus and tracking systems, build quality, and the inclusion of features such as eye focusing and face detection, crop sensor bodies no longer lag behind Full Frame cameras bodies when it comes to features and performance. There is simply no reason why they can’t be used at a professional level, and it really is about time that the stigma that follows crop sensors goes away.

Do you intend to use, or do you already use one of the above crop sensor cameras for your professional work? Would you consider jumping over to crop sensor cameras from their larger Full Frame brothers? Let us know in the comment section below why you may, or may not make this move in the future.

Via DPReview TV

Cameras crop sensor Crop Sensor Cameras fujifilm nikon olympus panasonic Photography portraiture professional photography sports wildlife
Shares
Written by

Brett Day

Brett Day is the Gear Editor at The Phoblographer and has been a photographer for as long as he can remember. Brett has his own photography business that focuses on corporate events and portraiture. In his spare time, Brett loves to practice landscape and wildlife photography. When he's not behind a camera, he's enjoying life with his wife and two kids, or he's playing video games, drinking coffee, and eating Cheetos.
10 Comments
  1. Simon69

    04/16/2020 6:10 pm
    Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown
    Spot.IM/1.0 (Export)

    Anyone who takes photos, whether they are a hobbyist, an amateur or a pro, tend to look down on other photographers if they don’t have a full frame camera, and see APSC as second best. I am in the UK, and people in this country are obsessed with showing off, whether its watches, gadgets, cars, their house. I live in a small minded society, maybe its a British thing I don’t know, but a lot of people are really self important, obnoxious and arrogant, always trying to outdo everyone else with what they own, when in reality nobody else cares. As regards cameras, it has very little to do with the equipment, its the skill of the person taking the photos that counts. Ive sold framed prints with a supposed beginners Nikon D3300, and have done shoots in guest houses and car dealerships with it. I really don’t buy into the idea that you have to get top of the range gear to do the job, and I wouldn’t get a 5d mk iv on principle, and just to prove a point. I currently have images for sale taken on an iphone 6s ! Another reason I don’t need an expensive camera is because I’m always using a tripod in low light, I don’t shoot sports or moving objects or concerts, so I’m not worrying about image noise with high ISOs when I’m always at no more than ISO 400 anyway.

  2. Simon69

    04/16/2020 6:10 pm
    Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown
    Spot.IM/1.0 (Export)

    Fuji are awesome cameras, I had an XE-2 a few years ago, sadly had to return it as the metering was all over the place, but from the few images I managed to keep, the details light and tones were far superior to my Nikon D3300 at the time, and thats with 16mp compared to 24mp. I had to sell all my gear a few years ago, finances were a bit rubbish at the time and hope to get a new camera at some point to get back into it again. If I was in the position to buy now, id get the X Pro-2, because of the price and in all honesty, not worth paying for the extra features on the Pro-3 (I know a Cornwall news photographer that uses a Pro-2, Astia setting, brilliant images) and for property photography id just use a 16mm prime for interiors (im not a fan of wide angle lenses indoors, I don’t agree with ultra wide just so you can fit the whole room in the frame, it needs to look realistic), plus the 18-55 for everything else

  3. Simon69

    04/16/2020 12:05 pm
    Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown
    Spot.IM/1.0 (Export)

    Well said.

  4. Guest

    04/30/2019 11:06 pm
    Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown
    Spot.IM/1.0 (Export)

    The really interesting question to pursue here would be what real advantages those cameras might actually have over comparable or even more expensive full-frame cameras. Like faster operation or lonmger telephoto reach.

  5. Guest

    04/30/2019 11:06 pm
    Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown
    Spot.IM/1.0 (Export)

    I have been using the Panasonic Gh3 m43 for real estate for several years, it is still more advanced than any DSLR with the possible exception of the d850. And none of the new full frame mirrorless from canon or nikon are any better for my purposes. They don’t correct the lenses in- camera, the Nikons don’t have the fully articulated screen, they don’t offer the native wide-angle I need, I doubt they have the bracketing flexibility, (delays between shots etc). The dynamic range for the ff is only marginally better, the gh3 basically matches the 80d for dynamic range, and the gh3 is several models old! Having a waist-level touch screen, withers live view being the norm, AND a choice of the aspect ratio I need for shooting matters- what Panasonic did with that camera is fabulous and it continues to get better with the g9, etc.

  6. Guest

    04/30/2019 11:06 pm
    Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown
    Spot.IM/1.0 (Export)

    I use a Pentax K3ii, and nothing touches it for Landscape or Astrophotography. Sooo many features and well executed.
    I use a Olympus Pen EP-5 for travel photography, and I never get grief when I want to take photos of people. Now if I use a full frame and ask to take a photo, you would think I had asked for their first born…
    There is more to crop camera systems than people give them credit.
    Afterall – I can’t tell you the last time I needed to shoot at ISO 12,800+ (actually never)

  7. Guest

    04/30/2019 11:06 pm
    Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown
    Spot.IM/1.0 (Export)

    No mention of Pentax in here?

  8. Guest

    04/30/2019 11:06 pm
    Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown
    Spot.IM/1.0 (Export)

    Well said, Michael! Ultimately, it’s the client/customer who dictates whether a particular image (and by extension, format/sensor size) is commercially viable, and I certainly agree that for most commercial purposes, the differences between FF and APS-C are irrelevant. It’s the skill of the photographer that counts in the long run.

  9. Guest

    04/30/2019 11:06 pm
    Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown
    Spot.IM/1.0 (Export)

    I use crop bodies from Fuji/Nikon/Sony professionally. FACT: I’ve got folks that buy prints produced from those bodies. Customers can’t distinguish between full frame or not (I also use a couple of Nikon FX bodies) and don’t complain about bokeh quality or any other perceived characteristic. I shoot portraits, sports, and events. If you’re getting paid to do photo work on crop bodies, then it means it doesn’t matter.

  10. Guest

    04/30/2019 11:06 pm
    Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown
    Spot.IM/1.0 (Export)

    IMHO, the Fujifilm X-System has always been of “Professional” Quality since it’s debut a few years ago. Currently, I shoot the X-T3 with some stellar Fujinon lenses, and can create sharp, highly detailed poster prints at 24” x 36”. The Fujinon XF80mm f/2.8 Macro is the sharpest lens I’ve ever used in 40 years of photography, and I’ve also used Fujinon glass in my large format film days, so it’s obvious that Fujifilm knows optics. The X-T3 is their best sensor and processing engine technology to date, and for most applications, is more than sufficient. This “Full Frame” hype, I think, is more a marketing ploy than anything, especially when image processing apps such as Capture One are compatible with the Fuji Raw files. End of story.

Comments are closed.

Previous Post

Four of Our Favorite Wide Angle Lenses Under $500 for Sony Mirrorless Cameras

Next Post

Portrait Photography Tip: How to Make Your Model Feel Less Awkward

The Phoblographer © 2023 ——Bridging Tech and Creative Photography
Bridging Tech and Creative Photography
  • Home
  • Our Staff
  • Editorial Policies
  • Media Kit
  • Membership
  • App Debug