An error or is it like that?

Ive heard a lot of people calling the 1D (I, II, III, IV) fullframe. But since its an APS-H sensor id like to know if it is? I mean it is 1.3 times smaller than "real" fullframe like the 5d series.

Is it fullframe or did the people i heard this from make an error?

It's not "full frame"...

DunnoWhen wrote in post #16252658
It's not "full frame"...

Depends which model 1D... the 1Dx is FF

vk2gwk wrote in post #16252679
Depends which model 1D... the 1Dx is FF

Shucks, you can't go changing the question on me like that. How will I ever get anything right if you do that?

It wasn't right either. Among Canon's 1D-series camera bodies, the following are APS-H (crop factor 1.3):

• 1D
  
• 1D Mark II
  
• 1D Mark IIn
  
• 1D Mark III
  
• 1D Mark IV

• 1Ds
  
• 1Ds Mark II
  
• 1Ds Mark III
  
• 1DX

Anders is correct.
Any of the 1Ds models and the 1DX are all full frame.
The non "S" models are all 1.3 crop.

apersson850 wrote in post #16252698
It wasn't right either. Among Canon's 1D-series camera bodies, the following are APS-H (crop factor 1.3):

• 1D
  
• 1D Mark II
  
• 1D Mark IIn
  
• 1D Mark III
  
• 1D Mark IV

These are full frame (crop factor 1.0):

• 1Ds
  
• 1Ds Mark II
  
• 1Ds Mark III
  
• 1DX

This is correct, with just my one added niggle. The Canon 1.3X format sensors are not the same size nor the same aspect ratio as the APS-H film format. I think it is stupid of Canon to re-use the names of a (now defunct) film system to try and describe their two smaller dSLR formats when neither of these formats are the same size as APS-C or APS-H.

The APS-H name is the especially egregious one though, as the aspect ratio isn't even the same.

That the 1Dx and 1Ds lines are really fullframe i know. But i heard alot people calling their 1D fullframe so its not just me xD

davidfarina wrote in post #16252811
That the 1Dx and 1Ds lines are really fullframe i know. But i heard alot people calling their 1D fullframe so its not just me xD

Perhaps you saw the s and thought they were just being plural?

"Since I have full frame with my 1Ds" meaning their 1Ds and not multple 1D3s?

Seriously though, many just leave the s off when they talk about their camera, so it can get confusing. It will get easier from here though, as it seems that perhaps Canon has abandoned the 1D crop body and they will just go with FF from this point forward.

I do know about the discrepancy between the original definition of APS-C, APS-H and APS-P vs. the use of these terms in the digital domain.

I just used the nomenclature which Canon has adopted for themselves. At least the APS-C is reasonably close to the sensor format in the relevant Canon cameras (16.7*25.1 mm vs. approx 15*22 mm).

But as pointed out above, APS-H ("High Definition") had a 16:9 ratio, not 3:2, being 16.7*30.2 mm. Still, it's not too far from the 18.7*28.1 mm you see in the 1D Mark III, for example.

You have to be careful with manufacturer labeling. I can't count the number of USB devices I've seen listed as "full speed" in contrast to "low speed" - when in fact they are both USB 1.1.

apersson850 wrote in post #16252978
I do know about the discrepancy between the original definition of APS-C, APS-H and APS-P vs. the use of these terms in the digital domain.

I just used the nomenclature which Canon has adopted for themselves. At least the APS-C is reasonably close to the sensor format in the relevant Canon cameras (16.7*25.1 mm vs. approx 15*22 mm).

I'm not blaming you. It's more Canon that I'm frustrated with on mis-appropriating names from a defunct film system.

I much prefer the Nikon format names of 'DX' and 'FX' which I think are handy, easy to remember and precise.

Canon should have done something similar. I think they were trying to give photographers something familiar when they described the sensors in the D30, D60, dRebel and 10D as 'APS-C' in size. And as you note, at least there they were only off by about 11% linear.

But things get sillier when you call the middle format 'APS-H'. The reality of the APS film system was that it exposed a single strip of film 16.7mm tall on the short axis. The different so-called 'formats' of the APS system were simply crops along the long axis from APS-P (panoramic) down to APS-H and APS-C.

So Canon seems kind of stupid once you realize that all APS film formats are 16.7mm on the short axis, while Canon uses the names to describe two different 2:3 ratio formats with 15mm and 18.7mm short side lengths.

JeffreyG wrote in post #16253068
I'm not blaming you. It's more Canon that I'm frustrated with on mis-appropriating names from a defunct film system.

I much prefer the Nikon format names of 'DX' and 'FX' which I think are handy, easy to remember and precise.

Canon should have done something similar. I think they were trying to give photographers something familiar when they described the sensors in the D30, D60, dRebel and 10D as 'APS-C' in size. And as you note, at least there they were only off by about 11% linear.

But things get sillier when you call the middle format 'APS-H'. The reality of the APS film system was that it exposed a single strip of film 16.7mm tall on the short axis. The different so-called 'formats' of the APS system were simply crops along the long axis from APS-P (panoramic) down to APS-H and APS-C.

So Canon seems kind of stupid once you realize that all APS film formats are 16.7mm on the short axis, while Canon uses the names to describe two different 2:3 ratio formats with 15mm and 18.7mm short side lengths.

Silly that such a big manufacturer misleads their customers for marketing purposes..

Hasn't happened before either...

Will never happen again!

apersson850 wrote in post #16252698
It wasn't right either. Among Canon's 1D-series camera bodies, the following are APS-H (crop factor 1.3):
[LIST]

1D

1D Mark II

1D Mark IIn

1D Mark III

How does Canon justify the cost of these cameras with an APS sensor?