{"id":6330,"date":"2026-07-25T07:19:13","date_gmt":"2026-07-25T07:19:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/whisperingcat.co.uk\/wp\/?post_type=article&p=6330"},"modified":"2026-07-25T07:51:44","modified_gmt":"2026-07-25T07:51:44","slug":"how-the-61-mp-sensor-changed-the-way-i-think-about-camera-systems","status":"publish","type":"article","link":"https:\/\/whisperingcat.co.uk\/wp\/article\/how-the-61-mp-sensor-changed-the-way-i-think-about-camera-systems\/","title":{"rendered":"How the 61 MP sensor changed the way I think about camera systems"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Do you really need multiple camera systems to cover all your photographic needs? Or can a single full-frame body with a high-resolution sensor comfortably fulfil several different roles?<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"\/
Image from Wikipedia<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Most discussions about high-resolution cameras revolve around sharpness, enormous prints and the ability to crop heavily. Far less attention is paid to the flexibility <\/em>that comes with the current generation of 60MP+ FF sensors. Having so many pixels, can one camera adequately fill many roles simply by changing lenses and spending those pixels prudently?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Firstly, I want to make clear this article isn’t an argument that everyone should buy a 61 MP camera, or a review of a particular model. It’s an exploration of how a high-resolution body changed the way I think about camera systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let’s take a look.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My background<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Many photographers recognise there is no such thing as one camera that can do it all and (sometimes reluctantly) run more than one system. Perhaps one high resolution camera, one fast camera, one lightweight camera and so on. This can solve multiple photographic problems. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

But it comes at a cost. More expensive gear to buy, more complexity, redundant lens systems, batteries and accessories. And worst of all, that horrible oppressive ever-present question: which camera shall I use today?<\/em> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, the question in my mind has been, is there an alternative for the general-purpose photographer? The 61MP sensor has opened up new possibilities but it requires a little flexibility of thought.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For many years I have run a m4\/3 system. It provides everything I need because printing is my preferred output medium, but not large prints. At A3+, perhaps even A2, m4\/3 is fine for printing and it got the job done while remaining a lightweight system. My most used lens on m4\/3 is the Lumix 14-140mm superzoom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But as always with m4\/3, thoughts of FF lurk ominously in the background. I wanted to explore fast primes and shallow depth of field. I picked up a used full frame Sony A7Riv with the intention of using it exclusively with fast primes while retaining my 4\/3 system for general photography.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

All was hunky dory at first and I grew comfortable with running two systems. But, after a few months something began to nag at me\u2026it gradually dawned on me that my m4\/3 Lumix G9 body was larger<\/em> than the Sony and about the same weight. I was already using the Sony for shallow depth of field and getting comfortable with it, and as much as I love the G9, I began to question exactly what I was gaining over the Sony by continuing to use it as my primary camera. Looking at it objectively, the lenses are certainly smaller and lighter than full frame lenses. But there is no benefit in body size with a premium body like the G9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This realisation made me start to seriously question the utility of running the two systems. I began to ask: maybe it was possible to squeeze more flexibility out of the full frame camera and do away with the need for two parallel systems. Could the Sony system do both jobs with a single body? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sony FF cameras come with a built in APS-C crop mode and Sony have a range of lightweight and compact crop lenses available for their APS-C range of cameras. With previous FF sensors, dropping down to APS-C mode came with serious reductions in pixel count which made the APS-C crop more of an emergency option than a serious practical increase in system flexibility. But with the 61MP family, APS-C mode brings you 26MP, which is similar territory to the majority of dedicated APS-C bodies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The A7R IV isn’t simply a full-frame camera with a crop mode. It is effectively a 61 MP full-frame camera and a 26 MP APS-C camera sharing the same body. Add Sony’s 4:3 crop option and the sensor comes surprisingly close to the resolution and proportions of a Micro Four Thirds camera. That led me to a bigger question: Could one camera body actually replace three<\/em> different systems? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The rest of the article explores that idea…and one more option I’ll get to later… <\/p>\n\n\n\n

What follows is based entirely on my own photography and the way I work. Your priorities may be completely different, so think of this as an exploration rather than a recommendation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1. Full-frame as a native format <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

I hope there is little controversy over the idea of running a full-frame camera in its native format! <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Larger sensors offer a blend of advantages and disadvantages. The larger light-gathering area means less noise (especially at high ISO) and more dynamic range, the bigger sensor means less magnification needed for printing, which means fewer visible artefacts. The extra pixels provide for retaining detail and sharpness in large prints. The downsides are more weight and bulk, and higher cost than smaller systems (generally). If you accept the trade-offs, a full-frame high resolution camera provides exactly the benefits it says on the tin. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

2. Full-frame as an APS-C body<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Here is where the controversy really starts. A crop body is supposed to be smaller, lighter and cheaper. I would not want to replace a dedicated aps-c body with a full frame body (although to be honest there is almost no difference in size and weight between the A7R C and the A6700, they are almost twins). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

No, the idea for me would be to repurpose my A7Riv occasionally. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The key to this is the 18-135mm superzoom. It’s small, light and quite sharp. My use case would be to include this lens in my full-frame outfit and use it as a backup for those occasions (the evening for example) where I wanted to leave the full-frame gear in the hotel and just wander around with a lighter, simpler superzoom outfit. I could of course always use a second APS-C body for this, but 18-135mm in APS-C crop mode provides a 26MP option every bit as useful as a dedicated APS-C body and the combination makes for a comfortable carry. And crucially, this solution means I would not need to learn a new body, nor agonise over choice of camera. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Normanton church, Rutland water – A7Riv in APS-C crop mode with 18-135mm OSS<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

3. Full-frame as a super M4\/3 body<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

I prefer the 4:3 squarer ratio of m4\/3 – it’s one reason why I use a m4\/3 system. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, given that the A7Riv is about the same carry size and weight as my Lumix G9 which I mainly use with the 14-140mm, is there much of a loss re-purposing the A7Riv to APS-C crop mode and switching to 4:3 aspect ratio with the 18-135mm? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Configured like this, I’d have: <\/p>\n\n\n\n