I see a lot of questions comparing full frame (e.g EF for Canon, FX for Nikon) and crop lenses (e.g. EF-S for Canon, DX for Nikon) but I can't find the answer to what would be the differences between the photos taken with say a 50mm f/1.4 EF and EF-S lenses both used with
- same APS-C sensor sized camera
- same ISO
- same f/1.4 f-stop
- same focal length
- same shutter speed
What would be the resulting differences in the photos? Which one would
- be brighter than the other due the EF-S lens concentrating the light more? no that's wrong. Both put the same amount of light from the same FoV on the sensor.
- have greater depth-of-field? neither
- less problems towards the edges? generally the full frame
- more lens flare? generally the full frame lens unless there is, or you provide more shading
- anything else? not really, unless you start down the road of which one is typically of better build quality.
Edit: Added the answers from what seems to be the general consensus from the multiple answers and comments.
Results: My desire to buy a fast medium-high quality lens compatible with both full frame and crop camera's doesn't have to be hampered by the APS-C sensor size of my current camera. This means I'm willing to part with more money to get a higher performance/quality lens as the performance/quality will be useful now and when I upgrade my camera. Though reading reviews of some full frame lenses with short focal lengths, look out, as some are really only made to perform well on crop cameras even though they fit on a full frame camera and will give you a full frame picture, the edge quality is very bad.