Except the weight, it's a great idea. I used zooms all the time, but once when I put a APSC prime on my FX30 i felt so free and able to do a lot more movements while filming.
Since I started photography back in 2005 I always bought full frame lenses because everyone argued that’s the way to go. Later, upgrading to a full frame camera, you already have the right lenses. Basically, I agree with this opinion, especially because people still argue in the same way. If it’s about me, I was never able to afford the money for a full frame camera, unfortunately. Now, almost two decades later, I’m very close to get my first full frame camera. And of course I do own full frame lenses. The reason I’m that close to my next step in photography is, I recognized people are suggesting to buy used camera. To me, that’s a game changer. Talking about used gear, especially in photography, should be much more appreciated. Anyways, love your content, keep and going and hopefully your channel will grow a lot in the future.
Other than focal length, it'll be less DOF too. Gotta multiple the F stop as well. I recommend FF lenses on APSC for future proof. You already save money for APSC body, why not get dope lenses. Lenses matter more for me.
Tq for the useful information! I am a APSC shooter but currently I bought a EF 70 - 200mm F4 OSS G2 lens. The image quality come out of my ZVE10 is very sharp and colour rendering is beautiful! Love this lens! It’s compact and lightweight! It definitely is a value for money 💰 investment! By the way the macro capability of this G2 lens is fantastic! So for far or near shooting range it’s convenient!
Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 is surprisingly good on the APS-C a6700. At the widest (42mm FF eqv), it is good for portraiture at f2.8. It can also zoom to 300mm (FF eqv). This is a very good all-purpose lens.
Wow that was very helpful. I am using a Sony ZV-e10 camera. And now we are trying to move away from the basic lens. Of course, you will struggle with the focal length, but you should consider a full-frame lens. thank you
for Nikon subframe (DX) lenses they can be used by most if not all FF (FX) DSLRs. You can enable "crop mode" in the FX camera so that it mimics a DX camera body. Yes you will lose some of the total sensor MP but that's going to happen anyway if you shoot at anything other the native sensor ratio. Which could be 4:3, 16:10, 16:9, depending on the specific camera body. I don't think that these optics-related issues are really the problem with buying and shooting a DSLR in this day and age. It's the in-camera image-processing options that really matter. Literally starting with HDR and NR settings. This particular video is showing a LOT of luminance noise which gives the video a grainy, "old-timey" look That noise could have been filtered-out in the camera. At 480p which I'm looking at now, the loss of Fine Detail probably would not even be noticeable. For an interior scene like this, it's ok. But these are more options that you will have to deal with shooting video. Shooting stills, NR can make a big difference in the results. And again, why take video like this with a DSLR and lens when it would probably look fine with a cellphone?
Subscribed after watching this one video! Exactly the question im looking for. For me, I am looking to use fullframe lens on apsc body, with a shift adapter to make an affordable shift lens solution on apsc. But Im always worry about apsc sensor couldnt resolve the fullframe lens well enough. i think your explanation cleared my doubt. Thanks!
One important thing you did not clarified. F-Stops, they change when you switch from APS to Full frame and visa-versa, this is extremely important factor for which I am looking for answers and nobody is talking about it,
dude, yes! If you shoot on a f2.8 lens on a crop sensor you're getting a f4.3ish equivalent. This is the biggest con and not mentioned in the video. I just learned this after years of shooting 4k/60 on my a74 on FF glass.
It's not really an "important factor" it's just that the F# at which an aps-c lens is sharpest is different than the corresponding full-frame lens and focal-length...because the lens is cheaper and thus at the same price point you can get better glass. The #1 factor is what level of camera performance do you need to be happy with your gear. It could be shit, it could be great, but if it's too big, heavy and expensive, you won't want to take it out to shoot it. Likewise if the shots suck. To really know if Camera & lens A are worth the extra money over Camera and lens B, you need to know the performance difference between the two and know what performance you need. You're not going to make the perfect choice the first time. Don't think about buying it. Buy it and try it. If you don't like it, return it in the return window and get a refund. Buy and try something else. If you want to save money, buy a lower-quality grade of gear on the used market. Heavily-used gear that is cosmetically imperfect, and "old gear", will cost way less than almost-new or like-new gear much less new gear. But if you have never shot a piece of gear yourself then you can't know how well it will perform for you. Today there really is no excuse for buying cheap garbage DSLR gear because decent gear is available at decent prices on eBay and everyone has a cellphone camera now which can take at least usable shots on most scenes. So this issue of "FF vs subframe lenses on subframe gear" has t start with two questions. #1 why are you shooting subframe gear in the first place. #2 what focal-length range are you trying to shoot over, with your one or two lenses that you want to buy. That is when you need to deal with crop-factor, and from there you need to know the DTMF charts, and that is going to get you to your choice of F#. I just would not bother buying any DSLR gear for shots under about 60 mm in 35mm effective, which a cellphone will take just fine. My go-to lens for DSLR shooting is the Tamron 28-300, but the 28-80 or so will do well-enough for a lot of scenarios. But again why carry and shoot a DSLR with a 28-80 (on an FX body) when I can take shots just as well with my cellphone? That all comes down to "needing a zoom" vs needing a cheap but effective camera". My Google 6a does have a "zoom mode" , though I usually used a fixed FL and crop afterwards. Where does the F# come into play? :) Only when you need more control of the lens. DOF and sharpness considerations. But basically I shoot at the optimum F# of the lens. If I can. Or close to it.
In general, pixels in full frame sensors are much bigger than APS-C sensors, a lens can get away with just to deliver enough clarity for the larger full frame pixel size, and any better clarity won't produce a clearer picture. So if you take a 12 megapixel full frame camera lens and put it on a modern 24 megapixel APS-C camera, you might find the lens not as clear as you would like. Hence, I will go for a more modern full frame camera lens if that's route I have to take. Some modern full frame cameras can go as high as 50 megapixels so their pixel size is just a hair bigger than that of the APS-C cameras, so those full frame lenses will be perfectly fine.
Would you make a video about the Sony 50mm 1.2 specifically on the fx30, how it does, how the breathing is, if the 75mm equivalent is good? Compared to the 50MM 1.4? PRETTY PLEASE
You are correct to a point, the image is affected by increased pixel density. A top end FF lens will be fine, but a mediocre one will be softer, basically the sensor will find all the flaws in the FF lens and magnify them. Tony Northrup can probably explain it better than me, but I noticed using a particular Sigma lens on a 5D3 and 7D2, the crop sensor image was noticeably softer.
APSC cameras tend to have a higher pixel density than full frame ones; sensor resolution is therefore higher in those cases. Using the same FF lens to frame the same image in the same way at the same aperture would show increased apparent depth of focus on APSC over FF. The trip is to buy the best FF lenses you can get. These lenses will work properly in both formats. Go for quality of rendering and low optical aberrations. People forget that the image projected onto the sensor is spherical and we are pressing a flat rectangular sensor onto that sphere. The best lenses have a very large sphere compared to the size of the sensor lesser lenses. High grade lenses designed for FF will be potentially better on APSC. Life gets tricky when we are looking for FF wides and FF super-wides for APSC and we often default to APSC designs at such moments. Modern lenses end up having to be extremely complex to work properly for short focal lengths. In any case we learn the characteristics of any lens/body combination and know how to get the effects we want from a particular pairing and the FF vs APSC becomes academic. It’s not a topic to set our hair on fire about. Just choose what gives the effect that you want and the freedom to create good images.
Assuming the same matrices, e.g. 24MPx, then on the APS-C matrix the pixel density will be higher, it's true because it's smaller, but the resolution will be the same. And it doesn't matter if it's FF or APS-C.
I'm thinking in buying the a6700 with the 35mm 1.4GM. I can get the pack for around 2,2k. My budget is around 2k and cannot have that glass with the a7iv for that price. Just the a7iv would be 1.9k...so I think I'll go that route for now
Honestly, matching APS-C lenses to the APS-C sensor has never been a priority for me at all, it's not like you are losing anything. An APS-C lens on an APS-C still has the same 1.5x crop factor
crop-factors only matter when you're comparing subframe gear to fullframe gear. If you only shoot subframe gear, then what do you care what 24 or 50mm effective in 35mm means.
@@paulhopkins1905 "buying full frame only future proofs your gear if you buy fullframe later" That's a nonsensical comment. You can buy FFs that will work fine with subframe lenses. You can buy subframes that work fine with FF lenses.This is not 1982.
@@touristguy87 what the hell dude, thats my whole damn point. Why pigeon hole yourself by buying APSC glass for your APSC camera when full frame works no differently and is future proof
I'm considering the sony 24mm 2.8g just because of the build quality and form factor, seems like a good lens to pair with the a6400. Do you think there's a better alternative with similar form factor?
I've just bought the SEL24F28G for my A6400 and I'm very happy with it. Especially because of the light and small size compared to similar focal lengths such as the 23mm or 30mm from Sigma. Together with the Sigma 56mm it is a perfect combination of focal length and compactness.
In my case I don’t have enough money to purchase 2 full frame cameras (a main one and a secondary one for shooting different angles at the same time). I’m currently using the Sony a7iv and I definitely need a second body but I doubt I’d the enough cash to invest into another Full Frame, especially when I already have 3 Full Frame lenses
Terimakasih telah berbagi. Saya pengikut baru saluran anda Tetapi saya tidak benar benar mengerti. Dua bulan lalu saya membeli camera Sony Zv e10 dan lensa sony 18-105g f4 minggu lalu saya menyewa lensa sigma 28-70 f2.8 untuk perbandingan. Tetapi kenapa jangkaun zoom lensa tersebut ( sigma) tidak sejauh lensa sony 18-105g Seharusnya jangkauannya sama Sony 18-105 ( APSC) Sigma 28-70 ( 42 - 105 ) ( FULL FRAME ) Saya harap anda menjelaskan nya Terimakasih kawan
… man, I use APSC lenses on my a7RV (still 26 MP) and also FF lenses on my a6700. To crop „in camera“ (aka using APSC on FF) is the same as crop in post. 🤷🏼♂️ The IQ is the same …
Does this translate to an anamorphic lenses as well? Example: looking into sirui 35mm full frame 1.66 x mount for my Fuji x-h1. I know I’d lose some of the frame but would the squeeze factor be messed up?
I use 50mm f1.8 Full frame lens on my ZV E10, Reason is it was 50$ cheaper, Never had any issue with autofocus, I use it on tripod so stablization was never a issue 😊
As far as I understand it, the exposure (brightness) will stay the same, but the bokeh (background blur) might change. This is because with a full frame lens on an apsc camera the image is cropped, so in order to get the same size image, you have to back up a little bit, which will make the bokeh smaller and therefore less blurry. But if you don't need the same size image and you're not backing up, the bokeh will be the same but on a cropped size image. It's complicated kind of, but that's how I understand it.
No. Using a 50mm f1.8 FF lens on a Crop sensor, is still a 50mm F1.8, but the image is cropped. Its not the same as focal length equivalence. So the amount of light hitting the sensor is exactly the same as if it would be on a FF camera. This is logical, because lens has not change, position has not change so all is the same except the image is a cropped from what you would have got from a full frame. That's why its called a crop sensor. 50mm is 50mm, you don't get better zoom (50mm x 1.5 crop factor = 75mm) just because you are using a crop camera. Too many mis-information on RUclips. Use your logic, how does a 50mm suddenly give you 1.5 time more OPTICAL zoom? Imagine a big man with big eyes looking through 50mm lens. Then a small child with small eyes looked through the SAME 50mm lens, will the little child suddenly get more optical magnification because his eyes is smaller? Anyway, its good to use FF lens on Crop because you are getting the best part of the glass. IBIS: Mirrorless Sensor sits inside the stabilisation system in the camera so the size of the lens does not affect the stabilisation so much.
Some correction. It's ok if the lens quality is good. You do lose resolution, but this is only visible in stills. You will need to consider line pairs (lp/mm) or line width (lw/ph - used to compare different sensor size) for resolution. For cheaper FF lenses it will be even worse on APS-C. A 26mp APS-C has the same density as the 61mp A7R5. Or to put it in more technical terms, you need more sharpness (lp/mm) for an APS-C lens to match the same sharpness of a FF lens. So you lose detail and resolution because the sensor is smaller so less line pairs for 18mm vs 24mm of the sensor dimension. E.g. an APS-C lens scoring 90lp/mm might be somewhere on par with a full frame lens scoring 70lp/mm (totally butchering the math, not an engineer). This applies mostly for stills. For video, it doesn't matter since 4K is only 8MP of resolution. For most modern Tamron or Sigma lenses and G/GM lenses, your mileage will vary depending on the quality of the lens. But for other budget lenses you are basically enlarging any flaw or lack of resolution of that lens. Or for vintage lenses, you're cropping out the rendering and goodness of the vintage lenses.
… how should I „lose“ resolution? using a FF lens on my a7RV (for example the 20 mm G) and shooting in APSC I will getting exactly the same picture (26 MP) in the same IQ like I shoot in FF mode and crop 1.5x in post, to get the same angle of view. 🤷🏼♂️ And using an APSC lens on my a7RV I will get nearly (off cause it’s not the same sensor) the same IQ in 26 MP I will get on my a6700 with the same lens.
@@TW-iu9zy Go read up on imatest website for resolution. Lets say you shoot and display a photo. It was done on the same lens, moved forwards/backwards to adjust for FOV changes. You're enlarging a smaller APS-C image circle into the same surface area of a monitor. Or a 20x30 print. What makes you think, a APS-C sensor would have the same level of detail as a FF sensor? Would you need a sharper APS-C lens so that no detail is lost during enlargement? Think about zooming in on a smartphone, or photoshop. Does a zoomed in image look the same as a zoomed out image? Would 90 line pairs x 24mm of a FF sensor have more or less line pairs than 90 x 18? It's just simple maths. With less line pairs, there is less detail and less resolution. If such things didn't matter, we would be shooting wildlife on a smartphone. Apart from the crappy plastic lens on smartphones (relative to real lenses), why is it that there's less detail captured? It's not about the megapixels. Why do smartphones fall apart when printed larger than a post card?
I think in good FF lens .If some high pixel ff camera can take good result (eg:A75R 61mp) should be fully support the optical requirements of APS-C crop size.
How do you know if my cam shoots 8mgp in video? I have a Sony zv-e10 I want the absolute sharpest quality possible preferably with a small zoom but not necessary which lens should I get like one telephoto zoom and then one 24 mm so it crops to about 35?
Bad idea. The distance between the rear lens element and the sensor is different on a full frame vs aps-c camera. I have a 24mm aps-c lens that performs better on my Rebel T7 camera than my 24-105 L lens. I could get a better comparison if I could test the aps-c lens on my full frame camera, but if it could be mounted on the full frame damage there would be a possibility of the mirror striking the lens and damaging the camera.
putting a 35 mm on a 1.5 times crop sensor does not make it a 52 mm lens. its just a crop on a 35 mm prospective. 52 mm lens will have a completly different prospective.
Sony Northrup claims that FullFrame Glass is not sharp on APSC. I don’t understand how that’s even possible when you’re using the bast portion of the image circle.
I've used all of my "full frame" lenses on APSC bodies, even on my Canon M bodies.... so what. Hmm 🤔 ... My 35-350mm on the M50 is fun. My 500mm on my Lumix M43 is a real hoot .. 1000mm
The only reason anyone should use a FF lens on APSC is you have both types of bodies and you want to interchange the lenses easily. Otherwise it is just meaningless waste of money. FF equivalent lens can be three times more expensive (or more) than their APSC counterparts.
Bodies come and go, a full frame lens is forever. Imagine buying a whole line of apsc lenses today and in 7 years you buy a full frame body and then also have to rebuy all the lenses in FF.
@@vvhalefccd Right and wrong at the same time. Lenses retain their values nicely. If you upgrade, you can use your APSC lenses on FF bodies and slowly swap them into FF lenses. Not everyone upgrades to FF. Do not take that as a "given".
@@vvhalefccd I have been with Sony APSC for 12 yrs (since NEX-5R) and I have no desire or intention to upgrade to FF for the types of shoots that I use it for. I am content, and I am sure I am not alone.
That doesn't mean it's bad You literally always also have a crop factor on every APSC lens too. In a perfect world go for it and use a f2.8 Sony GM 70-200 for your aspc
Nothing really extraordinary here. All Sony DSLRS, even the mirrorless series will shoot E lenses, the original Konica-Minolta 35mm film lenses. So you need a converter with the mirrorless series, and with the really-old screw-drive AF lenses you may have to worry about using an SWM lens instead, or trying to manual focus a screw lens on an SWM body. It's not an issue of compatibility. It is simply that lenses made for mirrorless cameras will be smaller & lighter in general. This is an absolute non-issue as long as you're aware of the performance characteristics of the lens that you're using, i.e. that you have at least seen the DTMF, CA and vignetting curves. The camera-body doesn't change the behavior of the lens. Having bought the body you are now choosing lenses for it. Anyone telling you that you "shouldn't" shoot FF lenses on apsc bodies should STFU unless they are willing to buy APSC lenses for you. People are great at telling other people that they should do things that they themselves don't have to do.
Me too. I just bought the Sony 20mm 1.8 for my A6700 and love it. Also have the 70-350 so thinking the 20-70 f4 would be the perfect lens to complete the trio. (95% for photography)
What a wiered logic to use ff lens on apsc camera. If you use ff lens that means you will never experience the true potential of apsc camera. Like I have a6600 with apsc and I take it everywhere. Even my kid use it so easily. On hiking my friends kept his FF frame camera in bag while I was carrying it like a point and shoot. So I tried his camera and it was fkng heavy. I would not buy it even if it was same price of apsc. FF only makes sense if u always use tripod or in studio. Nowadays camera are so good, if you know how to take pic u will get really really good pic no matter which camera.
Ehhh the crop factor has nothing to do with the lenses. And the crop factor is still 1,5 even if you use lenses made for Apsc cameras. Edit, there are way better videos demonstrating this issue than this, sorry.
Except the weight, it's a great idea. I used zooms all the time, but once when I put a APSC prime on my FX30 i felt so free and able to do a lot more movements while filming.
… yes, using the 20/1.8 G lens on my FX30 - amazing combo! 👍🏻
....because small-crop primes are generally lighter and smaller than large-crop zooms, and thus easier to maneuver.
Thanks for covering this, not finished the video yet, but it's something that I have wondered for a while.
ur the best in youtube for camera / lens / sony guy, i love ur footage and PHILISOPHICAL talks during your videos.
Since I started photography back in 2005 I always bought full frame lenses because everyone argued that’s the way to go. Later, upgrading to a full frame camera, you already have the right lenses.
Basically, I agree with this opinion, especially because people still argue in the same way.
If it’s about me, I was never able to afford the money for a full frame camera, unfortunately.
Now, almost two decades later, I’m very close to get my first full frame camera. And of course I do own full frame lenses.
The reason I’m that close to my next step in photography is, I recognized people are suggesting to buy used camera.
To me, that’s a game changer.
Talking about used gear, especially in photography, should be much more appreciated.
Anyways, love your content, keep and going and hopefully your channel will grow a lot in the future.
Thanks for watching!!
Yes, used gears are efficient in this game.
I always (almost) buy used one!
I buy lots of used gear and it’s great. There is however something very special about being the first person to actuate the camera.
some people need to have the latest & greatest gear, some don't...
Other than focal length, it'll be less DOF too. Gotta multiple the F stop as well. I recommend FF lenses on APSC for future proof. You already save money for APSC body, why not get dope lenses. Lenses matter more for me.
If you have an APS-C camera the type of the lens does not matter on the depth of field.
Tq for the useful information! I am a APSC shooter but currently I bought a EF 70 - 200mm F4 OSS G2 lens. The image quality come out of my ZVE10 is very sharp and colour rendering is beautiful! Love this lens! It’s compact and lightweight! It definitely is a value for money 💰 investment! By the way the macro capability of this G2 lens is fantastic! So for far or near shooting range it’s convenient!
Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 is surprisingly good on the APS-C a6700. At the widest (42mm FF eqv), it is good for portraiture at f2.8. It can also zoom to 300mm (FF eqv). This is a very good all-purpose lens.
starting from 44mm FF equiv is not ideal to have a lens to be called an "all-purpose lens".
Sounds like a telephoto beast!! Nice!
42mm is not that far off from 35mm. But then I don’t take landscape. Its image quality is definitely better than Tamron 18-300mm.
I've got this exact lens for my A7SIII and love it! So I'm sure it will be excellent on APSC cameras too 😊
Yes, but not good as on FF cameras when it comes to the focal length...
Wow that was very helpful. I am using a Sony ZV-e10 camera.
And now we are trying to move away from the basic lens.
Of course, you will struggle with the focal length, but you should consider a full-frame lens.
thank you
Thank you for watching!!
But I also wanted to say that APS-C cameras will be the "real" APS-C cameras when they are with APS-C lenses.
for Nikon subframe (DX) lenses they can be used by most if not all FF (FX) DSLRs.
You can enable "crop mode" in the FX camera so that it mimics a DX camera body.
Yes you will lose some of the total sensor MP but that's going to happen anyway if you shoot at anything other the native sensor ratio. Which could be 4:3, 16:10, 16:9, depending on the specific camera body.
I don't think that these optics-related issues are really the problem with buying and shooting a DSLR in this day and age.
It's the in-camera image-processing options that really matter. Literally starting with HDR and NR settings.
This particular video is showing a LOT of luminance noise which gives the video a grainy, "old-timey" look
That noise could have been filtered-out in the camera. At 480p which I'm looking at now, the loss of Fine Detail probably would not even be noticeable. For an interior scene like this, it's ok. But these are more options that you will have to deal with shooting video. Shooting stills, NR can make a big difference in the results. And again, why take video like this with a DSLR and lens when it would probably look fine with a cellphone?
Subscribed after watching this one video! Exactly the question im looking for. For me, I am looking to use fullframe lens on apsc body, with a shift adapter to make an affordable shift lens solution on apsc. But Im always worry about apsc sensor couldnt resolve the fullframe lens well enough. i think your explanation cleared my doubt. Thanks!
What about a video on Street Photography POV (fx30 + lenses of your choice)?
Came for the information, stayed for the Information and great personality 😂❤.
+ 1 subscriber.
Thank you!
One important thing you did not clarified. F-Stops, they change when you switch from APS to Full frame and visa-versa, this is extremely important factor for which I am looking for answers and nobody is talking about it,
dude, yes! If you shoot on a f2.8 lens on a crop sensor you're getting a f4.3ish equivalent. This is the biggest con and not mentioned in the video. I just learned this after years of shooting 4k/60 on my a74 on FF glass.
@@paulteelproductions1461can you explain thus in layman terms? Is jt therefor better to go full frame for low light?
not true
It's not really an "important factor" it's just that the F# at which an aps-c lens is sharpest is different than the corresponding full-frame lens and focal-length...because the lens is cheaper and thus at the same price point you can get better glass. The #1 factor is what level of camera performance do you need to be happy with your gear. It could be shit, it could be great, but if it's too big, heavy and expensive, you won't want to take it out to shoot it. Likewise if the shots suck. To really know if Camera & lens A are worth the extra money over Camera and lens B, you need to know the performance difference between the two and know what performance you need.
You're not going to make the perfect choice the first time. Don't think about buying it. Buy it and try it. If you don't like it, return it in the return window and get a refund. Buy and try something else. If you want to save money, buy a lower-quality grade of gear on the used market. Heavily-used gear that is cosmetically imperfect, and "old gear", will cost way less than almost-new or like-new gear much less new gear. But if you have never shot a piece of gear yourself then you can't know how well it will perform for you. Today there really is no excuse for buying cheap garbage DSLR gear because decent gear is available at decent prices on eBay and everyone has a cellphone camera now which can take at least usable shots on most scenes.
So this issue of "FF vs subframe lenses on subframe gear" has t start with two questions.
#1 why are you shooting subframe gear in the first place.
#2 what focal-length range are you trying to shoot over, with your one or two lenses that you want to buy.
That is when you need to deal with crop-factor, and from there you need to know the DTMF charts, and that is going to get you to your choice of F#.
I just would not bother buying any DSLR gear for shots under about 60 mm in 35mm effective, which a cellphone will take just fine. My go-to lens for DSLR shooting is the Tamron 28-300, but the 28-80 or so will do well-enough for a lot of scenarios. But again why carry and shoot a DSLR with a 28-80 (on an FX body) when I can take shots just as well with my cellphone? That all comes down to "needing a zoom" vs needing a cheap but effective camera". My Google 6a does have a "zoom mode" , though I usually used a fixed FL and crop afterwards. Where does the F# come into play? :)
Only when you need more control of the lens. DOF and sharpness considerations.
But basically I shoot at the optimum F# of the lens. If I can. Or close to it.
Hey kensei huge fan of your work dude . Is it still worth getting the a7m4 as an hybrid camera or do you recommend something else!
Thank you for this. It definitely helped me make my decision.
In general, pixels in full frame sensors are much bigger than APS-C sensors, a lens can get away with just to deliver enough clarity for the larger full frame pixel size, and any better clarity won't produce a clearer picture. So if you take a 12 megapixel full frame camera lens and put it on a modern 24 megapixel APS-C camera, you might find the lens not as clear as you would like. Hence, I will go for a more modern full frame camera lens if that's route I have to take. Some modern full frame cameras can go as high as 50 megapixels so their pixel size is just a hair bigger than that of the APS-C cameras, so those full frame lenses will be perfectly fine.
Would you make a video about the Sony 50mm 1.2 specifically on the fx30, how it does, how the breathing is, if the 75mm equivalent is good? Compared to the 50MM 1.4? PRETTY PLEASE
You are correct to a point, the image is affected by increased pixel density. A top end FF lens will be fine, but a mediocre one will be softer, basically the sensor will find all the flaws in the FF lens and magnify them. Tony Northrup can probably explain it better than me, but I noticed using a particular Sigma lens on a 5D3 and 7D2, the crop sensor image was noticeably softer.
APSC cameras tend to have a higher pixel density than full frame ones; sensor resolution is therefore higher in those cases. Using the same FF lens to frame the same image in the same way at the same aperture would show increased apparent depth of focus on APSC over FF. The trip is to buy the best FF lenses you can get. These lenses will work properly in both formats. Go for quality of rendering and low optical aberrations. People forget that the image projected onto the sensor is spherical and we are pressing a flat rectangular sensor onto that sphere. The best lenses have a very large sphere compared to the size of the sensor lesser lenses. High grade lenses designed for FF will be potentially better on APSC.
Life gets tricky when we are looking for FF wides and FF super-wides for APSC and we often default to APSC designs at such moments. Modern lenses end up having to be extremely complex to work properly for short focal lengths. In any case we learn the characteristics of any lens/body combination and know how to get the effects we want from a particular pairing and the FF vs APSC becomes academic. It’s not a topic to set our hair on fire about. Just choose what gives the effect that you want and the freedom to create good images.
Could you enumerate some of those recomended lenses? Sigma one would be enough? Or are you talking about even more expensive ones?
Assuming the same matrices, e.g. 24MPx, then on the APS-C matrix the pixel density will be higher, it's true because it's smaller, but the resolution will be the same. And it doesn't matter if it's FF or APS-C.
I'm thinking in buying the a6700 with the 35mm 1.4GM. I can get the pack for around 2,2k. My budget is around 2k and cannot have that glass with the a7iv for that price. Just the a7iv would be 1.9k...so I think I'll go that route for now
how do you like the combination a6700 + 35mm GM? (If you eventually bought them)
Honestly, matching APS-C lenses to the APS-C sensor has never been a priority for me at all, it's not like you are losing anything. An APS-C lens on an APS-C still has the same 1.5x crop factor
crop-factors only matter when you're comparing subframe gear to fullframe gear.
If you only shoot subframe gear, then what do you care what 24 or 50mm effective in 35mm means.
@@touristguy87 buying full frame only, future proofs your gear if you buy fullframe later
@@paulhopkins1905 "buying full frame only future proofs your gear if you buy fullframe later"
That's a nonsensical comment.
You can buy FFs that will work fine with subframe lenses. You can buy subframes that work fine with FF lenses.This is not 1982.
@@touristguy87 what the hell dude, thats my whole damn point. Why pigeon hole yourself by buying APSC glass for your APSC camera when full frame works no differently and is future proof
@@paulhopkins1905 if that was your whole point then why did you say all that you said afterwards in your reply to me
Great video, thanks for sharing. I have one full frame lens for my Sony FX 30. It works great.
I'm considering the sony 24mm 2.8g just because of the build quality and form factor, seems like a good lens to pair with the a6400. Do you think there's a better alternative with similar form factor?
I've just bought the SEL24F28G for my A6400 and I'm very happy with it. Especially because of the light and small size compared to similar focal lengths such as the 23mm or 30mm from Sigma. Together with the Sigma 56mm it is a perfect combination of focal length and compactness.
Awesome! Thank you for the info.
Thanks for the great info.
In my case I don’t have enough money to purchase 2 full frame cameras (a main one and a secondary one for shooting different angles at the same time). I’m currently using the Sony a7iv and I definitely need a second body but I doubt I’d the enough cash to invest into another Full Frame, especially when I already have 3 Full Frame lenses
I'm using 85mm FE on a6000 great picture, literally had to stand where you aren't supposed to stand to take a picture.
I use sony a6300 and thinking of buying Tamron 28-200 to replace my Tamron 17-70. 😅 Just not sure if I'll regret it. What do you think?
I guess it's a good choice!
on APSC how the number displayed like the zoom and the f stop? is it show 28mm with 2.8 or 42 with f4.2 as its widest aperture?
I thought you were talking about the lens... In which case, just to clarify the crop factor is not due to the lens, it's on the camera body...
can we use metabones speed booster to make it full frame ?
Terimakasih telah berbagi.
Saya pengikut baru saluran anda
Tetapi saya tidak benar benar mengerti.
Dua bulan lalu saya membeli camera Sony Zv e10 dan lensa sony 18-105g f4
minggu lalu saya menyewa lensa sigma 28-70 f2.8 untuk perbandingan.
Tetapi kenapa jangkaun zoom lensa tersebut ( sigma) tidak sejauh lensa sony 18-105g
Seharusnya jangkauannya sama
Sony 18-105 ( APSC)
Sigma 28-70 ( 42 - 105 ) ( FULL FRAME )
Saya harap anda menjelaskan nya
Terimakasih kawan
… man, I use APSC lenses on my a7RV (still 26 MP) and also FF lenses on my a6700. To crop „in camera“ (aka using APSC on FF) is the same as crop in post. 🤷🏼♂️ The IQ is the same …
I have FX30 and Sigma Art 24-70mm/f2.8 for Nikon FX Mount Lens. I Want to Use My This Sigma Lens. How to Possible This ? Please Suggestion Me 🙏
Does this translate to an anamorphic lenses as well? Example: looking into sirui 35mm full frame 1.66 x mount for my Fuji x-h1. I know I’d lose some of the frame but would the squeeze factor be messed up?
Never tried FF anamorphic lenses on APS-C cameras before...
I use 50mm f1.8 Full frame lens on my ZV E10, Reason is it was 50$ cheaper,
Never had any issue with autofocus, I use it on tripod so stablization was never a issue 😊
what about F no. when u put on full frame lens apsc CAMERA does it also lose 1.5 stop"?
As far as I understand it, the exposure (brightness) will stay the same, but the bokeh (background blur) might change. This is because with a full frame lens on an apsc camera the image is cropped, so in order to get the same size image, you have to back up a little bit, which will make the bokeh smaller and therefore less blurry. But if you don't need the same size image and you're not backing up, the bokeh will be the same but on a cropped size image. It's complicated kind of, but that's how I understand it.
No
@@KenseiAkatsu then u mean to say apsc will have same F no increase 0.5x?
@@realrebelli0n Pretty much how I understand it myself
Wow you still use the fx30, it must be so good enough 🎉
Fx30 is phenomenal
Of course!!
my friends thought I was crazy for putting a sony 85 mm gm on a zv-e10 HAHAHA but it was fun to experiment with
Logically, the image will be less wide, but the zoom will remain the same?
No. Using a 50mm f1.8 FF lens on a Crop sensor, is still a 50mm F1.8, but the image is cropped. Its not the same as focal length equivalence. So the amount of light hitting the sensor is exactly the same as if it would be on a FF camera. This is logical, because lens has not change, position has not change so all is the same except the image is a cropped from what you would have got from a full frame. That's why its called a crop sensor.
50mm is 50mm, you don't get better zoom (50mm x 1.5 crop factor = 75mm) just because you are using a crop camera.
Too many mis-information on RUclips. Use your logic, how does a 50mm suddenly give you 1.5 time more OPTICAL zoom? Imagine a big man with big eyes looking through 50mm lens. Then a small child with small eyes looked through the SAME 50mm lens, will the little child suddenly get more optical magnification because his eyes is smaller?
Anyway, its good to use FF lens on Crop because you are getting the best part of the glass.
IBIS: Mirrorless Sensor sits inside the stabilisation system in the camera so the size of the lens does not affect the stabilisation so much.
I have a plan use viltrox lens FE 20mm f2.8 or sony lens e 35mm f.18 . which one do u suggest for video on zvE10 ??
i have an a6500 sony, planning to buy a 35mm full frame anamorphic sirui saturn, is it a good idea?
Some correction. It's ok if the lens quality is good. You do lose resolution, but this is only visible in stills. You will need to consider line pairs (lp/mm) or line width (lw/ph - used to compare different sensor size) for resolution.
For cheaper FF lenses it will be even worse on APS-C. A 26mp APS-C has the same density as the 61mp A7R5. Or to put it in more technical terms, you need more sharpness (lp/mm) for an APS-C lens to match the same sharpness of a FF lens. So you lose detail and resolution because the sensor is smaller so less line pairs for 18mm vs 24mm of the sensor dimension. E.g. an APS-C lens scoring 90lp/mm might be somewhere on par with a full frame lens scoring 70lp/mm (totally butchering the math, not an engineer). This applies mostly for stills. For video, it doesn't matter since 4K is only 8MP of resolution.
For most modern Tamron or Sigma lenses and G/GM lenses, your mileage will vary depending on the quality of the lens. But for other budget lenses you are basically enlarging any flaw or lack of resolution of that lens. Or for vintage lenses, you're cropping out the rendering and goodness of the vintage lenses.
Thank you for corrections!!
… how should I „lose“ resolution? using a FF lens on my a7RV (for example the 20 mm G) and shooting in APSC I will getting exactly the same picture (26 MP) in the same IQ like I shoot in FF mode and crop 1.5x in post, to get the same angle of view. 🤷🏼♂️ And using an APSC lens on my a7RV I will get nearly (off cause it’s not the same sensor) the same IQ in 26 MP I will get on my a6700 with the same lens.
@@TW-iu9zy Go read up on imatest website for resolution. Lets say you shoot and display a photo. It was done on the same lens, moved forwards/backwards to adjust for FOV changes. You're enlarging a smaller APS-C image circle into the same surface area of a monitor. Or a 20x30 print. What makes you think, a APS-C sensor would have the same level of detail as a FF sensor? Would you need a sharper APS-C lens so that no detail is lost during enlargement? Think about zooming in on a smartphone, or photoshop. Does a zoomed in image look the same as a zoomed out image?
Would 90 line pairs x 24mm of a FF sensor have more or less line pairs than 90 x 18? It's just simple maths. With less line pairs, there is less detail and less resolution. If such things didn't matter, we would be shooting wildlife on a smartphone. Apart from the crappy plastic lens on smartphones (relative to real lenses), why is it that there's less detail captured? It's not about the megapixels. Why do smartphones fall apart when printed larger than a post card?
I think in good FF lens .If some high pixel ff camera can take good result (eg:A75R 61mp) should be fully support the optical requirements of APS-C crop size.
How do you know if my cam shoots 8mgp in video? I have a Sony zv-e10 I want the absolute sharpest quality possible preferably with a small zoom but not necessary which lens should I get like one telephoto zoom and then one 24 mm so it crops to about 35?
Just bought a Sony 24-70 GMI on Ebay for my Sony A6000. Can't wait to see the result lol
Enjoy it!!!
6:10 I don't know, but you've craftily mixed it up by saying: "Full-flame" on occasion 😛.
Bad idea. The distance between the rear lens element and the sensor is different on a full frame vs aps-c camera. I have a 24mm aps-c lens that performs better on my Rebel T7 camera than my 24-105 L lens. I could get a better comparison if I could test the aps-c lens on my full frame camera, but if it could be mounted on the full frame damage there would be a possibility of the mirror striking the lens and damaging the camera.
These considerations apply to mirrorless cameras.
Can you make a comparison of acii and acr vs fx3?
putting a 35 mm on a 1.5 times crop sensor does not make it a 52 mm lens. its just a crop on a 35 mm prospective. 52 mm lens will have a completly different prospective.
Hi bro
Only changes in focal length not for aperture?
What do you mean?
@@KenseiAkatsu frame lenses on apsc camera onle focal length is changed aprature will not change
Am I correct?
Sony Northrup claims that FullFrame Glass is not sharp on APSC. I don’t understand how that’s even possible when you’re using the bast portion of the image circle.
Would I need a speed booster?
Wait there is a G lens for the sony apsc line the sony 10-20 pz g lens.hmmm
This dosend hapend with full frame camera 5:55 ....realy ? I use two midle size lens(from camera that was capture images on 6x6cm films) in FF35mm
I have tried samyang 35 f1.4 fullframe lens on fx30 in 1080p, the results are super ugly. Or just maybe the lens arent sharp enough.
What about ff lens on ff cam and apsc lens on apsc cam
On 4k 120fps I face grains problem so what can I do please answer
Made right camera settings?
@@KenseiAkatsu yes witch is best settings ?
I've used all of my "full frame" lenses on APSC bodies, even on my Canon M bodies.... so what.
Hmm 🤔 ... My 35-350mm on the M50 is fun.
My 500mm on my Lumix M43 is a real hoot .. 1000mm
The only reason anyone should use a FF lens on APSC is you have both types of bodies and you want to interchange the lenses easily. Otherwise it is just meaningless waste of money. FF equivalent lens can be three times more expensive (or more) than their APSC counterparts.
Good point!!
Bodies come and go, a full frame lens is forever. Imagine buying a whole line of apsc lenses today and in 7 years you buy a full frame body and then also have to rebuy all the lenses in FF.
@@vvhalefccd Right and wrong at the same time. Lenses retain their values nicely. If you upgrade, you can use your APSC lenses on FF bodies and slowly swap them into FF lenses. Not everyone upgrades to FF. Do not take that as a "given".
@@vvhalefccd I have been with Sony APSC for 12 yrs (since NEX-5R) and I have no desire or intention to upgrade to FF for the types of shoots that I use it for. I am content, and I am sure I am not alone.
That doesn't mean it's bad
You literally always also have a crop factor on every APSC lens too. In a perfect world go for it and use a f2.8 Sony GM 70-200 for your aspc
Nothing really extraordinary here. All Sony DSLRS, even the mirrorless series will shoot E lenses, the original Konica-Minolta 35mm film lenses. So you need a converter with the mirrorless series, and with the really-old screw-drive AF lenses you may have to worry about using an SWM lens instead, or trying to manual focus a screw lens on an SWM body. It's not an issue of compatibility. It is simply that lenses made for mirrorless cameras will be smaller & lighter in general. This is an absolute non-issue as long as you're aware of the performance characteristics of the lens that you're using, i.e. that you have at least seen the DTMF, CA and vignetting curves.
The camera-body doesn't change the behavior of the lens. Having bought the body you are now choosing lenses for it.
Anyone telling you that you "shouldn't" shoot FF lenses on apsc bodies should STFU unless they are willing to buy APSC lenses for you. People are great at telling other people that they should do things that they themselves don't have to do.
What's the sense??! If you use the crop mode on your full frame Sony you have the same result! Maybe apsc lenses on full frame body!
i am thinking about a FE 20-70 for my a6700😂
Will be a good mid-tele zoom lens!!
… yes, good choice. you will get amazing results! 👍🏻
Me too. I just bought the Sony 20mm 1.8 for my A6700 and love it. Also have the 70-350 so thinking the 20-70 f4 would be the perfect lens to complete the trio. (95% for photography)
🙃
What a wiered logic to use ff lens on apsc camera. If you use ff lens that means you will never experience the true potential of apsc camera. Like I have a6600 with apsc and I take it everywhere. Even my kid use it so easily. On hiking my friends kept his FF frame camera in bag while I was carrying it like a point and shoot. So I tried his camera and it was fkng heavy. I would not buy it even if it was same price of apsc. FF only makes sense if u always use tripod or in studio. Nowadays camera are so good, if you know how to take pic u will get really really good pic no matter which camera.
How come camera is with r and frame is with l ?🤣
Ehhh the crop factor has nothing to do with the lenses. And the crop factor is still 1,5 even if you use lenses made for Apsc cameras. Edit, there are way better videos demonstrating this issue than this, sorry.