I do street photography. My needs include a small and lightweight body plus lens. I want more of the frame in focus. Of course I can create this effect using the aperture. As you point out, the IBIS is better with crop sensor than full frame. My lenses are cheaper than a full frame lenses. For me, crop sensors rock. Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)
Thanks a lot for this video. You are absolutely right, sensor size isn't a particularly meaningful decision factor when purchasing a camera. That said, you repeat that full frame is better for shallow depth of field, which is true only in specific contexts, and your first reason is exactly one of the contexts where APS-C has shallower DOF: if you are using the same lens, you will have a shallower depth of field on the APS-C camera than on the FF camera (because of the scaling factor between sensor size and final image size).
Yeah because a 35mm will act like a 56mm with more compression which gives it a blurrier background but you lose the wider focal length, you'll need a lower Aperture to match the equivalent on FF. Thanks a lot for commenting and I'm glad you liked the video! I just hope it helps people who get a FF for the hype when in reality they don't need it and can save a lot of money, especially for beginners.
8 дней назад
Yes... for most users/uses, but no all. If you need to take pictues with low light, or with extreme bokeh/subject isolation, then full frame cameras still are the place to go.
My response might throw some folks off. First off, i sold my Canon R5 about 2 yrs ago, and now own and shoot with two R7's. This was a great decision for me, as i shoot mostly small birds where reach is my #1 priority. But for pretty much everything else, I think Full Frame is a better choice. My R7's have so many issues that have to be worked around, but I dont have any choice. Most people do. I think most folks would be better off with the R6 or R6 Mk II... Or R8.
What issues are you experiencing with R7? I agree in some ways but I think a crop sensor can be better in some scenarios for people in things over than just reach. I'd still also choose the R7 over R8 because of the battery life and overheating
@@samuelmaynard84 the biggest PITA with the R7 is that the focus misses a lot.... especially when shooting closer to the MFD of a long lens, like my 800 F11's and my 200-800. It also just completely whacks out at random times, "even in good light and contrast". I've also never gotten completely used to not using a grip. BTW, apparently, this camera is very good for macro. I've only done a little of that when I rented the RF 100 F2.8 Macro. I'd love to get that lens for my R7's. And I can't speak for video, as I never that.
What are the other lenses you use on this ?Sigma 18-35 is very heavy with the adaptor. I struggled after buying this. Because, best the quality lenses are mostly in fullframe category. Once you started using it in various scenarios including low light, you will realise that You are in damn need of a full frame. Possibly fuji and sony have better apsc lenses than canon. Buying Canon RF apsc is a big mistake... until sigma makes a better cover.
Sigma have some really nice options, some nice primes coming out next year. I also mainly use the RF 70-200 with it. The sigma isn't that heavy compared to full frame lenses, they are a lot heavier. APSC is cheaper overall and some people can't afford full frame and the benefits of full frame won't be worth it to them. I agree full frame is better and said that at the start of the video but now sigma are coming out with APSC lenses, I think it's a great time to buy APSC.
I do street photography. My needs include a small and lightweight body plus lens. I want more of the frame in focus. Of course I can create this effect using the aperture. As you point out, the IBIS is better with crop sensor than full frame. My lenses are cheaper than a full frame lenses. For me, crop sensors rock.
Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)
Nice one man! Sounds great! I love my R7 and they are great for so many scenarios
Thanks a lot for this video. You are absolutely right, sensor size isn't a particularly meaningful decision factor when purchasing a camera. That said, you repeat that full frame is better for shallow depth of field, which is true only in specific contexts, and your first reason is exactly one of the contexts where APS-C has shallower DOF: if you are using the same lens, you will have a shallower depth of field on the APS-C camera than on the FF camera (because of the scaling factor between sensor size and final image size).
Yeah because a 35mm will act like a 56mm with more compression which gives it a blurrier background but you lose the wider focal length, you'll need a lower Aperture to match the equivalent on FF. Thanks a lot for commenting and I'm glad you liked the video! I just hope it helps people who get a FF for the hype when in reality they don't need it and can save a lot of money, especially for beginners.
Yes... for most users/uses, but no all.
If you need to take pictues with low light, or with extreme bokeh/subject isolation, then full frame cameras still are the place to go.
My response might throw some folks off.
First off, i sold my Canon R5 about 2 yrs ago, and now own and shoot with two R7's. This was a great decision for me, as i shoot mostly small birds where reach is my #1 priority.
But for pretty much everything else, I think Full Frame is a better choice.
My R7's have so many issues that have to be worked around, but I dont have any choice.
Most people do.
I think most folks would be better off with the R6 or R6 Mk II... Or R8.
What issues are you experiencing with R7? I agree in some ways but I think a crop sensor can be better in some scenarios for people in things over than just reach. I'd still also choose the R7 over R8 because of the battery life and overheating
@@samuelmaynard84 the biggest PITA with the R7 is that the focus misses a lot.... especially when shooting closer to the MFD of a long lens, like my 800 F11's and my 200-800. It also just completely whacks out at random times, "even in good light and contrast". I've also never gotten completely used to not using a grip.
BTW, apparently, this camera is very good for macro. I've only done a little of that when I rented the RF 100 F2.8 Macro. I'd love to get that lens for my R7's.
And I can't speak for video, as I never that.
What are the other lenses you use on this ?Sigma 18-35 is very heavy with the adaptor. I struggled after buying this. Because, best the quality lenses are mostly in fullframe category. Once you started using it in various scenarios including low light, you will realise that You are in damn need of a full frame. Possibly fuji and sony have better apsc lenses than canon. Buying Canon RF apsc is a big mistake... until sigma makes a better cover.
Sigma have some really nice options, some nice primes coming out next year. I also mainly use the RF 70-200 with it. The sigma isn't that heavy compared to full frame lenses, they are a lot heavier. APSC is cheaper overall and some people can't afford full frame and the benefits of full frame won't be worth it to them. I agree full frame is better and said that at the start of the video but now sigma are coming out with APSC lenses, I think it's a great time to buy APSC.