Sounds more like a you problem to me. The title is quite off, as others have already mentioned. If you're not willing to learn the "vocabulary" of aps-c, that's on you, not on the system. Meaning: you claim to know what 70mm looks like on FF. How did you get there? By experience and learning and memorizing what different focallengths look like on your camera. Do the same for aps-c then. Learn what 24mm look like on your FX30, how the depth of field looks like with 2.8 at 70mm etc. It takes some time to learn, but will eventually make you a better filmmaker/videographer. Take things more positively instead of ranting about it. If you specifically want/need a FF camera that doesn't crop to aps-c in 4K60, then you simply should have bought an a7Siii instead of the a7IV for example. The huge benefit of the IV is that you can practically turn every FF focal length into two lenses, because it can shoot 4k FF and 4k in aps-c. I have yet to come across a real life scenario where the 4K60 crop on my a7IV bothered me. Usually you're working on let's say a 24fps timeline and use the 60fps for slomo b-roll. Where do you need the exact same framing and composition for this type of shots? That's an absolute rarity. But one simple solution: zoom out or switch to a wider aps-c lense for these shots. I can recommend the Tamron 17-70 f2.8 btw for aps-c, you roughly get a 25-105 and it's even stabilized. I shoot in two FF and one aps-c cameras all the time and they mix together perfectly. Learn the focal lengths you like and prefer, get the equivalent aps-c lenses and embrace the greatness of the technology that you have in your hands to put it to good use and create beautiful images. Don't rant on stuff that's doing what it's supposed to do.
I think one of the biggest issues with this video is that it's not that big of a deal, and I didn't actually intend for it to be particularly negative, I rewatched it last night and I still don't think it is, probably because I know the wider context and the intention behind what I said. As for your suggestions, I get where you're coming from, but you also don't know the context or reasoning behind those decisions, like getting an a7IV over anything else. I also did say in the video that the optional apsc mode is great and all cameras that could have it, should. As for lenses, at this point and up to this point, I don't feel it's worth it to invest in apsc lenses because then I'm limited to only using them on one camera (or in apsc mode on the other), whereas full frame lenses just work perfectly fine on both, and I have the option to crop on the a7IV.
@@PatrickRambles this was far from an explanation of that, I made that video ages ago where I actually explained things. This was just a little rant based on a title idea I had a while ago
Title should have been "The problem with using Full Frame Lenses on APSC". There's a reason there are APSC lenses 😅 If you wanna use both systems, there's no way around it: you need to buy lenses for both.
I don't think that's the case at all. I was mostly talking about focal length here, not the lenses themselves. Yes, they generally make somewhat equivalent ranges for zooms like 18-55mm instead of 24-70mm, but as someone who uses both full frame and apsc cameras with the same lenses, I like that I'm able to share lenses between them, I would just prefer to have multiple full frame cameras but that's currently not the case.
Typical Sony user issue who uses the wrong lenses on the APSC body. Buy APSC lenses for APSC bodies, they exist for a reason. It's not an issue of APSC, it's a user error. "Is full frame dead? When I mount my medium format lenses on full frame, they crop in, really annoying, full frame bad!" see how ridiculous that sounds?
That's still not the point. The point was about focal lengths, not the fact that I use full frame lenses on an APSC camera (which is still think is the best option for me right now because I don't see a good reason to invest in APSC glass). Also, it's not that serious, I was just sharing some thoughts
@@frogmanyt2515 you're right, but I see this a lot with Sony users, not all of course. They buy the cheap 50 1.8 FF prime for APSC and then say it's too cropped in and doesn't give as much shallow DOF. Instead they could just buy a 33mm f1.4 and call it a day. The whole point of APSC is that the sensor is smaller, so you can create smaller lenses at the same aperture, using FF glass negates all of that.
@drchtct I understand you're just making a bit of a generalisation, but that's not even what happened here. The reason I only have full frame glass is that I had my a7IV (FF) before I got my FX30 (APSC) so there was never a time where APSC glass was the best option. I also don't plan on getting more APSC cameras, my next camera will almost definitely be full frame, so it made sense to invest in better full frame lenses that could work on either camera and more in the future
@edgilligan8506 this is clearly an opinion-based video, I even called it a rant in the video itself. And no, that's not what annoys me, what I said was that it can be annoying switching back and forth between 2 different size sensors or using them both simultaneously
All these points work both ways and are a matter of a prefference. So you could complain that full frame makes lenses appear too wide and it is hard to get the right reach out of them. That for full frame you need more light to achive the same depth of field as on super 35. That lenses are too huge and too expensive. Oh and that on your particular full frame camera you can't shoot higher frame rates without cropping in as opposed to your particular super 35 camera. Wait, that last one you actually did.
This might be a noob comment, but a friend of mine brought his full frame and his 18-200 lens last night. I held it, took a few shots, and told myself, nope, I'm not going to carry this weight all around with me. It takes away the enjoyment of taking photos because of the weight. That's just my personal opinion, though.🙂
@@sioboy fair enough. Size and weight can absolutely be a factor to consider. I generally prefer a larger rig for video for many reasons, but for walking around taking photos, a lighter setup would definitely have a lot of benefits. It's all about what you're using it for and what you want it to do
I would use APSC more often but I havent found great ultrawide lenses for it. On Full Frame I rely on the 14mm & 10-20mm quite often for a specific repeatable shot I need. I don't see that equivalent lens in S35.
it just that 35mm sensor is considered the standard. hence the disparity of expectations and actual image is different. i wish all lens maker just use the expected focal length as the naming convention instead of saying 20mm lens equivalent to 30mm in apsC. just say its 30mm apsC or if its for full frame, a 20mm. to add more to the wound, some youtubers when recommending lenses in arbitrary situation, does not mention what gear or sensor, adding more confusion.
That's a fair point, but we would need to change the measure we use to be Field of View, rather than focal length because focal length is an actual measurement inside the lens, irrespective of sensor size. It would take a lot to get use to talking about FOV in degrees, rather than focal length in mm
@@itmeremy nope, you are right. good point. i take it back. it will just add more confusion. my point is, there is a lot of misunderstanding between focal length and field of view. especially when comparing different sensor. they are not the same thing, yet people use these words almost interchangeably
APS-C is very useful. Fujifilm is selling like hot cakes. And since compact cameras with small sensors aren’t really produced anymore, and 1”type sensor cameras like RX100VA are just as expensive as entry level A6100 with kit lens… I predict many more younglings, travellers and minimalists will still buy APS-C. Filming in super35 is also still industry standard.
An expert will be able to take decent photos and video with APSC no problem. Not all pictures need to be beautiful anyway, take the news sites for example, they take unflattering pictures of people they don't like that have a poor quality image.
I just wonder: Back in the days (80s, 90s) film camera where full frame and they made compact cameras with small lenses.. Where are these digital versions today? They all make massive lenses and nothing compact.. Full frame should not be anything special.. Film was full frame and it is around forever?
Probably because digital sensors are harder to make than film, so making them bigger is more difficult and expensive, which is why it's more of a big deal
@@itmeremy Yeh, I did some research.. They make the sensors out of waffers, just like chips and they can make like 100 APS-C sensors and 20 full frame sensors out of one waffer. That explains the extra cost..
Sounds more like a you problem to me.
The title is quite off, as others have already mentioned.
If you're not willing to learn the "vocabulary" of aps-c, that's on you, not on the system. Meaning: you claim to know what 70mm looks like on FF. How did you get there? By experience and learning and memorizing what different focallengths look like on your camera. Do the same for aps-c then. Learn what 24mm look like on your FX30, how the depth of field looks like with 2.8 at 70mm etc.
It takes some time to learn, but will eventually make you a better filmmaker/videographer.
Take things more positively instead of ranting about it. If you specifically want/need a FF camera that doesn't crop to aps-c in 4K60, then you simply should have bought an a7Siii instead of the a7IV for example. The huge benefit of the IV is that you can practically turn every FF focal length into two lenses, because it can shoot 4k FF and 4k in aps-c.
I have yet to come across a real life scenario where the 4K60 crop on my a7IV bothered me. Usually you're working on let's say a 24fps timeline and use the 60fps for slomo b-roll. Where do you need the exact same framing and composition for this type of shots? That's an absolute rarity.
But one simple solution: zoom out or switch to a wider aps-c lense for these shots. I can recommend the Tamron 17-70 f2.8 btw for aps-c, you roughly get a 25-105 and it's even stabilized.
I shoot in two FF and one aps-c cameras all the time and they mix together perfectly.
Learn the focal lengths you like and prefer, get the equivalent aps-c lenses and embrace the greatness of the technology that you have in your hands to put it to good use and create beautiful images. Don't rant on stuff that's doing what it's supposed to do.
I think one of the biggest issues with this video is that it's not that big of a deal, and I didn't actually intend for it to be particularly negative, I rewatched it last night and I still don't think it is, probably because I know the wider context and the intention behind what I said.
As for your suggestions, I get where you're coming from, but you also don't know the context or reasoning behind those decisions, like getting an a7IV over anything else.
I also did say in the video that the optional apsc mode is great and all cameras that could have it, should.
As for lenses, at this point and up to this point, I don't feel it's worth it to invest in apsc lenses because then I'm limited to only using them on one camera (or in apsc mode on the other), whereas full frame lenses just work perfectly fine on both, and I have the option to crop on the a7IV.
Strange title choice. It's more like a beginners explanation of the difference between full frame and cropped sensor.
@@PatrickRambles this was far from an explanation of that, I made that video ages ago where I actually explained things. This was just a little rant based on a title idea I had a while ago
Title should have been "The problem with using Full Frame Lenses on APSC". There's a reason there are APSC lenses 😅 If you wanna use both systems, there's no way around it: you need to buy lenses for both.
I don't think that's the case at all. I was mostly talking about focal length here, not the lenses themselves. Yes, they generally make somewhat equivalent ranges for zooms like 18-55mm instead of 24-70mm, but as someone who uses both full frame and apsc cameras with the same lenses, I like that I'm able to share lenses between them, I would just prefer to have multiple full frame cameras but that's currently not the case.
Typical Sony user issue who uses the wrong lenses on the APSC body. Buy APSC lenses for APSC bodies, they exist for a reason. It's not an issue of APSC, it's a user error. "Is full frame dead? When I mount my medium format lenses on full frame, they crop in, really annoying, full frame bad!" see how ridiculous that sounds?
Woah why the drive by??? Not all Sony users do this (or do this then complain about it) lol.
That's still not the point. The point was about focal lengths, not the fact that I use full frame lenses on an APSC camera (which is still think is the best option for me right now because I don't see a good reason to invest in APSC glass).
Also, it's not that serious, I was just sharing some thoughts
@@itmeremy you can get every focal length for APSC if you use the correct lens.
@@frogmanyt2515 you're right, but I see this a lot with Sony users, not all of course. They buy the cheap 50 1.8 FF prime for APSC and then say it's too cropped in and doesn't give as much shallow DOF. Instead they could just buy a 33mm f1.4 and call it a day. The whole point of APSC is that the sensor is smaller, so you can create smaller lenses at the same aperture, using FF glass negates all of that.
@drchtct I understand you're just making a bit of a generalisation, but that's not even what happened here. The reason I only have full frame glass is that I had my a7IV (FF) before I got my FX30 (APSC) so there was never a time where APSC glass was the best option. I also don't plan on getting more APSC cameras, my next camera will almost definitely be full frame, so it made sense to invest in better full frame lenses that could work on either camera and more in the future
Dude….what are you banging on about…..you didn’t really say anything informative. Different lenses and sensor sizes annoy you!
@edgilligan8506 this is clearly an opinion-based video, I even called it a rant in the video itself. And no, that's not what annoys me, what I said was that it can be annoying switching back and forth between 2 different size sensors or using them both simultaneously
Not really related to this video, but I recently learnt that half-frame is actually bigger than APSC. Thought that was interesting.
All these points work both ways and are a matter of a prefference. So you could complain that full frame makes lenses appear too wide and it is hard to get the right reach out of them. That for full frame you need more light to achive the same depth of field as on super 35. That lenses are too huge and too expensive. Oh and that on your particular full frame camera you can't shoot higher frame rates without cropping in as opposed to your particular super 35 camera. Wait, that last one you actually did.
This might be a noob comment, but a friend of mine brought his full frame and his 18-200 lens last night. I held it, took a few shots, and told myself, nope, I'm not going to carry this weight all around with me. It takes away the enjoyment of taking photos because of the weight. That's just my personal opinion, though.🙂
@@sioboy fair enough. Size and weight can absolutely be a factor to consider. I generally prefer a larger rig for video for many reasons, but for walking around taking photos, a lighter setup would definitely have a lot of benefits. It's all about what you're using it for and what you want it to do
I would use APSC more often but I havent found great ultrawide lenses for it. On Full Frame I rely on the 14mm & 10-20mm quite often for a specific repeatable shot I need. I don't see that equivalent lens in S35.
Laowa has a 9mm for APS-C, equivalent of 13.5mm on full frame. They also have a 7.5mm for S35.
@@c.s.christopher5801 I'll look into them now. Thanks!
it just that 35mm sensor is considered the standard. hence the disparity of expectations and actual image is different. i wish all lens maker just use the expected focal length as the naming convention instead of saying 20mm lens equivalent to 30mm in apsC. just say its 30mm apsC or if its for full frame, a 20mm. to add more to the wound, some youtubers when recommending lenses in arbitrary situation, does not mention what gear or sensor, adding more confusion.
That's a fair point, but we would need to change the measure we use to be Field of View, rather than focal length because focal length is an actual measurement inside the lens, irrespective of sensor size. It would take a lot to get use to talking about FOV in degrees, rather than focal length in mm
@@itmeremy nope, you are right. good point. i take it back. it will just add more confusion. my point is, there is a lot of misunderstanding between focal length and field of view. especially when comparing different sensor. they are not the same thing, yet people use these words almost interchangeably
"Oh no, my Full Frame lenses don't make sens on a different sensor format, so the format must inherently suck!" Weird take, but you do you I guess?
@trulsdirio that's not at all an accurate summary of this video
APS-C is very useful. Fujifilm is selling like hot cakes. And since compact cameras with small sensors aren’t really produced anymore, and 1”type sensor cameras like RX100VA are just as expensive as entry level A6100 with kit lens… I predict many more younglings, travellers and minimalists will still buy APS-C.
Filming in super35 is also still industry standard.
All very true, as I said in the video, I don't actually have an inherent issue with apsc itself, mostly just using it alongside full frame
An expert will be able to take decent photos and video with APSC no problem.
Not all pictures need to be beautiful anyway, take the news sites for example, they take unflattering pictures of people they don't like that have a poor quality image.
@pow9606 yeah of course, I never said APSC wasn't good or capable. Arguably the best cinema camera in the world right now is super35
I just wonder: Back in the days (80s, 90s) film camera where full frame and they made compact cameras with small lenses..
Where are these digital versions today? They all make massive lenses and nothing compact..
Full frame should not be anything special.. Film was full frame and it is around forever?
Probably because digital sensors are harder to make than film, so making them bigger is more difficult and expensive, which is why it's more of a big deal
@@itmeremy Yeh, I did some research.. They make the sensors out of waffers, just like chips and they can make like 100 APS-C sensors and 20 full frame sensors out of one waffer. That explains the extra cost..
Yeah, and that's assuming the entire wafer is even good
@@itmeremy Yeah, imagine you drop a Hasselblad waffer on your first day internship.. oops 😂
Use fx3 or a6700 will fix your issue, So i think your title confuse others
@@hoangvancong123 if I had FX3 money when I bought my FX30, you're right, I probably wouldn't have made this video in the first place