If you buy today's gear through my affiliate links, you'll have a Fringin good time. Thank you for your Bitcoin donations :) bc1qacvd72s9565hpat4jueeultha3qvrv4kznyl3f Fringer sent me the adapter to review for free Nikon Z6 III amzn.to/4eiMrFZ Fringer EF-NZ II amzn.to/3NltmXX Canon C100 II amzn.to/4gTxs7d Canon EF 24mm f1.4 amzn.to/4dhaUu1 Canon EF 85mm f1.2 amzn.to/4ezrLZU Canon EF 135mm f2 amzn.to/3BliNkG All my gear and recommended products can be found in my affiliate shop, thanks for shopping around! www.amazon.com/shop/vegetablepolice
His original 'toneh' video was hilarious. It's all comedy with some nuggets of useful info thrown in.... Seasoned with self depricating declarations of incompetence. It's never meant to make sense, and if he ever takes himself too seriously there'd no longer be reason to keep watching.
@@juliancroot We love you Tony, but we can't find you! I didn't see that original video until long after I discovered the channel, and it was so much better than I expected even knowing the basic thrust.
He was joking with Tony N who can’t take a joke. If you actually watch his videos he likes the Northrops and admires the family. Casey also jokes about background blur all the time while Tony takes it seriously like it’s great cinema.
1. Full frame is a digital era rebrand of small format. 2. Tonyature is not a measurement of the aperture but a derived value. Aperture is measured in diameter, assuming its circular, which it doesn't have to be. Tonyature is aperture diameter divided by focal length. 3. DoF is determined exclusively by aperture diameter and focus distance. If you had more bokeh on same lens on full frame, you must have focused closer. 4. Light gathering ability is a product of aperture area and fov. Aperture determines how much light you gather from any given direction and fov determines from how much area you gather the light. 5. To calculate fov you need both the focal length and sensor size. 300 on μ for loser gives tangent of half angle of 9/300 = 0.03. 600 on small format gives you 18/600 = 0.03. The fov of those lenses on respective systems is equivalent. 6. To calculate aperture diameter you need to divide focal length by tonyature. 300/4 = 75mm. 600/6.3~95mm. 600/6.3 lens has bigger aperture. 7. To give you a number on light gathering ability, you have to square both the tangent and aperture diameter, because image is 2d. The ratio of light gathering between the 300/4 and 600/6.3 will work out to (75*75)/(95*95) ~ 0.62. The 300/4 on μ for loser only gathers around 62% of the light of the 600/6.3 on small format. If you put 300/4 on small format and it can cover it with its image circle, it will gather more light by giving you wider fov. 8. Tonyature is awkward for exposure. T4.0 is 4 times slower than T2.0. It doesn't compare at all between different formats because it does not factor in the actual field of view.
Another way to think of all of this is imagine you adapt both an f/2.8 APS-C and f/2.8 Full Frame lens for Medium Format. Both will give you a fair amount of vignette and corner distortion, but the FF one will give you roughly 2.54x more light and 1.5x less vignette/distortion. The exposure in the centre of the image will be the same on both, but because the image circle sizes are different - i.e. the size of the image projected onto the sensor, you get a vastly different light gathering from the 2 lenses despite the exposure being identical - proving the FF lens gathers significantly more light (2.54x on a perfect lens, but this is usually within 1-2%). You have to remember you're working with different sized sensors: APS-C: 337.5 mm² vs FF: 864 mm² . So when you are taking an image, you will need your lens to provide 2.56x more light on full frame (or 2.33x for non Canon APS-C) just to get the same light intensity (exposure) onto the larger sensor (think same intensity, larger image circle). So a 24mm f/2.8 lens on Full Frame will have identical exposure as a 16mm f/2.8 lens on APS-C and a 3.85mm f/2.8 lens on an iPhone4, sure. But to achieve this, each is working with a vastly different amount of light gathered by each lens.
They 'match' until you reach the limits of the crop. ie. You can 'match' a 27mm f/1.2 to a 40mm f/1.8 on FF, but there's simply no equivalent on 1.5 crop to a full-frame at f/1.2, so the potential for low-light and shallow DoF is better, so long as you're using those lenses. For me, wedding and event photography is where full-frame really shines. Fast standard zooms simply aren't quite fast enough on crop, while a 24-70 f/2.8 does the job well on full-frame. Pair that with an 85 f/1.4 and it's all you really need. For normal use, travel, etc, I prefer a crop since they're a bit smaller, lighter, and cheaper (less worried about it being damaged or stolen).
As an example, a Voigtländer 17.5mm f/0.95 lens on Micro Four Thirds provides the equivalent of 35mm and f/1.9 on Full Frame, due to the 2x crop factor. The exposure settings are for f/0.95 though as it's f/0.95. Technically if you put the 17.5mm f/0.95 MFT lens on a Full Frame, you will have the results you expect with those specs on Full Frame but of course the lens would have a big vignette as it wasn't designed to cover Full Frame. Crop in 2x and you'll get 35mm f/1.9 equivalent, same framing and toneh results as on MFT. So the results are always the same (minus difference in ISO performance etc) because the lens is truly a 17.5mm f/0.95. It just wasn't made to cover a Full Frame sensor.
Its better to demonstrate the way he does in the video. Putting a cropped lens on FF with obviously be equivalent. Sensors are like cups. If you have a smaller cup, you gather less water. The speed of the water pouring from your sink is like throttling your aperture. The cups will only fill as much as they are sized to, no matter how much pressure the sink has.
I remember the incentive that I use a lot of toneh is that when going out to shoot in a messed up environment, where everything is ugly, and the model is the best among all pieces of crap. Especially with 85 1.2L or 135L, all photos ended up with just one face in the center and gradient color on the back, it's pointless, meaningless, shameful, and creativity disaster.
So, the blurriness depends on the size of the opening in the lens. To figure out how blurry a photo will be, you divide the focal length of the lens by the aperture value. For example, a 200mm lens with an aperture of 4.0 and a 50mm lens with an aperture of 1.0 will both give you the same amount of blur. (To get a same shot you need to stand on a different distance accordingly and relevant to the form factor as well, tho)
Man. That was a beautiful demo of background blur. Due too financial strain I had to sell my camera gear but man this is a reminder of what I’m missing. Bloody 3d pop off the charts, it looked like you were going to jump through the screen. Also those old train tracks with the red trees were an awesome backdrop.
I had a strange dream last night 😮 I was on a big boat with my new Panasonic 300mm Toneh 4, and then suddenly in the distance I saw a small boat with my 600mm equivalent, and it had to people in it, it was Toneh and Chelsea and they were screaming for help, I remember only taking Chelsea onboard and as we sailed away together we could see less and less Toneh 🤗🚣♂️🚣♀️ and then I woke up all sweaty 🙈
The IBIS is the one factor that impresses me on micro 4/3. The LUMIX G9II was so nice for vlogging. Sony ZVE1 had unnatural jerking motions in dynamic steady shot.
@@loboptlu I mean who cares about photographers :D In all seriousness though, I've been using Panasonic for both photo and video since G85/GH5 and it's been great. Their full frame primes are fantastic too
@@yawningmarmot i tried em out and compared them to sony canon and pentax , not impressed with the photo quality. And before someone starts the usual " the composition is all " , why should i accept lesser quality for the same composition at the same price?
@@loboptlu Wouldn't be my first choice solely for photography, but it's the best hybrid solution because everything else overheats. Don't know what you mean about photo quality though - the S5II uses the same sensor as the A7III, so the actual quality is basically identical.
Heh as a person who both owns a canon R5 and a Panasonic G9II i have both full frame and MFT and yea the canon looks better 90% of the time. I have the Olympus 45mm 1.2 Pro and the Canon 85mm 1.4 EF IS, so kind of some of the best lenses of the systems, and i bring the canon when the focus and the look is most important, and i bring the Panasonic when im lazy or are just goofing around or need better ibis for video.
Full frame is equivalent to 35mm film, which is considered SMALL format. This is why the next step up is called medium format. There is also large format film.
@@borderlands6606 Modern digital cameras have improved imaging to the point that m 4/3 format out performs 35mm film and "Full Frame" digital format cameras perform at the same (or better) level as Medium Format film when it comes to the enlargeability of the image.
Jared Polin would say, "Get off the tracks, hobo." Looks like the last time a train was on that track was 1905. Got some good light - very warm good fall-ish colors.
I feel like the biggest conspiracy with UA-cam cinematographers is the overuse of the blurry background. Let’s get back to basics and all relearn all of the composition and all of the different shots of basic real cinematography!
Some of Nicky boy was in focus 👍 As a M43 loser, I like walking to my city park with a 70mm-200mm just hanging on a strap across my back 🚶♂️ As always, get the camera that’ll make you go out and gather some lights.
@@DelticEngine "both" was in reference to your comment where you mentioned precisely two alternatives. The second sentence was me listing out all valid alternatives. Hope this grammar lesson helps!
if you're doing video. the standard is s35. its not a crop. choosing a frame arbitrarily that was commonly used in photography then assigning crop factors based on that is totally arbitrary for video. what we as human beings are used to for films is s35. for broadcast video is 2/3inch sensor.
And full frame still wins for any kind of lens once you do the equivalence math. There simply aren’t really medium format lenses out there that are faster than the fastest full frame lenses.
@@RegrinderAlert Once everyone has full frame it will be deprecated and medium format will be considered the only serious format. The medium format lenses will then become readily available. Just wait for it.
Canon and Sony got such good affordable FF cameras nowadays, there's only very specific use cases that I'd recommend APS-C to anyone, especially not Fuji or Nikon. It does make sense for Wildlife on a budget, since you'll get more pixel on the target, compared to cropping budget FF cameras, basically more reach for less money.
The first camera I own was Nikon d750, it was so heavy despite being the the lightest FX of it time, so bought sony A7C when it came out and it still heavy! not only camera that its heavy also the lenses. I guess Im ready to sacrifice the image quality to the weight.
For me the main reason to consider full frame has nothing to do with quality it's to get wide angle with the widest open f-stop exposure that is still hard to get because wide angle lenses tend to be more complex as you move away from 40 to 50 mm it gets more expensive to create more open light gathering lenses
Taking it to the extreme makes it simple to understand. Look at a smartphone with a teeny tiny '24mm' F/1.8 lens, then look at a 24mm F/1.8 full frame lens and tell me which one collects more light and if the blur is remotely comparable.
Sensor size matters most in high contrast situations. You underexpose so you do not blow out the highlights and then raise the shadows in post. Larger the sensor better the details in the shadows. Everything else is depth of field/ compression and how your particular lens was designed.
Have you ever considered switching to a large format camera with IBIS? That along with some Cibachrome paper will give you the 3D pop and toneh you're REALLY longing for.
It's the distance from the center of the focus point not from the camera. I know this for a fact, I'm not guessing. I've written both ray tracing and other types of renderers fully in software or hardware accelerated. It's not true to say that a wide angle lens has the same distortion from far away for this reason, that is ONLY true at the centermost pixels. So you are in effect bringing the pixels closer to the center when you crop in which changes some of the look. But there will always be another f stop that would show the same look anyway if you wanted to get it. The outside parts of the lens will also have the most distortion. You will theoretically get more dynamic range from the more sensors but this is only going to matter for photography and even then not enough that most people would even notice unless they took a bad shot and had to heavily edit it. For video the pixels are so oversampled that it really doesn't matter at all and even a one inch sensor should be perfectly fine so long as the algorithms/processing and the hardware are just as good as the full frame (but keep in mind they very likely are NOT). TLDR Buy a kneecon and good lense for nice video, buy anything with good lens for photos and learn to set your settings correctly to get good dynamic range.
Yup, framing the shot the same (same angle of view) with a full frame vs M4/3 means you have to move further back with the 4/3 from the subject. That means the distance from subject to sensor is now much larger percentage of the distance between the subject and background. Your demonstration clearly shows how that results in less toneh blur. It’s a lot easier for most people to understand if you tell them that you not only have to multiply the crop factor of 2 for a M4/3 to get the equivalent full frame focal length, but you also need to multiply the aperture by the same crop factor. So f/1.4 becomes an f/2.8 equivalent in terms of toneh.
Love your videos. Such a refreshing sense of humour. I have one question though: kidding aside, have you become a boheh enthusiast? Is that a reason why you won't use something like the Panasonic g9ii? I remember some videos way back where you seemed to be making the point that bokeh is overrated, if I remember correctly. Has this changed?
APS-C and Full Frame are not meant to compete. They have different use cases. Yes there are differences - which one is better or worse is totally subjective, and we all know what those differences are. This is all getting a bit boring now - sorry :D
Honestly after watching your videos I have rented, bought different cameras. But actually (as I do not need to video myself), I have settled on an X-T5 and the 18-120mm lens. It is an amazing combination. Gave rented Sony cameras - but the whole setup became heavy. Can I see much difference on the footage - not really. And then the full sensor setup was so heavy, I often could not be bothered to take it out! So keep going - yeah there are differences. I am preferring APS-C.
@@colinhoward2200 it's just a confirmation bias. No, APS-C is not inherently smaller/lighter. Sony A7C with Tamron 28-200/2.8-5.6 weighs 1084g, while X-T5 with 18-120/4 lens weighs 1017g -- almost the same, while Tamron is a better/faster lens.
I’ve determined through watching many hours of these “videos.” That this is basically angry camera asmr. And I’m here for it. Also 3d pop does not exist.
17mm 1.4 is 17mm 1.4 no matter what system you are on. Filed of view will differ. Background blur is dependent on focus distance and f number anyway. No matter 17mm f1.4 is not a this, that or whatnot. It is the physical (read mathematical) properties of the lens and it has no equivalens exept thos lenses with the same properties. Lesson: Don't blame the lens for what is the property of the chip.
You are being pedantic and also wrong. Besides not behaving the same in any relevant metric, those two lenses will resolve a different maximum image circle - clearly not the same.
@@RegrinderAlert To be really pedantic: it may have escaped you that the numbers you read on a lens is not a matter of opinion. It's maths. The focal length given i millimeters (thank god it started in France not the USA otherwise it would be in imperial), and the F number is the size of the rear lens in ratio to the focal length. It's maths and not an opinion. Naturally there are various qualities in both glass and construction between lenses. And some even have that elusive 3D pop that seems to be in such high demand nowadays. But otherwise, if you use the same lens (to be even more pedantic: using an adapter) on a full frame, aps-c and a mft camera, the difference is all about the chip and not the glass.
The Nikon Z6 III kicks the Canon C100's ass. I have the Olympus 300mm toneh 4 lens. It's not equivalent to a 600mm full frame. It's a 300mm lens where the image is cropped to fit on a m4/3 camera sensor. You could do the same thing with the Sony 300mm f/2.8 and a full frame camera. Crop the middle of the image to match the Olympus. Whoopee. The lenses even weigh the same, but the Olympus is a lot less expensive...yeah, it's only f/4, while the Sony is f/2.8. That shows you that Sony is doing a lot to decrease the weight of their lenses. You should expect a 300 f/4 to weigh much less than a 300 f/2.8. It's sad, really. To compensate for their smaller stature, m4/3 users need to pretend they are just as good, even better than the full frames. But notice where the lenses makers are gravitating to. Full frame. The m4/3's users are being left in the dust...I know, I'm choking on it now. (Full disclosure, I also have and use Sony full frame cameras).
Its super funny to really watch you. Just one comment, full frame bodies are small cause all mirrorless cameras are pretty much small, (they can't get smaller then sensor itself though), but the full frame glass is much heavier / bigger - thats reason why for small walks i do the olympus 12-40/f2.8 pro ii and for studio sessions rf 24-70 F/2.8, even though they have pretty similar fov. But one glass is size of camera + small glass :D
The crop factor applies to tonnehs as well. If you don't adjust the tonnehs to be equivalent, it's gonna look different. Canon (1.6) and Nikon (1.5) have different crop factors. Equivalency is hard, and few people get it right.
Food for thought, Maybe this will help you understand why the change of lens mess around the exposure. With the camera being at sea level, Horizon center of frame. (Time of day matters for this example lets say a few hours before midday or a few hours after midday. As midday is generally harsh like being pale and bright.) 10-24 mm lens tends to be more yellow in spectrum or warm, due to the possibility of getting the sun in frame or glare. Equaling in excessive white phase also too shallow f-stop add to this. 28- 35mm lens has more chance of seeing the blue sky less chance of sun, equaling more blue spectrum or cold look. 40-60mm tends to be more saturated generally middle ground view seeing mainly vegetation or subject in the frame. 80-200mm tends to be more muted. as the degree is very narrow horizontally and vertically as the number grows so does the lack of gather in potential of light. needing more compensation. To produce equivalent images.
As a MFT loser I should feel very offended. I don't really care about shallow DoF though and for backpacking you can't beat the lens weight! The second hand prices are sweet too. The scene was too glorious.
Coming from the manufacturing would I believe in two things, get the format that meets your artistic vision and get the format that fits your resolution needs, but always buy good glass. There are so many factors in bokeh that it negates the discussion, however as a general rules you'll need a 36MP full frame sensor to have the resolution of a 24MP crop sensor. The full frame gets yo about 45" wide on a 200 DPI archival print, 30" from a crop sensor and about 22.5" on a micro 4/3. If you do product shots for the web micro 4/3 works fine. Quality glass brings out the best of all formats. Less weed improves your intelligence! 😃😃😃
so form your demo and comments it look like if you use the same lens on a full frame vs 3/4 there is no difference in lighting, just a crop issue and background blur. Good test and insight !
what camera would you recommend for hiking? something that is cinematic but not too heavy, the pocket 3 would be ideal if it was weather sealed, what would be your recommendation?
The f-stop number is a relative value. What gives you the real toneh factor is the absolute aperture, which is simply the diameter of the aperture wide open. The bigger the diameter of the aperture, the more tonies in the background. Sensor size and focal length are a matter of field of view, not background blur.
The lenses available in full frame with autofocus are a lot brighter than the AF lenses available in medium format systems, so in the real world, it is not that simple. Full frame kind of wins.
@@Mityman64not sure if you are being sarcastic. But for comparison. Full frame is around 35mm, med format 60mm, full format 110mm, on average as back in the day there was a lot of variation. And these were obviously film “plates” not film rolls. Hope this helps. If you were being sarcastic, well that’s great too. Cheers.
I am seriously considering getting a 5D with the 50mm EF 1.4. That is a magical lens and DSLR’s are tanking hard. What is stopping me is the question: Will I take this with me over my MFT gear, and the answer is: probably not very often.
That was my go-to combo many years ago until my car was broken into and it was all stolen. I didn't have any issues with it personally and I used to miss it dearly.. but after using the Sony FE 55mm 1.8 zeiss lens, I miss it much less :)
In simple terms if a cropped sensor doubles the focal length then it also doubles the effective tonney. As an example a 25mm 1.4 is the equivalent of a 50mm 2.8.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
If you buy today's gear through my affiliate links, you'll have a Fringin good time.
Thank you for your Bitcoin donations :) bc1qacvd72s9565hpat4jueeultha3qvrv4kznyl3f
Fringer sent me the adapter to review for free
Nikon Z6 III amzn.to/4eiMrFZ
Fringer EF-NZ II amzn.to/3NltmXX
Canon C100 II amzn.to/4gTxs7d
Canon EF 24mm f1.4 amzn.to/4dhaUu1
Canon EF 85mm f1.2 amzn.to/4ezrLZU
Canon EF 135mm f2 amzn.to/3BliNkG
All my gear and recommended products can be found in my affiliate shop, thanks for shopping around! www.amazon.com/shop/vegetablepolice
Instead of micro 4/3 it should be micro 1.33333336
Why do you have a vegetable police shirt on‽
@@cameraconspiracies I had 2 BT but @voyager stole them, went bankrupt and then returned peanuts. A great Canadian company BTW.
Background blur is for people who are hiding something.
😂
Yep! And i’m drunk most of the time so everything is already blurred for me. I got that naturel Toneh…
@@djshineboyit’s like a real time LUT for your eyes!
haha
Kaseh won't stop hiding the forest 😢
I think we need a video where @cameraconspiracies watches his own videos and gives commentary
Especially this one ...
I mean, he's already doing that in all of his videos... Half of this video was him narrating over top of it...
This is like the end game of end game
"you're supposed to destroy the toneh, not join them"
Tony is his idol. We just need the meeting room footage or Kent and shilltuber footage
hahsahshah but he had the height ground
m43 is better at having field depth at low aperture. Not everyone wants the d-tuber look. Often field depth is very important.
Was this the guy that berated Tony N. for having too much blur? I am now even more confused!
His original 'toneh' video was hilarious. It's all comedy with some nuggets of useful info thrown in.... Seasoned with self depricating declarations of incompetence.
It's never meant to make sense, and if he ever takes himself too seriously there'd no longer be reason to keep watching.
@@juliancroot We love you Tony, but we can't find you!
I didn't see that original video until long after I discovered the channel, and it was so much better than I expected even knowing the basic thrust.
He was joking with Tony N who can’t take a joke. If you actually watch his videos he likes the Northrops and admires the family. Casey also jokes about background blur all the time while Tony takes it seriously like it’s great cinema.
@@Localtraveler2376 I completely understand the joke, it was intended to be sarcastic! This channel is one of the best!
logs are the most candian unit of measurment ever
I am a M4/3 punk, the tutorial is greatly appreciated :-)
1. Full frame is a digital era rebrand of small format.
2. Tonyature is not a measurement of the aperture but a derived value. Aperture is measured in diameter, assuming its circular, which it doesn't have to be. Tonyature is aperture diameter divided by focal length.
3. DoF is determined exclusively by aperture diameter and focus distance. If you had more bokeh on same lens on full frame, you must have focused closer.
4. Light gathering ability is a product of aperture area and fov. Aperture determines how much light you gather from any given direction and fov determines from how much area you gather the light.
5. To calculate fov you need both the focal length and sensor size. 300 on μ for loser gives tangent of half angle of 9/300 = 0.03. 600 on small format gives you 18/600 = 0.03. The fov of those lenses on respective systems is equivalent.
6. To calculate aperture diameter you need to divide focal length by tonyature. 300/4 = 75mm. 600/6.3~95mm. 600/6.3 lens has bigger aperture.
7. To give you a number on light gathering ability, you have to square both the tangent and aperture diameter, because image is 2d. The ratio of light gathering between the 300/4 and 600/6.3 will work out to (75*75)/(95*95) ~ 0.62. The 300/4 on μ for loser only gathers around 62% of the light of the 600/6.3 on small format. If you put 300/4 on small format and it can cover it with its image circle, it will gather more light by giving you wider fov.
8. Tonyature is awkward for exposure. T4.0 is 4 times slower than T2.0. It doesn't compare at all between different formats because it does not factor in the actual field of view.
Bringing facts!
Physics vs. Flat earther
My brain hurts
You are the one he is making fun of haha!
*Neil deGrasse Tyson entered the chat*
White balance left the chat :D
Who needs white balance when you have white hat.
Probably for the best. 😮
Yellow balance
Mexico filter
Mic drop!
That Nikon RED camera makes the Sony colors look like absolute garbage.
Another way to think of all of this is imagine you adapt both an f/2.8 APS-C and f/2.8 Full Frame lens for Medium Format. Both will give you a fair amount of vignette and corner distortion, but the FF one will give you roughly 2.54x more light and 1.5x less vignette/distortion. The exposure in the centre of the image will be the same on both, but because the image circle sizes are different - i.e. the size of the image projected onto the sensor, you get a vastly different light gathering from the 2 lenses despite the exposure being identical - proving the FF lens gathers significantly more light (2.54x on a perfect lens, but this is usually within 1-2%).
You have to remember you're working with different sized sensors: APS-C: 337.5 mm² vs FF: 864 mm² . So when you are taking an image, you will need your lens to provide 2.56x more light on full frame (or 2.33x for non Canon APS-C) just to get the same light intensity (exposure) onto the larger sensor (think same intensity, larger image circle). So a 24mm f/2.8 lens on Full Frame will have identical exposure as a 16mm f/2.8 lens on APS-C and a 3.85mm f/2.8 lens on an iPhone4, sure. But to achieve this, each is working with a vastly different amount of light gathered by each lens.
They 'match' until you reach the limits of the crop. ie. You can 'match' a 27mm f/1.2 to a 40mm f/1.8 on FF, but there's simply no equivalent on 1.5 crop to a full-frame at f/1.2, so the potential for low-light and shallow DoF is better, so long as you're using those lenses. For me, wedding and event photography is where full-frame really shines. Fast standard zooms simply aren't quite fast enough on crop, while a 24-70 f/2.8 does the job well on full-frame. Pair that with an 85 f/1.4 and it's all you really need. For normal use, travel, etc, I prefer a crop since they're a bit smaller, lighter, and cheaper (less worried about it being damaged or stolen).
There are literally 0.95 m43 options. And f1.8 are a dime a dozen.
As an example, a Voigtländer 17.5mm f/0.95 lens on Micro Four Thirds provides the equivalent of 35mm and f/1.9 on Full Frame, due to the 2x crop factor. The exposure settings are for f/0.95 though as it's f/0.95. Technically if you put the 17.5mm f/0.95 MFT lens on a Full Frame, you will have the results you expect with those specs on Full Frame but of course the lens would have a big vignette as it wasn't designed to cover Full Frame. Crop in 2x and you'll get 35mm f/1.9 equivalent, same framing and toneh results as on MFT. So the results are always the same (minus difference in ISO performance etc) because the lens is truly a 17.5mm f/0.95. It just wasn't made to cover a Full Frame sensor.
Its better to demonstrate the way he does in the video. Putting a cropped lens on FF with obviously be equivalent. Sensors are like cups. If you have a smaller cup, you gather less water. The speed of the water pouring from your sink is like throttling your aperture. The cups will only fill as much as they are sized to, no matter how much pressure the sink has.
The autumn Toneh is really nice
the dorky-ness from this is overshadowing all the legit worthy informations
thanks for showing this to us.
Good stuff mate!
Your good energy is absolutely wonderful .. natural and organic to
Kasey, probably in your top 3 best videos ever!
I remember the incentive that I use a lot of toneh is that when going out to shoot in a messed up environment, where everything is ugly, and the model is the best among all pieces of crap. Especially with 85 1.2L or 135L, all photos ended up with just one face in the center and gradient color on the back, it's pointless, meaningless, shameful, and creativity disaster.
Maybe it's time for you to try medium format cameras for comparison. Like what's to vlog on medium format. Would be a lot of fun.
Something about this channel calms me, is it the music or this film location? You too funny bro lol.
Super impressed with the af of the adapted lenses on nikon.
So, the blurriness depends on the size of the opening in the lens. To figure out how blurry a photo will be, you divide the focal length of the lens by the aperture value. For example, a 200mm lens with an aperture of 4.0 and a 50mm lens with an aperture of 1.0 will both give you the same amount of blur. (To get a same shot you need to stand on a different distance accordingly and relevant to the form factor as well, tho)
The fact that you still call it Toneh is hilarious
Man. That was a beautiful demo of background blur. Due too financial strain I had to sell my camera gear but man this is a reminder of what I’m missing. Bloody 3d pop off the charts, it looked like you were going to jump through the screen. Also those old train tracks with the red trees were an awesome backdrop.
I must have been dropped on my head, I keep watching after many years my friend.
Holy moly the colours 😍
Bro went to Mexico just for this video, thats dedication!
Another great video, thanks.
The 135 f/2L is beautiful, maybe a pain but it sure has a pretty look, while being sharp.
This is epic comedy. Probably just as funny if you know nothing about photography. Thank you, you're a genius.
I had a strange dream last night 😮 I was on a big boat with my new Panasonic 300mm Toneh 4, and then suddenly in the distance I saw a small boat with my 600mm equivalent, and it had to people in it, it was Toneh and Chelsea and they were screaming for help, I remember only taking Chelsea onboard and as we sailed away together we could see less and less Toneh 🤗🚣♂️🚣♀️ and then I woke up all sweaty 🙈
Loved this video!
I can honestly say im never disappointed when i click on one of your vids.
Crop vs. Full Frame - and my question is: can I make good photos with each? The answer is "yes" and "yes". I am the limiting factor.
Your new hat as a reference for white balancing is real genius
The IBIS is the one factor that impresses me on micro 4/3. The LUMIX G9II was so nice for vlogging. Sony ZVE1 had unnatural jerking motions in dynamic steady shot.
I mean, Panasonic full frame IBIS is practically as good :)
@@yawningmarmot panasonic is only good for video anymore , great specialisation for video but has nothing to do with photography anymore.
@@loboptlu I mean who cares about photographers :D
In all seriousness though, I've been using Panasonic for both photo and video since G85/GH5 and it's been great. Their full frame primes are fantastic too
@@yawningmarmot i tried em out and compared them to sony canon and pentax , not impressed with the photo quality.
And before someone starts the usual " the composition is all " , why should i accept lesser quality for the same composition at the same price?
@@loboptlu Wouldn't be my first choice solely for photography, but it's the best hybrid solution because everything else overheats. Don't know what you mean about photo quality though - the S5II uses the same sensor as the A7III, so the actual quality is basically identical.
Heh as a person who both owns a canon R5 and a Panasonic G9II i have both full frame and MFT and yea the canon looks better 90% of the time. I have the Olympus 45mm 1.2 Pro and the Canon 85mm 1.4 EF IS, so kind of some of the best lenses of the systems, and i bring the canon when the focus and the look is most important, and i bring the Panasonic when im lazy or are just goofing around or need better ibis for video.
welcome back ali-g!
I must say... the location for this video is quite nice 👌 colors look great too
This man is so funny. I thank God for him ❤
Agree with a few others on how nice that last shot was with the wind and blowing leaves…. 🍃
the amount of toneh was perfect. you were in a beautiful location and just obliterated it, so we cant tell what it is. perfection.
Oblivverated
that last shot of you walking away with the leaves falling is quite cinematic ngl LMAO
Full frame is equivalent to 35mm film, which is considered SMALL format. This is why the next step up is called medium format. There is also large format film.
Don't let facts get in the way :)
Not just small, but miniature. The advent of sharper lenses raised 35mm from the toy category, but its still Tichy (see what I did there?)
@@borderlands6606 Modern digital cameras have improved imaging to the point that m 4/3 format out performs 35mm film and "Full Frame" digital format cameras perform at the same (or better) level as Medium Format film when it comes to the enlargeability of the image.
Key take away that auto focus adapter is awesome also the 135 is also awesome
Jared Polin would say, "Get off the tracks, hobo." Looks like the last time a train was on that track was 1905. Got some good light - very warm good fall-ish colors.
I just commented the same thing, yours is better though. lol
@@NYGIANTSFAN1934 Hehee. Canon color science forever.
Lisa Simpson: the old Union Pacific doesn't come by here much anymore 😂
@@ElementaryWatson-123 Obviously.
Outstanding stuff man
Love you
Will you get the legendary EF 50mm f1.0?
Clever way to pay homage to Toney Northrup
5:02 I’m not a fan of the blurry background. It just looks like a green screen.
THANK YOU!
everything was evenly blurred, he's slowly becoming toneh himself.
I feel like the biggest conspiracy with UA-cam cinematographers is the overuse of the blurry background. Let’s get back to basics and all relearn all of the composition and all of the different shots of basic real cinematography!
I feel jealousy coming from small format people 😂
Some of Nicky boy was in focus 👍
As a M43 loser, I like walking to my city park with a 70mm-200mm just hanging on a strap across my back 🚶♂️
As always, get the camera that’ll make you go out and gather some lights.
It's MFT not M43.
@@DelticEngine umm, it's both actually. MFT, M4/3, and M43 are all used interchangeably
@@neilr7935 'It's both' you say, listing three...LOL And as I've shown, only one is logically correct and that's 'MFT'.
@@DelticEngine "both" was in reference to your comment where you mentioned precisely two alternatives. The second sentence was me listing out all valid alternatives. Hope this grammar lesson helps!
@@neilr7935 I don't need any grammar lessons. You need a logic lesson. The only valid one is 'MFT', as I have proven through logic.
Can you get the full frame look on an action cam or smartphone?
if you're doing video. the standard is s35. its not a crop. choosing a frame arbitrarily that was commonly used in photography then assigning crop factors based on that is totally arbitrary for video. what we as human beings are used to for films is s35. for broadcast video is 2/3inch sensor.
Does a reducer or speed booster lens change the comparison if added to the aps-c camera?
Here for the comments telling kasey he is making the wrong comparisons
he does because he is, sadly, a mental midget
You forgot diffraction!
this video is like the equivalent of tonys toneh video. awesome. don't get lost in the toneh. your family needs you.
That C100 looks killer!
Full frame is a crop sensor of medium format.
And full frame still wins for any kind of lens once you do the equivalence math. There simply aren’t really medium format lenses out there that are faster than the fastest full frame lenses.
@@RegrinderAlert Once everyone has full frame it will be deprecated and medium format will be considered the only serious format. The medium format lenses will then become readily available. Just wait for it.
@@danwilliams4820 Physics would like a word with you 😂
This will never happen - wait and see.
@@RegrinderAlert The needs of the market will always win over physics.
@@danwilliams4820 🤡
Thank u for helping me convince my partner 2 let me get a new camera.
It is difficult enough to control focus on aps-c, why then make this job even more difficult with yet bigger sensor?
I liked this one and learned some stuff through your emperical demo.
Canon and Sony got such good affordable FF cameras nowadays, there's only very specific use cases that I'd recommend APS-C to anyone, especially not Fuji or Nikon.
It does make sense for Wildlife on a budget, since you'll get more pixel on the target, compared to cropping budget FF cameras, basically more reach for less money.
I love my "1 inch" ZV-1, M43 GM5 and EM1ii and Full frame A9...None of these cameras can replace each other.
The full frame master race strikes again!
The first camera I own was Nikon d750, it was so heavy despite being the the lightest FX of it time, so bought sony A7C when it came out and it still heavy! not only camera that its heavy also the lenses. I guess Im ready to sacrifice the image quality to the weight.
Full frame will never match medium format because full frame is for children. LOL
true, medium format is just special, its like a whole different world
I want a Fuji 8MP medium format camera with a flippy screen.
😂@@cameraconspiracies
Is this the caveman photographer mindset Kasey always talks about
@solid477 Lighten up and have a sense of humor, Francis.
For me the main reason to consider full frame has nothing to do with quality it's to get wide angle with the widest open f-stop exposure that is still hard to get because wide angle lenses tend to be more complex as you move away from 40 to 50 mm it gets more expensive to create more open light gathering lenses
Taking it to the extreme makes it simple to understand. Look at a smartphone with a teeny tiny '24mm' F/1.8 lens, then look at a 24mm F/1.8 full frame lens and tell me which one collects more light and if the blur is remotely comparable.
That 135mm took you to the Toneh dimension... Come back to us!
Sensor size matters most in high contrast situations. You underexpose so you do not blow out the highlights and then raise the shadows in post. Larger the sensor better the details in the shadows. Everything else is depth of field/ compression and how your particular lens was designed.
Have you ever considered switching to a large format camera with IBIS? That along with some Cibachrome paper will give you the 3D pop and toneh you're REALLY longing for.
It's the distance from the center of the focus point not from the camera. I know this for a fact, I'm not guessing. I've written both ray tracing and other types of renderers fully in software or hardware accelerated. It's not true to say that a wide angle lens has the same distortion from far away for this reason, that is ONLY true at the centermost pixels. So you are in effect bringing the pixels closer to the center when you crop in which changes some of the look. But there will always be another f stop that would show the same look anyway if you wanted to get it. The outside parts of the lens will also have the most distortion. You will theoretically get more dynamic range from the more sensors but this is only going to matter for photography and even then not enough that most people would even notice unless they took a bad shot and had to heavily edit it. For video the pixels are so oversampled that it really doesn't matter at all and even a one inch sensor should be perfectly fine so long as the algorithms/processing and the hardware are just as good as the full frame (but keep in mind they very likely are NOT). TLDR Buy a kneecon and good lense for nice video, buy anything with good lens for photos and learn to set your settings correctly to get good dynamic range.
"Obliverated"!!! Haha! Great video.
Love the tracks location your yellow tee and white cap rock it.
Yup, framing the shot the same (same angle of view) with a full frame vs M4/3 means you have to move further back with the 4/3 from the subject. That means the distance from subject to sensor is now much larger percentage of the distance between the subject and background. Your demonstration clearly shows how that results in less toneh blur. It’s a lot easier for most people to understand if you tell them that you not only have to multiply the crop factor of 2 for a M4/3 to get the equivalent full frame focal length, but you also need to multiply the aperture by the same crop factor. So f/1.4 becomes an f/2.8 equivalent in terms of toneh.
Love your videos. Such a refreshing sense of humour. I have one question though: kidding aside, have you become a boheh enthusiast? Is that a reason why you won't use something like the Panasonic g9ii? I remember some videos way back where you seemed to be making the point that bokeh is overrated, if I remember correctly. Has this changed?
For some superior photographs, the crop in combination with their lens is exactly what they want
APS-C and Full Frame are not meant to compete. They have different use cases. Yes there are differences - which one is better or worse is totally subjective, and we all know what those differences are. This is all getting a bit boring now - sorry :D
Honestly after watching your videos I have rented, bought different cameras. But actually (as I do not need to video myself), I have settled on an X-T5 and the 18-120mm lens. It is an amazing combination. Gave rented Sony cameras - but the whole setup became heavy. Can I see much difference on the footage - not really. And then the full sensor setup was so heavy, I often could not be bothered to take it out!
So keep going - yeah there are differences. I am preferring APS-C.
nobody knows what they are *meant* for, but they sure do compete😁
@@colinhoward2200 it's just a confirmation bias. No, APS-C is not inherently smaller/lighter. Sony A7C with Tamron 28-200/2.8-5.6 weighs 1084g, while X-T5 with 18-120/4 lens weighs 1017g -- almost the same, while Tamron is a better/faster lens.
@@ElementaryWatson-123 Confirmation bias is saying aTamron 28-200 lens is better!
We can all agree to disagree :D
@@colinhoward2200 confirmation bias is what you believe in, not the objective facts, silly 😂
I’ve determined through watching many hours of these “videos.” That this is basically angry camera asmr.
And I’m here for it. Also 3d pop does not exist.
17mm 1.4 is 17mm 1.4 no matter what system you are on. Filed of view will differ. Background blur is dependent on focus distance and f number anyway. No matter 17mm f1.4 is not a this, that or whatnot. It is the physical (read mathematical) properties of the lens and it has no equivalens exept thos lenses with the same properties. Lesson: Don't blame the lens for what is the property of the chip.
You are being pedantic and also wrong. Besides not behaving the same in any relevant metric, those two lenses will resolve a different maximum image circle - clearly not the same.
@@RegrinderAlert To be really pedantic: it may have escaped you that the numbers you read on a lens is not a matter of opinion. It's maths. The focal length given i millimeters (thank god it started in France not the USA otherwise it would be in imperial), and the F number is the size of the rear lens in ratio to the focal length. It's maths and not an opinion. Naturally there are various qualities in both glass and construction between lenses. And some even have that elusive 3D pop that seems to be in such high demand nowadays. But otherwise, if you use the same lens (to be even more pedantic: using an adapter) on a full frame, aps-c and a mft camera, the difference is all about the chip and not the glass.
@@runearntzen6499 A lenses specifications are almost meaningless without of the context of the camera being attached. Period.
@@RegrinderAlert Sure, cool, well done. Now just read my original post...
I like reading these pedantic high-brow arguments, 😂
The Nikon Z6 III kicks the Canon C100's ass. I have the Olympus 300mm toneh 4 lens. It's not equivalent to a 600mm full frame. It's a 300mm lens where the image is cropped to fit on a m4/3 camera sensor. You could do the same thing with the Sony 300mm f/2.8 and a full frame camera. Crop the middle of the image to match the Olympus. Whoopee. The lenses even weigh the same, but the Olympus is a lot less expensive...yeah, it's only f/4, while the Sony is f/2.8. That shows you that Sony is doing a lot to decrease the weight of their lenses. You should expect a 300 f/4 to weigh much less than a 300 f/2.8.
It's sad, really. To compensate for their smaller stature, m4/3 users need to pretend they are just as good, even better than the full frames. But notice where the lenses makers are gravitating to. Full frame. The m4/3's users are being left in the dust...I know, I'm choking on it now. (Full disclosure, I also have and use Sony full frame cameras).
Its super funny to really watch you. Just one comment, full frame bodies are small cause all mirrorless cameras are pretty much small, (they can't get smaller then sensor itself though), but the full frame glass is much heavier / bigger - thats reason why for small walks i do the olympus 12-40/f2.8 pro ii and for studio sessions rf 24-70 F/2.8, even though they have pretty similar fov. But one glass is size of camera + small glass :D
The crop factor applies to tonnehs as well. If you don't adjust the tonnehs to be equivalent, it's gonna look different. Canon (1.6) and Nikon (1.5) have different crop factors. Equivalency is hard, and few people get it right.
Food for thought, Maybe this will help you understand why the change of lens mess around the exposure.
With the camera being at sea level, Horizon center of frame. (Time of day matters for this example lets say a few hours before midday or a few hours after midday. As midday is generally harsh like being pale and bright.)
10-24 mm lens tends to be more yellow in spectrum or warm, due to the possibility of getting the sun in frame or glare. Equaling in excessive white phase also too shallow f-stop add to this.
28- 35mm lens has more chance of seeing the blue sky less chance of sun, equaling more blue spectrum or cold look.
40-60mm tends to be more saturated generally middle ground view seeing mainly vegetation or subject in the frame.
80-200mm tends to be more muted. as the degree is very narrow horizontally and vertically as the number grows so does the lack of gather in potential of light. needing more compensation. To produce equivalent images.
As a MFT loser I should feel very offended. I don't really care about shallow DoF though and for backpacking you can't beat the lens weight! The second hand prices are sweet too. The scene was too glorious.
@@solid477 Oops!
Coming from the manufacturing would I believe in two things, get the format that meets your artistic vision and get the format that fits your resolution needs, but always buy good glass.
There are so many factors in bokeh that it negates the discussion, however as a general rules you'll need a 36MP full frame sensor to have the resolution of a 24MP crop sensor. The full frame gets yo about 45" wide on a 200 DPI archival print, 30" from a crop sensor and about 22.5" on a micro 4/3.
If you do product shots for the web micro 4/3 works fine. Quality glass brings out the best of all formats. Less weed improves your intelligence! 😃😃😃
Question is, is the difference in quality worth 3x the price on everything from camera body to lenses?
Kubrick and Spielberg seemed to do fine with small apertures ❤
The difference is in the depth of field, so you can get the same blur -2 stops on a crop sensor lens
Tony Northrup is going to critique this video saying there's too many Kelsies, it's a Kelsie 1.4
"Kelseh" will become the next thing😅
ok but how beautiful is the location!!!
so form your demo and comments it look like if you use the same lens on a full frame vs 3/4 there is no difference in lighting, just a crop issue and background blur. Good test and insight !
what camera would you recommend for hiking? something that is cinematic but not too heavy, the pocket 3 would be ideal if it was weather sealed, what would be your recommendation?
lumix s9, compact and cinematic, not wr tho
The f-stop number is a relative value. What gives you the real toneh factor is the absolute aperture, which is simply the diameter of the aperture wide open. The bigger the diameter of the aperture, the more tonies in the background. Sensor size and focal length are a matter of field of view, not background blur.
Bravo man🎉🎉❤
Full frame can never match medium format!
Then why would they call it medium? Clearly inferior.
The lenses available in full frame with autofocus are a lot brighter than the AF lenses available in medium format systems, so in the real world, it is not that simple. Full frame kind of wins.
Might as well call it small format.
@@cameraconspiracies Yeah, or maybe call it Standard 35. That sounds sad. Full frame background blur is half-assed compared to medium format!
@@Mityman64not sure if you are being sarcastic. But for comparison. Full frame is around 35mm, med format 60mm, full format 110mm, on average as back in the day there was a lot of variation. And these were obviously film “plates” not film rolls. Hope this helps. If you were being sarcastic, well that’s great too. Cheers.
I am seriously considering getting a 5D with the 50mm EF 1.4. That is a magical lens and DSLR’s are tanking hard. What is stopping me is the question: Will I take this with me over my MFT gear, and the answer is: probably not very often.
Just know that lens always breaks lol. The AF motors die.
That was my go-to combo many years ago until my car was broken into and it was all stolen. I didn't have any issues with it personally and I used to miss it dearly.. but after using the Sony FE 55mm 1.8 zeiss lens, I miss it much less :)
In simple terms if a cropped sensor doubles the focal length then it also doubles the effective tonney. As an example a 25mm 1.4 is the equivalent of a 50mm 2.8.
Your like a professor in Toneh.😂😂😂