There's also something to be said about "The best camera is the one you have with you". I shoot Fujifilm, the AF performance is sub-par, its an APSC sensor, the menus are outdated, the app is wonky. But I just LOVE holding this camera, and using it, and bringing it out, and the lenses are so nice. The camera ENCOURAGES me to want to go out and use it and play with it. I think that's super important too, even if you are a professional! You can achieve anything if you ENJOY your equipment and it makes you happy :)
Most photography sites focus on generalizing everything: camera choices, lens choices, camera settings, camera reviews and what camera is “best for you”. Very few of them even acknowledge that we’re all inspired for different reasons and shoot different subjects. I appreciate that you acknowledge this simple truth.
I'm surprised that you didn't mention that using full frame glass on aps-c sensor most of the time the lens performs better because you're using the best part of the glass which is the middle
Simon, thanks for the best explanation of the differences in sensor sizes I’ve ever heard. A couple of years ago I switched from Canon full frame down to Olympus micro 4/3. The change made sense for me because as an older photographer, I am 67, the weight and bulk of a full frame system was getting in my way of the joy photography. I wanted to upgrade to a mirrorless system and I didn’t have a fortune to spend on the new system. I got two bodies and a good selection of lenses for half the price of full frame. And I’m a happier photographer. I’m pulling my camera out and shooting a lot more than I did before. Different strokes for different folks. And I’m not saying that sometime in the future, I might not get back into full frame for some reason. After all cameras are just tools, and we get the tools we need for the jobs at hand. Again, thanks so much.
I switched from APSC to Mirrorless Full Frame, and for my case, landscape photography in some difficult light conditions, the performance of full frame to capturing high dynamic range is much better. It helps to preserve dark tones and high lights.
I Live in Mauritania ( a country mainly speaking french and arabic) and I am always eagerly waiting for your videos. What amazes me is that there are UA-camrs with millions of followers who don't have a third of your knowledge in photography. I have learned more from your videos than from anyone else on UA-cam, it covers everything and are easy to understand for me as a French speaker. Because of you i ended up investing more than 4000 dollars in canons (R8 + RF 24+105 F4 + 50 mm f1.8 + canon m50 mark ii + viltrox adapter and speed booster + several lenses). Thank you for your work and knowledge your sharing with us , keep up the good work . Sorry if i made mistakes in my comment , English is not my mothertongue language .
Thanks for someone learning about cameras and photography, you explain things so well, I watched many UA-cam videos, and still feel a bit lost, you hit the nsil on the head each time with such clear and understandable videos😊
You're like some kind camera Guru God, I was so confused as I just bought my first camera the R50 just 2 weeks ago and I was so lost as to why I only get subpar photos compared to my phone. I quickly went down the rabbit hole of watching videos about expenses lenses and lighting gear and I was like Wth the hell am I getting into, I'm broke I'll never afford these things. My head was spinning until I found this channel. The clean straight to the point presentations and clear wording has been my Saviour. Can't thank you enough for clearing things up so much for me. Your video about the Histogram was especially eye opening for me.
As a new photographer your channel is very helpful. It has helped me not to go down rabit hole of equipment specs and rather helped me focus on my art. Congratulations on reaching 500k
I am so glad that you publish this video at this time, because I have been struggling with the idea of getting a full frame camera. I shoot with a Nikon D7500. I think I would rather go to a mirrorless so I can relieve myself with some of the weight of my Nikon. I knew that a full frame would just be more weight, but I didn't realize the difference of how the photos look. I was looking at a full frame because of having more light and I often should an old abandoned houses. I think I would just rather go mirrorless or just get some really good lenses for lowlight situations. Thanks again for all the great info you share which other photographers are not willing to do! 😊
After using Nikon Z50 (crop-sensor) more than 2 years, I switched to full-frame Canon R8. I have been using R8 for more than 6 months now. What genre of photography I do? Travelling, landscape, portraits of my family and friends. I use R8 with 2 main lenses: basic RF 24-105 f4-7.1, EF 70-200 f4. Yes, this combo is bigger than my old Nikon Z50 + 2 kit lenses. But, in my case, it was totally worth the switch (I also often use the RF 50mm F1.8). I explain a little bit: - for travel: the R8 is small enough to get it everywhere. I love how this camera manages a lot of situations: indoors photography (and I love to take indoor shots of palaces, churches, cathedrals etc). Even with the 'cheap' 24-105mm the image quality is much better overall: colors, noise etc. Also, for outdoor, the images are superior: much detailed, the highlights are recovered much better, also the details in the shadows are better. Now, I feel that I worry less about the dynamic range, I know I can recover highlights/shadows information in post-processing. And when you travel and walk the streets of old Italians, Greeks, Spanish towns, it is very comfortable to shots knowing the details will all be there. - landscape: as nature lover, I did also quite a lot of landscape photography. Not for selling, but also for landscape R8 is better (and not having the cutting-edge lenses). The details and the dynamic range make a lot the difference. - for portraits: oooo, yes, here it is absolutely no doubt the change was well worth it. The focus of R8 is amazing, the multiple way you can setup up how the camera will focus on subject is a big advantage. The subject tracking, again the high ISO management (when fast shutter speed needed), all is so good, worth every penny. With R8 I started to love portrait photography. - I didn't do wildlife. Except few tries on zoo, but this is not wildlife, with 70-200mm. And yes, you feel the need to have more reach, much longer focal length. But so far, so good, it is not my main interest. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Conclusion: using this R8 is a joy, having a camera I can rely on for a lot of scenarios: indoors, outdoors, low light, portraits, speed ... Everything is better, is higher quality, is close to professional work I could do one day with this camera. For me for me it was worth.
I recently upgraded to a canon R8. It’s great for what I do which is mostly landscape photography. I love these videos as an amateur who is always looking to learn you are very instructive and a great teacher.
I shoot full frame at work and bought mysef a m4/3 for my personal use. Definitely pros and cons for each. I really love the reach I get out of my Gh6 and my 100-400 lens. Ive gotten amazing shots on my work cameras and my personal cameras. So definitely bigger is not always better, just different.
I went from a Z-50 (Very Nice Camera) to a D850. Zero regrets. The Z-50 was just too small for me to work intuitively and quickly. The 850 is a bit of a tank but it fits my grip much better. A true bonus has been the influx of great used lenses available. Love the channel Simon and congrats on 500,000 plus subscribers!
D850 team! I went from a D5300 to the D850 recently. My focus of interest is pretty much anything that catches my interest. I primarily like building and landscape photography though.
I'm so glad that you explain in a calm and methodical manner all the differences in sensor sizes. The main myth being that FF cameras give blurrier background just because of being FF, and not because you take the shots differently. I have met quite some people who'd swear that FF gives you blurrier background, without really explaining the Why. Anyway, thank you for the best videos on photography on UA-cam. You're a gem. And the 500k are well deserved.
Yes, full frame might be theoretically better for low light but then again it is not that simple. I switched from Canon full frame SLR to Fuji mirrorless. It also helped with astrophotography since the Fuji camera does cut of less of the deep red hydrogen alpha line. Later I got a dedicated cooled monochrome camera for my telescope which has a even smaller micro 4/3 sensor. Again no regrets on my side. So from my point of view it is about picking the camera that suits you best.
I shoot with an R5, but my wife shoots with an R10. Every time I use her camera, I think “man these smaller form factors are so much easier to handle and travel with!”
@@Leah-ju8ht as a travel camera I didn’t think so, I do go to Japan often, I’d still use my rp, but I will say for the m200 used price point and even with the kit lens although not recommended, maybe grab a f/2 22mm and m200 body, it’s pretty good as a run and gun documenting camera
Hello from the Philippines, Simon! Your videos are a great help to novice photographers, especially those like me who's about to buy their first camera.
After using a nikon d7000 and d7100 for 10 years, I bought a nikon z6. I mostly shoot wildlife, take basic snaps when traveling and some family photos at Christmas. While both my d7100 and z6 have a 24mp sensor, the reason I upgraded was because of the better lenses. The basic kit lens (24-70 f4) on the new mirrorless system is light years ahead of any crop sensor lens I ever owned. Similarly, the difference in the iso performance of my two cameras is mindblowing. I don't attribute all the gains to the sensor size, because there's also a difference of 5 years in sensor technology. But still, being a pixel-peeper, I very much appreciate the benefits of the new system. (Well not really new. I bought a used z6 that's 6 years old, but still.)
If Nikon releases a z50ii or a z70 with ibis and the modern AF, they will kill it. It’s honestly amazing they haven’t upgraded the DX format mirrorless cameras. The D500 needs a successor!
Nobody does it better Simon. Congrats on breaking the 500k threshold. It comes as no surprise. I'll stick with APS-C, Canon and Fujifilm, because of my photo interests, the smaller form factor and lower cost; it also allows for purchasing more glass. Kudos to you Simon.
Congratulations on the 500K subscribers, Simon! We are the subscribers, of course, but we are here because of the quality of the content on this channel which is second to none. You deserve all the credit!... Thanks for another great video! A year ago, I bought a new camera after hesitating between the similarly priced Canon R7 (APSC) and R8 (full frame). I chose the R7 mainly for its build quality, its bigger battery, dual card slots, etc. I am mostly interested in landscape photography, so "close quarter" is not an issue. I like having more reach, when using my zoom lens, for the occasional wildlife photos. I thought the narrower field of view of the cropped sensor would be a limitation for landscape photo, but in reality, the wider the field of view, the more difficult it is to avoid obstructions and to find a composition (so many trees in Canada!). However, to compensate somewhat, I found a 7.5 mm f2.0 fisheye lens (12 mm full frame equivalent on an APSC) which I intend to use for indoor/architecture photos from time to time. I still think I do not really need a full frame camera, but I may change my mind someday, who knows...
My main camera right now is a Fuji X-T5. I love the small size of the camera and most of Fuji’s lenses. I can fit the camera plus six Fuji lenses of widely varying focal lengths into a small backpack. Even Fuji’s XF 70-300mm lens is relatively small. I shoot a wide range of genres including travel, street, events, sports, and aviation, but only usually as an unpaid amateur for friends and family. I’m sure I’d like the low light capabilities of FF plus Fuji’s autofocus isn’t the best. But I prioritize small size and weight, and I know the camera well and can work around its less than perfect autofocus capabilities. So for now, this Fuji system works great for me.
Another highly concentrated walk-through of some of the technical and equipment-related camera fundamentals with the top online photography teacher. Merci Beaucoup!
I have three crop senor canon cameras. I have used all of them and just have no need to buy a full frame camera. I use full frame lenses on them and get results that fills my needs. Since I sell my images I only get asked what I use from fellow photographers. The people buying the images don't care what camera or what editing software I use. They just want the image that fills their heart. I have always been a believer that the most important factor is the lenses and not the camera. I shoot wildlife and enjoy the reach I get with them. I also shoot other kinds of things and use lenses that fit the occasion. Even more important is the person behind the lens can make it work with what they own. The only time I would consider a new camera is when I have a need for one and can make enough to warrant the perchance price. Thanks for the info and keep it coming.
I liked how you presented the advantages and disadvantages of both sensors. It’s a matter of what you photograph in my opinion. I bought a Fujifilm X-T5 crop sensor and I’m very happy with it. I used a Canon EOS RP for many years with some EF and RF lenses. The cost of a newer full frame body and RF lenses made me reconsider. At the end the Fujifilm system I owe now it’s more than enough for what I do as a hobbyist. The smaller size and lower price was very attracting without to mention its 40MP size. Thank you for the video.
A very good and honest presentation . I shoot with both full frame and micro four-thirds. Both have their benefits. When used in the right situations, they both produce great images.
Congratulations! I used Canon APS-C cameras for 10 years for landscape and some wildlife. I bought the original EOS R when it came out because of the mirrorless features and improved noise characteristics and dynamic range. Most of my images are long exposures of Bald Cypress trees/knees in lakes. In this type of photography the scene dictates the field of view needed so full frame provides more options. But getting closer also reduces the depth of field. As a result I sometimes need to either use a smaller aperture, focus stack or let the background go out of focus. It just makes me have to think more about depth of field. There are tradeoffs when moving to full frame. I still use APS-C for birds and wildlife but now have the R7 for the eye tracking.
Great video Simon - you speak a lot of sense and say it exactly how it is. After getting back into photography recently via a Fuji X-H2 APS-C, I then got intrigued by M43 so also tried out an OM-1. Down the rabbit hole I went. M43 is poor, no good in low light, poor image quality etc etc. But, for what I shoot (which is essentially everything), and how I shoot it (generally with a young family in tow), I'm really valuing the small form factor of the M43 system. I went to an airshow yesterday with my OM-1.2 and 40-150 f2.8 (so 80-300 FF equiv.) and didn't even realise I had it with me. Seeing the guys and girls with FF and massive lenses on the front really made me realise that I just couldn't lug that around all day with everything else I need to do (and I wouldn't want to either). That doesn't mean anyone is wrong, it's just a case of to each their own. I can see the benefits of FF in some of my shooting situations, and I may well now offload the APS-C and get a FF for certain scenarios - in effect having the benefits of each system at both ends of the scale and ignoring the one in the middle. Either way the most important thing is the size of your sensor doesn't make you a better photographer - you do. Pick up the camera you have, go and, shoot it, and most importantly LEARN IT. That'll make you a far better photographer than continually buying 'better' gear (and it's significantly cheaper too!).
I'd like to add, like Simon mentioned, the trend of compacting full-frame cameras exists, the reverse is also the case, namely the enlargement of small sensor cameras, as seen in GH7 and OM1. The smaller sensors such as M43 still have the advantage of faster readout speed and being easier to stablize, with sophisticated image processor units these cameras can reach burst and tracking capabilities way above their similarly priced full-frame counterparts, and not to mention very comprehensive pro video features. In a way, full-frame cameras are gunning for the entry-level market ever more aggressively, while crop cameras are offering more and more pro features at a price not possible for full-frame.
Recently went from a Canon M50 to Canon R6 for Automotive and Motorsports Photography. Full frame allows me to catch more of a scene, not just a car filling the frame. Absolutely love it.
Excellent explanation. I use M4/3 as my camera body and a couple of lenses are easily transported on my bicycle or motorcycle. I have thought about switching to a slightly larger APC camera but that's a new set of lenses to buy so I'm sticking with my M4/3 set up. By the way, I also own a tiny Sony RX100 and it produces beautiful images. Thanks for the upload 👍
My simple minded solution for better bokeh? Greater separation between subject and background. Not always possible, but something to look for when composing the image. Another option would be to choose a lens with a short minimum focus distance. Get closer to the subject to throw the bakground out of focus.
@@timothykieper Agreed. Now I’m shooting M43 I think about this more than I used to. It’s ‘easier’ to blur a background with FF, but likewise I’ve never been a fan of totally obliterated backgrounds (I appreciate there are some scenarios where it’s required), and I’m not the sort of person who shoots a portrait of someone from ten metres with them standing up against a fence, and then gets grumpy that the fence is in focus too!
I did a video in French about my regrets going full frame. I think you missed some points that some people should consider too: - With bigger camera / lens there is an higher expectations from relatives from your photos. It can put pressure on you. - With more expensive gear you will be more reluctant to take it outside in difficult situations (at the beach, close to some water...) or you will be less comfortable to use it where the security is not top notch. You can be less comfortable during a trip in a poor country by showing off your big heavy expensive gear. After many years I'm more comfortable with my full frame gear but damn, it's heavy. I hope that Canon will develop it's aps-c lens offer for their mirrorless offer.
An excellent summary of the differences. 'It depends' is so true. Simon has proved it and others have said it. Re bodies & lenses Body weights and sizes are decreasing. So too for lenses. Eg Canon's R series (mirrorless) 24-240 and 100-400 are lightweight FF lenses but price competitive with APS-C lenses! If you are thinking APS-C, you could still choose them and keep the FF option open for later on! Quality is fine. Far better than typical kit lenses. Lots of reviews around say so. My move I had a ten year old Canon 600D (18MP APS-C) with Tamron 18-270. Loved it. I do travel grab shots. So an APS-C upgrade would probably have done me. Instead I got a Canon RP (26MP FF) and Canon 24-240. Why? I did NOT lose 'reach' over my old gear. Crop of new gear better IQ than full image of old gear. Regardless, most of my pics are in the 24-200 range on FF. So reach not critical. The difference in price for FF bodies and lenses in mirrorless is narrowing fast. Mid range APS-C options can be dearer than entry level FF options! Got some discounts on the RP + 24-240 too good to refuse! That FF v APS-C price gap is shrinking regardless. I gained IQ over my old gear. Over new APS-C? I added an R50 for super-reaching. Not a body I'd recommend for regular use. So far FF better IQ. I LOST a few hundred grams in weight! Though the separate flash added it back. So I'm weight equivalent with a better flash and FF advantages. With mirrorless I get a better image in the viewfinder of what to expect. Got back what I liked about my Fuji 6MP mirrorless from 15 years ago! I didn't need most of the features found in mid-range bodies. eg 15fps+, better video, etc. The RP has more than what I had before. So how did that all happen? More MP? 18MP went to 26MP So probably. Maybe later technology pixels too. FF pixels (larger) v APS-C pixels (smaller)? In low light, yes. Otherwise maybe. Even the belief that larger pixels are always better is being challenged! New lens? Probably. My old one was 10 years old and collected a little inside dust. Manufacturing technology is always improving. The lens served me well. Moving from Tamron to a budget Canon lens? Unknown. My old Tamron v a new Tamron may have been similar. At the time Canon did not allow third party R series lenses. Change from mirror to mirrorless? Yes. Mirrorless allows for smaller and lighter bodies and lenses v mirror bodies. That means cheaper v mirrored bodies! (Reverse for second hand!) New firmware / software. Yes. Lens correction now happens in the Canon's body. Which is exactly why Simon started with 'it depends', introduced the factors at play (when just one factor changes) and then leaves it up to you. Perfect. As others have said too. And what have I now done? Added an R50 (APS-C 24MP) and a Canon 100-400! Got them on discount. The R50 is too small for everyday use for me. But it's good enough for the odd super reach shots I might take! 400 x 1.6 = 600+! I'll leave Simon to do the super IQ, super reach shots! Maybe I should have just bought his African Safari shots instead? Now if I wanted / needed an L lens with F1.8, then my budget would have said APS-C!
That "I know you can do it ! ;) " always leaves me with a smile :D Love your videos Simon - wether you need the tips in the video or not, its always fun to watch them 💪
Several years I went on a workshop shooting eagles. I had three cameras a Canon 6DMKII, 7DMKII and Olympus OM-D E-M1X. My best eagle images were from the 7DMKII with the 100-400 and 1.4 extender. That said my best inflight image was on the Olympus with the 300 Pro lens. While camera choice is important that choice is more based on the end use. If you “really need” a full frame so you can crop that actually says more about how you shoot than anything else. In the end I believe my images were the result of having 3 really good cameras, the best lenses available, a sturdy tripod and a good gimbal head than the sensor size.
Congratulations Simon on your well deserved milestone! I feel some folk get too hung up on camera gear rather than the pure creative joy photography can bring to us 😎
68 here; been with Nikon since 1974- that said, I use both formats; 810s (FX) and a D500 (crop). The 500 is for high FPS; the crop factor= my glass is 1.5x magnified/POV. A 200-500mm tele is now a 300-750mm. At some point I’ll add a used Z body….because some features of mirrorless are too good to ignore. FWIW: I haven’t bought a NEW camera body, ANY format, film or digital, since 1978; EVERYTHING used…, from hobbyists, LOW use.
Love your videos, Simon. I watch Them even though I already know the material because your explanations are so good. You are one of the best teachers on youtube.
I went from 7d to a 6d plus now the Canon 70-200 is usm f4, best choice i could ever make! This combination gives me so much more benefits using it in low light and still get crisp result!
When I moved to mirroless, I went from canon full frame to fujifilm crop sensor, best decision as a wedding photographer. Smaller kit means my back and wrist don’t hurt at the end of a 10 hour day. Cheaper lenses mean I get to experiment with more focal lengths without breaking the bank. And I view getting a deeper depth of field at wider apertures a benefit as weddings can be notoriously dark.
Do not fool yourself - DoF is not affected by sensor size nor by FL used. DoF depends solely on used F number and magnification of the subject. Thus if you take the photo by GFX or m4/3 or anything in between and the subject will be the same size on printed photo or displayed on screen, the DoF will be the same if the same F number is used to take the photo. (Even if it is used zoom lens and distance to subject is corrected to maintain the same subject magnification on zooming - DoF will be the same.) Only FG ~ BG separation will be different because FL is main factor influencing BG blur.
@@PavelR2 I'm confused, FG - BK Separation is a factor of DOF. DOF does change based on distance to subject and focal length (which is what crop sensor forces you to change). Macro photos can have an f5.6 and only have a DOF of a couple of inches. Or, if you focus on a building that is 100 yards away, your DOF is going to be 100 yards out to infinity.
@@andrewselbyphotography DoF and BG blur is affected by the same variables but by different amount. You can not comapre photo of building and photo of insect - there is only same FL, aperture and sensor size but the subject is not comparable. My example was about shooting person (or group of people) with the same F number: different FL and from different distance (same sensor) or with different FL and different sensor size from the same distance, with the person the same size in the print / on display in both mentioned cases. In that scenario longer FL produce more blurred BG, but DoF will be the same. BG blur is the most affected by FL because bigger FL = smaller portion of BG (narrower FoV) need to fill the frame = BG is more magnified. You can try to input the values in your favourite DoF calculator (change only FL and sensor size and DOF will be the same [for example FF vs 2x crop + halving the FL]).
@@PavelR2 Okay, I just did a DoF calculator. One for a fuji xt5 33mm at 1.4 subject at 2 meters, and one for a canon 5d 50mm at 1.4 subject at 2 meters. These are equivalent fields of view, so the subject distance and the framing would be exactly the same. The Fuji had a DoF of .20 meters The Canon had a DoF of .13 meters The DoF changed because, in order to get the same shot on a crop sensor, you need to change either your focal length or your distance to the subject. Changing your focal length will give you the same framing. So I still don't know what you are talking about.
@@PavelR2 you are almost correct: DOF depends on lens aperture (not f-number, which is ratio of aperture to focal length) and image magnification - but on the sensor or film, not in the end print/display. So a larger format has shallower DOF for the same field of view, f-number and image distance because a) the aperture is larger because the focal length is longer for the same FOV, and b) the image magnification is greater onto the larger sensor/film format
This videos are really good to explain why you need full frame and why you MIGHT not need it. The thing is if you're starting with photography buying a cheap second hand camera has millions of possibilities and it's better than anything any great photographer of the 90s and before have available
When I got my hands on my full frame camera, I was shocked how much heavier it was than my crop sensor camera. Same with the lenses. I upgraded from a Canon T7 to a Sony A7Rv recently, so it has been a huge change. I absolutely LOVE the Sony for landscapes and such. I haven't been able to hike like I normally do because of knee issues, but once those are fixed, I'm really debating which camera will be joining me on my hikes and backpacking trips. The Sony's image quality is unmatched, but the T7 is SO much lighter and smaller. Time will tell!
I use a canon 250d , the lightest dslr ever made by Canon and its such a treat to use and carry , even with a big zoom lens like the 18-135 efs or the pancake 24 , i rarely find myself even using the 18 mm on that big lens but i zoom a lot so dslrs work for me 📷 Idk if you'll see this but you're one of if not the main reason I am pursuing photography for a year now, rarely have i had a week without doing some street photography or other types of photos , i download a lot of your vids to watch at my job , and ive learnt a lot from you ever since
Thank you Simon. This is the clearest explanation of the differences and benefits of crop and full-frame sensors that I have ever heard. Thank you so much. Dave from down-under 🇦🇺👍
Thank you, this is the first time I heard an explanation that make sense regarding background blur between FF and crop. All the UA-camrs would just say about the sensor, it didn't really made sense to me since the difference would not create that effect if it's just the sensor.
Well explained video again from Simon. The benefits of each sensor size is why I have both an APSC and a Full Frame in my gear stash. As much as people recommend just dropping my APS-C and buy a second full frame, I couldn't let go of the smaller format because of its small overall form factor esp. when you couple it with apsc lenses. This really gets very handy when on travel.
Congrats Simon for half a million Subscribers So me too Subscribing now till date just watched but now am a subscriber too ! Love your contents all are really interesting. Thanks 😊. Love from Mumbai , India.
I take my Fuji X100V on road bicycle rides using the PS Bagworks rider strap and a JJC neoprene camera case. It’s a brilliant little camera, weather sealed and the built-in ND filter is really handy. The form factor is perfect as I hardly ever notice that I’m carrying it when riding. 📷🚴♂️🇨🇦🙂 PS: Congratulations on the 500K milestone … well done!
Hey Simon! Just wanted to say: I’m an audio engineer, and I can literally hear you getting better at your audio finishing processes! 👍 I remember you mentioning before in one of your advertisements that you were going to pursue that course of study. It’s paying off! ✌️👌👌👌👌 I have learned probably 1/2 of how to function in photography world competently from your videos. Thank you for never compromising 🙏 📷 Your content helps the entire community 🤘
I am almost 63 and with several disabilities. In my use case, M43 with 150-400 + 1.25tc + digital lossless doubling gives me 2000mm. Safe to "creep up to crocodiles" that way, or lions.
I started this year with the Sony a6700 three zoom lenses and a prime. It all fits into a 20l backpack which is amazing. To me low light performance is mostly about fast enough lenses, so I tend to favour aperture over focal length when buying. I shoot street, landscape and wildlife. So far it is an amazing APS-C experience.
Simon, excellent video with clear narration, helpful graphics, nice example photos, and perfect delivery of the info. I like how you produce your videos, explain the tech stuff, and show examples and options and tips. Keep up the good work (subscribed).
I have been using ASPC Nikons for years (D3300, D5300, D7500) Started to photo dryland sled dog racing in poor light; first tried the Z50 ASPC for 'real time' exposure and faster frames rates; now have gone FF with the Z6, low light performance is incredible! Also image quality in good light and faster shutter speeds make the FF a great camera! Still use the Z50 for the extra reach with a 300mm lens. Great channel and videos :)
As an underwater photographer I decided to go with a full frame camera when I was new thinking of the low light aspects of the sensor. in reality I need much more light to get clean images with a full frame sensor due to needing to shoot at F11 or higher. The issue is with a wide lens (16-35) a dome port is needed. A dome port projects a curved image in front of the camera which is where the camera actually focuses on not the subject its self. Being a curved image depth of field becomes and issue if you want anything but the center in focus. A smaller sensor camera can get away with a smaller dome port or the same size dome port but because of the crop factor the projected image is flatter. The flatter image allows for an aperture that is lower for a clean image thus requiring lower light for a given ISO. There are other benefits to shooting a full frame camera underwater but it does make the system much larger.
I agree with most of the points, but in 6:18 I actually prefer the M50 picture - more pleasing for me, the R6 picture looks like it's already been through some post processing in the camera, the M50 looks more natural 11:58 actually this is not true - smaller sensor will have a little bit shallower depth of field, but because we have to go "back" to have the same size of the subject it negates and FF has shallower DOF in the end, so the size of the sensor actually does directly alter the image, but in an opposite way than most think :) Anyway, great video as always!
I started my digital photography journey with an apsc. I bought full frame for the greater angle of view and better low light performance. I have kept my crop sensor where I need greater reach. Have recently bought a 150 to 600mm zoom so on the crop sensor will now be virtually redundant as I wish to try my hand at wildlife photography and the better low light performance from full frame will give me faster shutter speeds with lower iso and hence less noise. Back in the film days we called this a grainy image. Can look okay in certain situations especially monochrome rather than colour.
I shoot with my RX10IV for so long now. I sometimes forget it's just a one inch. Yea! One Inch, even smaller than APS-C, I love it so much and the only upgrade I see is the ability to use prime lenses. I don't care about the sensor at ALL.
Best explanation of sensor size choices and what works best in particular scenarios. I’m sure that will help a lot of people whom might be thinking bigger is always better. Well done (again)!
Congrats on your 513K! I still have my Canon 60D, I use it for Macro with a 35mm Macro lens, no need for a full frame for this type of photos; sometimes I take it for wild life and paintball, depending on "the mood". I bought a Canon 5D IV, more expensive, but great dynamic range compared to my 60D.
Great reminder for those of us craving full frame and for beginners who are confused by hype. I'm using my full frame Nikon for the backyard birds. With a 150-50mm it has helped me get shots that adapt to lighting better. However, I have been in search of a M43 or light weight option for travel. On the other hand, M43 lenses are getting HUGE. Then the smaller size issue is a moot one. You are to me, one of the top educators on UA-cam, Simon!
That depends of what use you need. If you do most Macro and Bird Photography, then a 40 megapixels APSC Camera will be very nice, but if you do fx Landscape Photography, then a 60 megapixels full frame Camera will be very nice.
I upgraded from my d3100 go a d7100. Most of the knowledge that i put into practice was stuff i learned from your videos! I thought i would drop photography like i drop other hobbies but its beem consistently fun
The D7100 is a wonderful camera and it takes beautiful pictures. That is my only APS-c camera. You can get some incredible cheap glass for the D7100 with legendary D lenses like the 180mm D and the 60mm D macro (the holy grail for macro being the 200mm f4 D, which is as good as any macro lens on the planet). You can always check out images for specific lenses on flickr. And of course, there are plenty of nice G lenses and even cheap as dirt AI-S F lenses.
I started about two month ago with a Canon SL2/200D, so the compactness is a charm and it takes pretty nice shots. Currently with a 55-250 stm for wildlife and the kit for landscape. I guess if in the future I want to switch to full frame I'll try to look for something relatively compact like the r8
I see it this way: Since every Nikon (I use Nikon) crop camera is 21 mp and because a 45 mp cropped down full frame is 28 mp, the full frame can capture everything an aps-c can, and more. And I rather have an uncropped image and crop it later by hand, than an already cropped image in the first place. Still, I would mostly recommend aps-c to friends. To me, size and price are not so important. But for most others, it is. And the differences are big. Aps-c is definitively the much better price vs. performance.
Surprised it's not 5 million! Many haven't discovered you yet. Simon by far has the best and most useful training and info videos! Very easy to understand and the way he describes everything is crystal clear to understand by even people that have no knowledge of any of this subject.
I'd say, it totally depends on ones uses. I owned FF DSLR's WAY back in the day, and they were great for landscapes, or anything I could get close enough to. My first mirrorless camera was the R5, and it was a fine camera for a lot of things, but shooting mostly small birds, I was constantly struggling to get enough reach, even with an 800mm lens, 100% crops were the norm. Finally I rented the crop body R7. Loved it so much, I bought one. Then the R5 sat on the dresser collecting dust. Finally I sold it and bought a second R7 for my backup. That was 2 yrs ago, and I've never looked back. Shooting with the 800 F11, I now have a 1280mm equivalent reach, which after close to 300K shots taken with this combo, feels pretty normal to me. Can't wait to get the 200-800 (on order) which will be everything I have now, but WAY more versatility. I've actually already rented it, and I consider that lens, on the R7, to be the Holy Grail for small bird photography. For myself, 'upgrading' from the R5 to the R7 was a great decision :) Big congrats Simon, on the 500K subscribers :) You have a fantastic channel, and I always have to watch new episodes as soon as you post them :) Thank you :)
I have all 3 😊 love all 3, Olympus ep 1, Fujifilm xt1, Sony a7iii the biggest difference are the lenses and the low light ability off the full frame. Use my xt1 as a carry on when cycling, waterproof and easy to replace, Use my Sony for low light and fast moving objects. As for lenses cost … FF are cheaper especially 2nd hand.
Congratulations on the number of subscribers. This doesn’t surprise me as I was following you back when you had 10,000 or less. Another great video which makes understanding cameras, Photography, and other subjects related easy to understand.
I recently made a huge jump from a Canon R10 to a Canon R5, and wow! The difference is apparent, but the lost of focal range is as well. I am a nature and wildlife photographer, but will take on any challenge. I can confidently say that it is great to have full frame, but currently being limited to only 500mm isn’t the greatest at times.
I'm considering a full frame camera but still on the fence simply because as a mere hobbyist I'm not sure the expense is justified, even if I purchase a used camera (I already have two EF lenses).
After shooting with my gf's Rebel T7 crop sensor for a year, I decided to get my own. After months of picking through details, I settled on the EOS RP full frame. I've taken it in the woods, to the beach, to the city. Wonderful camera for my area of Nova Scotia in the south. I picked up a 2nd hand 70-300 and have even gotten some good shots of wildlife.
Clear explanation as always. I actually use both full and crop frame sensors. Each has a unique advantage over the other. For longer reach, I prefer APSC cameras, but for better bokeh on portraits, Full Frame is my choice. If I go for a hike, APSC and their lenses are lighter to carry.
I use a Nikon D700 for full-frame. I shoot social dance events and most of the time, the lights are turned down and people are moving quite fast, not to mention the dance venues can vary from a HS gym to a rustic barn. Having a FF can give me a true 24 or 35mm FoV, with the added benefit of a 1.8/1.4 aperture. I love my D500, but the D700 helps me out tremendously.
I just upgradee to R5 from APS-C and the lowlight performance increase blew my mind, definetly worth the upgrade. Sure, for my wildlife photography I'm losing a bit of focal length but I'd rather take that and then crop the image in post compared to having extremely noisy pictures when shooting in low light.
You asked for comments about switching from crop to full frame. In my case I currently shoot with the MFT Olympus/OMDS OM-1, and I was considering on switching to a Nikon Z8. The Z8 in many ways is similar to my OM-1, both are jacks of all trades. Both can do high res landscape (OM-1 using sensor shift), both shoot fast bursts for sports and wildlife, and are both very good general purpose cameras. Cost wasn't much of a factor, all of the lenses I have would have paid for a smaller set of lenses for the Nikon, but typically f/4 instead of f/2.8. The improvements in lens weight, quality and higher ISO shooting, make it possible. Each system has its advantages which I won't go into. But my main reason was thinking of moving to Nikon over OMDS was my concern that OMDS may not keep up with the improvements in technology. I'm fairly certain that Nikon, Canon and Sony all have better AF than the OM-1. It's a question of will new technologies that make things easier for photographers (e.g. Canon's R1 sports tracking modes) be something OMDS will be able to keep up with. Thom Hogan was even raising the question if Nikon would be able to keep up, his verdict was probably. But in the end I decided to stay with the OM-1. Main reason, moving to the Nikon wouldn't currently improve my photography substantially. I am still the weak link. Perhaps in two years I'll reevaluate my decision. BTW, I really enjoy your videos. I know most of it, but every now and then I pick out something I didn't know or a different perspective.
What I realized the most as a beginner photographer is that you’re always hungry for new gear. You’re constantly looking for something that can do everything when there’s simply no such option. It’s easy to just constantly look for ways to upgrade your gear instead of trying to master what you have already. This is especially true for us guys since tech channels are heavily targeted towards us. It quickly turns into some kind of obsession where we analyze, compare and disregard stuff that’s barely a year old. I build computers, take photos and produce music so I know this better than anyone. xD Right now I’ve settled for a Fuji X-H2S and one tele, macro and wide lense. It’s taking some time not to look for new stuff but I’m at ease now with what I have, Because I realize it’s already a LOT. (I’m still craving a brand new drone though…)
I know that feeling, every time something new comes out it’s hard to resist the temptation, but recently I’ve found cameras so good that the only thing holding me back is me !! I’ve been digital since 2004 and film for many years before that but I would say when I got the Canon R5 2.5 years ago it felt like the Swiss Army knife of photography even compared to the 5Div I had before (not that the 5Div wasn’t a top camera) but I had finally decided to switch to mirrorless. BTW drone laws are so strict here in NZ they aren’t worth the agro.
Congrats on half a million subs!!! Very well deserved! I'm one of those who did not switch to full frame due to the advantage of crop sensors for wildlife.
I went from a canon 80d to an RP to an R6. Going to full frame instantly felt so much better. I like the look, color depth, and contrast. I’m sure there are some great crop sensor cameras but I won’t go back.
thanks for the education on the advancement of cameras, I had a Brownie, graduated to an 127 and then to 35mm, I have 62 years of photography taking, you teach me lots Simon, thank you, do your viewers even know what a Brownie is ?
I switched from ff to apsc, fuji, but currently selling my fuji gear to go back to ff. Good lenses are also heavy on apsc if you want the same dof. Ff also isn't heavy anymore, check the r8 and even r6 isn't so heavy
This is a UA-camr who has earned and deserves the 500k subscribers he now has.
Absolutely excellent content!
Love you comment❤ So true!
@InsatiableAppetite-tz1ib😂😂😂 Not at all😅
There's also something to be said about "The best camera is the one you have with you". I shoot Fujifilm, the AF performance is sub-par, its an APSC sensor, the menus are outdated, the app is wonky. But I just LOVE holding this camera, and using it, and bringing it out, and the lenses are so nice. The camera ENCOURAGES me to want to go out and use it and play with it.
I think that's super important too, even if you are a professional! You can achieve anything if you ENJOY your equipment and it makes you happy :)
Most photography sites focus on generalizing everything: camera choices, lens choices, camera settings, camera reviews and what camera is “best for you”. Very few of them even acknowledge that we’re all inspired for different reasons and shoot different subjects. I appreciate that you acknowledge this simple truth.
I'm surprised that you didn't mention that using full frame glass on aps-c sensor most of the time the lens performs better because you're using the best part of the glass which is the middle
Simon, thanks for the best explanation of the differences in sensor sizes I’ve ever heard. A couple of years ago I switched from Canon full frame down to Olympus micro 4/3. The change made sense for me because as an older photographer, I am 67, the weight and bulk of a full frame system was getting in my way of the joy photography. I wanted to upgrade to a mirrorless system and I didn’t have a fortune to spend on the new system. I got two bodies and a good selection of lenses for half the price of full frame. And I’m a happier photographer. I’m pulling my camera out and shooting a lot more than I did before. Different strokes for different folks. And I’m not saying that sometime in the future, I might not get back into full frame for some reason. After all cameras are just tools, and we get the tools we need for the jobs at hand. Again, thanks so much.
I switched from APSC to Mirrorless Full Frame, and for my case, landscape photography in some difficult light conditions, the performance of full frame to capturing high dynamic range is much better. It helps to preserve dark tones and high lights.
I ended up backing both! RP with 25-240 plus R50 with 100-400. Both FF zooms so interchangeable.
I Live in Mauritania ( a country mainly speaking french and arabic) and I am always eagerly waiting for your videos. What amazes me is that there are UA-camrs with millions of followers who don't have a third of your knowledge in photography. I have learned more from your videos than from anyone else on UA-cam, it covers everything and are easy to understand for me as a French speaker. Because of you i ended up investing more than 4000 dollars in canons (R8 + RF 24+105 F4 + 50 mm f1.8 + canon m50 mark ii + viltrox adapter and speed booster + several lenses). Thank you for your work and knowledge your sharing with us , keep up the good work .
Sorry if i made mistakes in my comment , English is not my mothertongue language .
Thanks for someone learning about cameras and photography, you explain things so well, I watched many UA-cam videos, and still feel a bit lost, you hit the nsil on the head each time with such clear and understandable videos😊
Simon is the one that keeps convincing me that my gear is better than I thought it was (:
You're like some kind camera Guru God, I was so confused as I just bought my first camera the R50 just 2 weeks ago and I was so lost as to why I only get subpar photos compared to my phone. I quickly went down the rabbit hole of watching videos about expenses lenses and lighting gear and I was like Wth the hell am I getting into, I'm broke I'll never afford these things. My head was spinning until I found this channel. The clean straight to the point presentations and clear wording has been my Saviour. Can't thank you enough for clearing things up so much for me. Your video about the Histogram was especially eye opening for me.
As a new photographer your channel is very helpful. It has helped me not to go down rabit hole of equipment specs and rather helped me focus on my art. Congratulations on reaching 500k
I am so glad that you publish this video at this time, because I have been struggling with the idea of getting a full frame camera. I shoot with a Nikon D7500. I think I would rather go to a mirrorless so I can relieve myself with some of the weight of my Nikon. I knew that a full frame would just be more weight, but I didn't realize the difference of how the photos look. I was looking at a full frame because of having more light and I often should an old abandoned houses. I think I would just rather go mirrorless or just get some really good lenses for lowlight situations. Thanks again for all the great info you share which other photographers are not willing to do! 😊
After using Nikon Z50 (crop-sensor) more than 2 years, I switched to full-frame Canon R8. I have been using R8 for more than 6 months now. What genre of photography I do? Travelling, landscape, portraits of my family and friends. I use R8 with 2 main lenses: basic RF 24-105 f4-7.1, EF 70-200 f4. Yes, this combo is bigger than my old Nikon Z50 + 2 kit lenses. But, in my case, it was totally worth the switch (I also often use the RF 50mm F1.8).
I explain a little bit:
- for travel: the R8 is small enough to get it everywhere. I love how this camera manages a lot of situations: indoors photography (and I love to take indoor shots of palaces, churches, cathedrals etc). Even with the 'cheap' 24-105mm the image quality is much better overall: colors, noise etc. Also, for outdoor, the images are superior: much detailed, the highlights are recovered much better, also the details in the shadows are better. Now, I feel that I worry less about the dynamic range, I know I can recover highlights/shadows information in post-processing. And when you travel and walk the streets of old Italians, Greeks, Spanish towns, it is very comfortable to shots knowing the details will all be there.
- landscape: as nature lover, I did also quite a lot of landscape photography. Not for selling, but also for landscape R8 is better (and not having the cutting-edge lenses). The details and the dynamic range make a lot the difference.
- for portraits: oooo, yes, here it is absolutely no doubt the change was well worth it. The focus of R8 is amazing, the multiple way you can setup up how the camera will focus on subject is a big advantage. The subject tracking, again the high ISO management (when fast shutter speed needed), all is so good, worth every penny. With R8 I started to love portrait photography.
- I didn't do wildlife. Except few tries on zoo, but this is not wildlife, with 70-200mm. And yes, you feel the need to have more reach, much longer focal length. But so far, so good, it is not my main interest.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Conclusion: using this R8 is a joy, having a camera I can rely on for a lot of scenarios: indoors, outdoors, low light, portraits, speed ... Everything is better, is higher quality, is close to professional work I could do one day with this camera. For me for me it was worth.
I recently upgraded to a canon R8. It’s great for what I do which is mostly landscape photography. I love these videos as an amateur who is always looking to learn you are very instructive and a great teacher.
I shoot full frame at work and bought mysef a m4/3 for my personal use. Definitely pros and cons for each. I really love the reach I get out of my Gh6 and my 100-400 lens. Ive gotten amazing shots on my work cameras and my personal cameras. So definitely bigger is not always better, just different.
I went from a Z-50 (Very Nice Camera) to a D850. Zero regrets. The Z-50 was just too small for me to work intuitively and quickly. The 850 is a bit of a tank but it fits my grip much better. A true bonus has been the influx of great used lenses available.
Love the channel Simon and congrats on 500,000 plus subscribers!
D850 team! I went from a D5300 to the D850 recently. My focus of interest is pretty much anything that catches my interest. I primarily like building and landscape photography though.
I'm so glad that you explain in a calm and methodical manner all the differences in sensor sizes. The main myth being that FF cameras give blurrier background just because of being FF, and not because you take the shots differently. I have met quite some people who'd swear that FF gives you blurrier background, without really explaining the Why.
Anyway, thank you for the best videos on photography on UA-cam. You're a gem. And the 500k are well deserved.
Yes, full frame might be theoretically better for low light but then again it is not that simple.
I switched from Canon full frame SLR to Fuji mirrorless. It also helped with astrophotography since the Fuji camera does cut of less of the deep red hydrogen alpha line.
Later I got a dedicated cooled monochrome camera for my telescope which has a even smaller micro 4/3 sensor.
Again no regrets on my side.
So from my point of view it is about picking the camera that suits you best.
Yep - horses for courses!
I shoot with an R5, but my wife shoots with an R10. Every time I use her camera, I think “man these smaller form factors are so much easier to handle and travel with!”
As someone with an r5 and and rp I totally get this, shot on the m200 yesterday, game changer
R8 much better than r10. I have both still full frame really matter
There are of course also smaller sized cameras then an R5 with a full frame sensor.
@@annoholics The R8 is full frame.
@@Leah-ju8ht as a travel camera I didn’t think so, I do go to Japan often, I’d still use my rp, but I will say for the m200 used price point and even with the kit lens although not recommended, maybe grab a f/2 22mm and m200 body, it’s pretty good as a run and gun documenting camera
Congratulations on passing half a million 🎉 you deserve it!! Thanks for all the educational info and advice for all types of photographers.
Best photography channel on UA-cam!
The most knowledgeable and easy to understand content on yt , Great work Simon !
Glad you think so!
Hello from the Philippines, Simon! Your videos are a great help to novice photographers, especially those like me who's about to buy their first camera.
As a crop sensor Canon user I appreciate your giving time to the topic. Not surprisingly you’ve hit 500k so quickly. Best from Texas!
After using a nikon d7000 and d7100 for 10 years, I bought a nikon z6. I mostly shoot wildlife, take basic snaps when traveling and some family photos at Christmas. While both my d7100 and z6 have a 24mp sensor, the reason I upgraded was because of the better lenses. The basic kit lens (24-70 f4) on the new mirrorless system is light years ahead of any crop sensor lens I ever owned. Similarly, the difference in the iso performance of my two cameras is mindblowing. I don't attribute all the gains to the sensor size, because there's also a difference of 5 years in sensor technology. But still, being a pixel-peeper, I very much appreciate the benefits of the new system. (Well not really new. I bought a used z6 that's 6 years old, but still.)
Add a 7artisans 50 f1.05 manual lens USD 225 earlier. You will be amazed by the images, only con is it's manual.
Every video from you always contains so much knowledge to learn. The only issue is we all tend to forget!
You Simon are the Master!! 📸
If Nikon releases a z50ii or a z70 with ibis and the modern AF, they will kill it. It’s honestly amazing they haven’t upgraded the DX format mirrorless cameras. The D500 needs a successor!
Full frame is the way to go👍🏼
I love when he says his name!😊
Nobody does it better Simon. Congrats on breaking the 500k threshold. It comes as no surprise. I'll stick with APS-C, Canon and Fujifilm, because of my photo interests, the smaller form factor and lower cost; it also allows for purchasing more glass. Kudos to you Simon.
Congratulations on the 500K subscribers, Simon! We are the subscribers, of course, but we are here because of the quality of the content on this channel which is second to none. You deserve all the credit!... Thanks for another great video! A year ago, I bought a new camera after hesitating between the similarly priced Canon R7 (APSC) and R8 (full frame). I chose the R7 mainly for its build quality, its bigger battery, dual card slots, etc. I am mostly interested in landscape photography, so "close quarter" is not an issue. I like having more reach, when using my zoom lens, for the occasional wildlife photos. I thought the narrower field of view of the cropped sensor would be a limitation for landscape photo, but in reality, the wider the field of view, the more difficult it is to avoid obstructions and to find a composition (so many trees in Canada!). However, to compensate somewhat, I found a 7.5 mm f2.0 fisheye lens (12 mm full frame equivalent on an APSC) which I intend to use for indoor/architecture photos from time to time. I still think I do not really need a full frame camera, but I may change my mind someday, who knows...
this guy deserves an oscar or something, so easy to understand!!
My main camera right now is a Fuji X-T5. I love the small size of the camera and most of Fuji’s lenses. I can fit the camera plus six Fuji lenses of widely varying focal lengths into a small backpack. Even Fuji’s XF 70-300mm lens is relatively small. I shoot a wide range of genres including travel, street, events, sports, and aviation, but only usually as an unpaid amateur for friends and family. I’m sure I’d like the low light capabilities of FF plus Fuji’s autofocus isn’t the best. But I prioritize small size and weight, and I know the camera well and can work around its less than perfect autofocus capabilities. So for now, this Fuji system works great for me.
Another highly concentrated walk-through of some of the technical and equipment-related camera fundamentals with the top online photography teacher. Merci Beaucoup!
de rien!
I have three crop senor canon cameras. I have used all of them and just have no need to buy a full frame camera. I use full frame lenses on them and get results that fills my needs. Since I sell my images I only get asked what I use from fellow photographers. The people buying the images don't care what camera or what editing software I use. They just want the image that fills their heart. I have always been a believer that the most important factor is the lenses and not the camera. I shoot wildlife and enjoy the reach I get with them. I also shoot other kinds of things and use lenses that fit the occasion. Even more important is the person behind the lens can make it work with what they own. The only time I would consider a new camera is when I have a need for one and can make enough to warrant the perchance price. Thanks for the info and keep it coming.
I liked how you presented the advantages and disadvantages of both sensors. It’s a matter of what you photograph in my opinion. I bought a Fujifilm X-T5 crop sensor and I’m very happy with it. I used a Canon EOS RP for many years with some EF and RF lenses. The cost of a newer full frame body and RF lenses made me reconsider. At the end the Fujifilm system I owe now it’s more than enough for what I do as a hobbyist. The smaller size and lower price was very attracting without to mention its 40MP size. Thank you for the video.
A very good and honest presentation . I shoot with both full frame and micro four-thirds. Both have their benefits. When used in the right situations, they both produce great images.
Congratulations!
I used Canon APS-C cameras for 10 years for landscape and some wildlife. I bought the original EOS R when it came out because of the mirrorless features and improved noise characteristics and dynamic range. Most of my images are long exposures of Bald Cypress trees/knees in lakes. In this type of photography the scene dictates the field of view needed so full frame provides more options. But getting closer also reduces the depth of field. As a result I sometimes need to either use a smaller aperture, focus stack or let the background go out of focus. It just makes me have to think more about depth of field. There are tradeoffs when moving to full frame. I still use APS-C for birds and wildlife but now have the R7 for the eye tracking.
Great video Simon - you speak a lot of sense and say it exactly how it is.
After getting back into photography recently via a Fuji X-H2 APS-C, I then got intrigued by M43 so also tried out an OM-1. Down the rabbit hole I went. M43 is poor, no good in low light, poor image quality etc etc. But, for what I shoot (which is essentially everything), and how I shoot it (generally with a young family in tow), I'm really valuing the small form factor of the M43 system. I went to an airshow yesterday with my OM-1.2 and 40-150 f2.8 (so 80-300 FF equiv.) and didn't even realise I had it with me. Seeing the guys and girls with FF and massive lenses on the front really made me realise that I just couldn't lug that around all day with everything else I need to do (and I wouldn't want to either).
That doesn't mean anyone is wrong, it's just a case of to each their own. I can see the benefits of FF in some of my shooting situations, and I may well now offload the APS-C and get a FF for certain scenarios - in effect having the benefits of each system at both ends of the scale and ignoring the one in the middle.
Either way the most important thing is the size of your sensor doesn't make you a better photographer - you do. Pick up the camera you have, go and, shoot it, and most importantly LEARN IT. That'll make you a far better photographer than continually buying 'better' gear (and it's significantly cheaper too!).
I'd like to add, like Simon mentioned, the trend of compacting full-frame cameras exists, the reverse is also the case, namely the enlargement of small sensor cameras, as seen in GH7 and OM1. The smaller sensors such as M43 still have the advantage of faster readout speed and being easier to stablize, with sophisticated image processor units these cameras can reach burst and tracking capabilities way above their similarly priced full-frame counterparts, and not to mention very comprehensive pro video features. In a way, full-frame cameras are gunning for the entry-level market ever more aggressively, while crop cameras are offering more and more pro features at a price not possible for full-frame.
Recently went from a Canon M50 to Canon R6 for Automotive and Motorsports Photography. Full frame allows me to catch more of a scene, not just a car filling the frame. Absolutely love it.
Excellent explanation. I use M4/3 as my camera body and a couple of lenses are easily transported on my bicycle or motorcycle. I have thought about switching to a slightly larger APC camera but that's a new set of lenses to buy so I'm sticking with my M4/3 set up. By the way, I also own a tiny Sony RX100 and it produces beautiful images.
Thanks for the upload 👍
My simple minded solution for better bokeh? Greater separation between subject and background. Not always possible, but something to look for when composing the image. Another option would be to choose a lens with a short minimum focus distance. Get closer to the subject to throw the bakground out of focus.
same!
@@timothykieper Agreed. Now I’m shooting M43 I think about this more than I used to. It’s ‘easier’ to blur a background with FF, but likewise I’ve never been a fan of totally obliterated backgrounds (I appreciate there are some scenarios where it’s required), and I’m not the sort of person who shoots a portrait of someone from ten metres with them standing up against a fence, and then gets grumpy that the fence is in focus too!
I did a video in French about my regrets going full frame.
I think you missed some points that some people should consider too:
- With bigger camera / lens there is an higher expectations from relatives from your photos. It can put pressure on you.
- With more expensive gear you will be more reluctant to take it outside in difficult situations (at the beach, close to some water...) or you will be less comfortable to use it where the security is not top notch. You can be less comfortable during a trip in a poor country by showing off your big heavy expensive gear.
After many years I'm more comfortable with my full frame gear but damn, it's heavy. I hope that Canon will develop it's aps-c lens offer for their mirrorless offer.
An excellent summary of the differences. 'It depends' is so true. Simon has proved it and others have said it.
Re bodies & lenses
Body weights and sizes are decreasing. So too for lenses. Eg Canon's R series (mirrorless) 24-240 and 100-400 are lightweight FF lenses but price competitive with APS-C lenses! If you are thinking APS-C, you could still choose them and keep the FF option open for later on! Quality is fine. Far better than typical kit lenses. Lots of reviews around say so.
My move
I had a ten year old Canon 600D (18MP APS-C) with Tamron 18-270. Loved it. I do travel grab shots. So an APS-C upgrade would probably have done me. Instead I got a Canon RP (26MP FF) and Canon 24-240.
Why?
I did NOT lose 'reach' over my old gear. Crop of new gear better IQ than full image of old gear.
Regardless, most of my pics are in the 24-200 range on FF. So reach not critical.
The difference in price for FF bodies and lenses in mirrorless is narrowing fast. Mid range APS-C options can be dearer than entry level FF options!
Got some discounts on the RP + 24-240 too good to refuse! That FF v APS-C price gap is shrinking regardless.
I gained IQ over my old gear. Over new APS-C? I added an R50 for super-reaching. Not a body I'd recommend for regular use. So far FF better IQ.
I LOST a few hundred grams in weight! Though the separate flash added it back. So I'm weight equivalent with a better flash and FF advantages.
With mirrorless I get a better image in the viewfinder of what to expect. Got back what I liked about my Fuji 6MP mirrorless from 15 years ago!
I didn't need most of the features found in mid-range bodies. eg 15fps+, better video, etc. The RP has more than what I had before.
So how did that all happen?
More MP? 18MP went to 26MP So probably. Maybe later technology pixels too.
FF pixels (larger) v APS-C pixels (smaller)? In low light, yes. Otherwise maybe. Even the belief that larger pixels are always better is being challenged!
New lens? Probably. My old one was 10 years old and collected a little inside dust. Manufacturing technology is always improving. The lens served me well.
Moving from Tamron to a budget Canon lens? Unknown. My old Tamron v a new Tamron may have been similar. At the time Canon did not allow third party R series lenses.
Change from mirror to mirrorless? Yes. Mirrorless allows for smaller and lighter bodies and lenses v mirror bodies. That means cheaper v mirrored bodies! (Reverse for second hand!)
New firmware / software. Yes. Lens correction now happens in the Canon's body.
Which is exactly why Simon started with 'it depends', introduced the factors at play (when just one factor changes) and then leaves it up to you. Perfect. As others have said too.
And what have I now done? Added an R50 (APS-C 24MP) and a Canon 100-400! Got them on discount. The R50 is too small for everyday use for me. But it's good enough for the odd super reach shots I might take! 400 x 1.6 = 600+! I'll leave Simon to do the super IQ, super reach shots! Maybe I should have just bought his African Safari shots instead?
Now if I wanted / needed an L lens with F1.8, then my budget would have said APS-C!
That "I know you can do it ! ;) " always leaves me with a smile :D
Love your videos Simon - wether you need the tips in the video or not, its always fun to watch them 💪
Several years I went on a workshop shooting eagles. I had three cameras a Canon 6DMKII, 7DMKII and Olympus OM-D E-M1X. My best eagle images were from the 7DMKII with the 100-400 and 1.4 extender. That said my best inflight image was on the Olympus with the 300 Pro lens. While camera choice is important that choice is more based on the end use. If you “really need” a full frame so you can crop that actually says more about how you shoot than anything else. In the end I believe my images were the result of having 3 really good cameras, the best lenses available, a sturdy tripod and a good gimbal head than the sensor size.
Congratulations Simon on your well deserved milestone! I feel some folk get too hung up on camera gear rather than the pure creative joy photography can bring to us 😎
Yes it is !!! I have FullFrame R8 and its MUCH-MUCH better then my last before 550d ;)))) Only Full Frame !!!
You have such a good educational channel, Simon. And you make it all a little easier to understand than some photography channels.
68 here; been with Nikon since 1974- that said, I use both formats; 810s (FX) and a D500 (crop). The 500 is for high FPS; the crop factor= my glass is 1.5x magnified/POV. A 200-500mm tele is now a 300-750mm. At some point I’ll add a used Z body….because some features of mirrorless are too good to ignore. FWIW: I haven’t bought a NEW camera body, ANY format, film or digital, since 1978; EVERYTHING used…, from hobbyists, LOW use.
Love your videos, Simon. I watch Them even though I already know the material because your explanations are so good. You are one of the best teachers on youtube.
You always explain things soooo well ... Simply and straight to the point ... Thank You 🎉
I went from 7d to a 6d plus now the Canon 70-200 is usm f4, best choice i could ever make! This combination gives me so much more benefits using it in low light and still get crisp result!
When I moved to mirroless, I went from canon full frame to fujifilm crop sensor, best decision as a wedding photographer. Smaller kit means my back and wrist don’t hurt at the end of a 10 hour day. Cheaper lenses mean I get to experiment with more focal lengths without breaking the bank. And I view getting a deeper depth of field at wider apertures a benefit as weddings can be notoriously dark.
Do not fool yourself - DoF is not affected by sensor size nor by FL used. DoF depends solely on used F number and magnification of the subject. Thus if you take the photo by GFX or m4/3 or anything in between and the subject will be the same size on printed photo or displayed on screen, the DoF will be the same if the same F number is used to take the photo. (Even if it is used zoom lens and distance to subject is corrected to maintain the same subject magnification on zooming - DoF will be the same.) Only FG ~ BG separation will be different because FL is main factor influencing BG blur.
@@PavelR2 I'm confused, FG - BK Separation is a factor of DOF.
DOF does change based on distance to subject and focal length (which is what crop sensor forces you to change). Macro photos can have an f5.6 and only have a DOF of a couple of inches. Or, if you focus on a building that is 100 yards away, your DOF is going to be 100 yards out to infinity.
@@andrewselbyphotography DoF and BG blur is affected by the same variables but by different amount. You can not comapre photo of building and photo of insect - there is only same FL, aperture and sensor size but the subject is not comparable. My example was about shooting person (or group of people) with the same F number: different FL and from different distance (same sensor) or with different FL and different sensor size from the same distance, with the person the same size in the print / on display in both mentioned cases. In that scenario longer FL produce more blurred BG, but DoF will be the same. BG blur is the most affected by FL because bigger FL = smaller portion of BG (narrower FoV) need to fill the frame = BG is more magnified. You can try to input the values in your favourite DoF calculator (change only FL and sensor size and DOF will be the same [for example FF vs 2x crop + halving the FL]).
@@PavelR2 Okay, I just did a DoF calculator. One for a fuji xt5 33mm at 1.4 subject at 2 meters, and one for a canon 5d 50mm at 1.4 subject at 2 meters. These are equivalent fields of view, so the subject distance and the framing would be exactly the same.
The Fuji had a DoF of .20 meters
The Canon had a DoF of .13 meters
The DoF changed because, in order to get the same shot on a crop sensor, you need to change either your focal length or your distance to the subject. Changing your focal length will give you the same framing.
So I still don't know what you are talking about.
@@PavelR2 you are almost correct: DOF depends on lens aperture (not f-number, which is ratio of aperture to focal length) and image magnification - but on the sensor or film, not in the end print/display.
So a larger format has shallower DOF for the same field of view, f-number and image distance because a) the aperture is larger because the focal length is longer for the same FOV, and b) the image magnification is greater onto the larger sensor/film format
I just bought a 7D mark II to complement my 6D mark II for wildlife photography and muah… best decision ever!
This videos are really good to explain why you need full frame and why you MIGHT not need it. The thing is if you're starting with photography buying a cheap second hand camera has millions of possibilities and it's better than anything any great photographer of the 90s and before have available
When I got my hands on my full frame camera, I was shocked how much heavier it was than my crop sensor camera. Same with the lenses. I upgraded from a Canon T7 to a Sony A7Rv recently, so it has been a huge change. I absolutely LOVE the Sony for landscapes and such. I haven't been able to hike like I normally do because of knee issues, but once those are fixed, I'm really debating which camera will be joining me on my hikes and backpacking trips. The Sony's image quality is unmatched, but the T7 is SO much lighter and smaller. Time will tell!
I use a canon 250d , the lightest dslr ever made by Canon and its such a treat to use and carry , even with a big zoom lens like the 18-135 efs or the pancake 24 , i rarely find myself even using the 18 mm on that big lens but i zoom a lot so dslrs work for me 📷
Idk if you'll see this but you're one of if not the main reason I am pursuing photography for a year now, rarely have i had a week without doing some street photography or other types of photos , i download a lot of your vids to watch at my job , and ive learnt a lot from you ever since
Thank you Simon. This is the clearest explanation of the differences and benefits of crop and full-frame sensors that I have ever heard. Thank you so much. Dave from down-under 🇦🇺👍
Thank you, this is the first time I heard an explanation that make sense regarding background blur between FF and crop. All the UA-camrs would just say about the sensor, it didn't really made sense to me since the difference would not create that effect if it's just the sensor.
Well explained video again from Simon.
The benefits of each sensor size is why I have both an APSC and a Full Frame in my gear stash. As much as people recommend just dropping my APS-C and buy a second full frame, I couldn't let go of the smaller format because of its small overall form factor esp. when you couple it with apsc lenses. This really gets very handy when on travel.
Congrats Simon for half a million Subscribers So me too Subscribing now till date just watched but now am a subscriber too ! Love your contents all are really interesting. Thanks 😊. Love from Mumbai , India.
I take my Fuji X100V on road bicycle rides using the PS Bagworks rider strap and a JJC neoprene camera case. It’s a brilliant little camera, weather sealed and the built-in ND filter is really handy. The form factor is perfect as I hardly ever notice that I’m carrying it when riding. 📷🚴♂️🇨🇦🙂 PS: Congratulations on the 500K milestone … well done!
Just bought a sony a7 iii im new to all this but im having so much fun just capturing moments in time!
Hey Simon! Just wanted to say: I’m an audio engineer, and I can literally hear you getting better at your audio finishing processes! 👍 I remember you mentioning before in one of your advertisements that you were going to pursue that course of study.
It’s paying off! ✌️👌👌👌👌
I have learned probably 1/2 of how to function in photography world competently from your videos.
Thank you for never compromising 🙏 📷
Your content helps the entire community 🤘
I am almost 63 and with several disabilities. In my use case, M43 with 150-400 + 1.25tc + digital lossless doubling gives me 2000mm. Safe to "creep up to crocodiles" that way, or lions.
I started this year with the Sony a6700 three zoom lenses and a prime. It all fits into a 20l backpack which is amazing. To me low light performance is mostly about fast enough lenses, so I tend to favour aperture over focal length when buying. I shoot street, landscape and wildlife. So far it is an amazing APS-C experience.
Simon, excellent video with clear narration, helpful graphics, nice example photos, and perfect delivery of the info. I like how you produce your videos, explain the tech stuff, and show examples and options and tips. Keep up the good work (subscribed).
Many thanks!
I have been using ASPC Nikons for years (D3300, D5300, D7500) Started to photo dryland sled dog racing in poor light; first tried the Z50 ASPC for 'real time' exposure and faster frames rates; now have gone FF with the Z6, low light performance is incredible! Also image quality in good light and faster shutter speeds make the FF a great camera! Still use the Z50 for the extra reach with a 300mm lens.
Great channel and videos :)
As an underwater photographer I decided to go with a full frame camera when I was new thinking of the low light aspects of the sensor. in reality I need much more light to get clean images with a full frame sensor due to needing to shoot at F11 or higher. The issue is with a wide lens (16-35) a dome port is needed. A dome port projects a curved image in front of the camera which is where the camera actually focuses on not the subject its self. Being a curved image depth of field becomes and issue if you want anything but the center in focus. A smaller sensor camera can get away with a smaller dome port or the same size dome port but because of the crop factor the projected image is flatter. The flatter image allows for an aperture that is lower for a clean image thus requiring lower light for a given ISO. There are other benefits to shooting a full frame camera underwater but it does make the system much larger.
I agree with most of the points, but in 6:18 I actually prefer the M50 picture - more pleasing for me, the R6 picture looks like it's already been through some post processing in the camera, the M50 looks more natural
11:58 actually this is not true - smaller sensor will have a little bit shallower depth of field, but because we have to go "back" to have the same size of the subject it negates and FF has shallower DOF in the end, so the size of the sensor actually does directly alter the image, but in an opposite way than most think :)
Anyway, great video as always!
I started my digital photography journey with an apsc. I bought full frame for the greater angle of view and better low light performance.
I have kept my crop sensor where I need greater reach. Have recently bought a 150 to 600mm zoom so on the crop sensor will now be virtually redundant as I wish to try my hand at wildlife photography and the better low light performance from full frame will give me faster shutter speeds with lower iso and hence less noise.
Back in the film days we called this a grainy image. Can look okay in certain situations especially monochrome rather than colour.
I shoot with my RX10IV for so long now. I sometimes forget it's just a one inch. Yea! One Inch, even smaller than APS-C, I love it so much and the only upgrade I see is the ability to use prime lenses. I don't care about the sensor at ALL.
Best explanation of sensor size choices and what works best in particular scenarios. I’m sure that will help a lot of people whom might be thinking bigger is always better. Well done (again)!
Congrats on your 513K!
I still have my Canon 60D, I use it for Macro with a 35mm Macro lens, no need for a full frame for this type of photos; sometimes I take it for wild life and paintball, depending on "the mood".
I bought a Canon 5D IV, more expensive, but great dynamic range compared to my 60D.
Great reminder for those of us craving full frame and for beginners who are confused by hype. I'm using my full frame Nikon for the backyard birds. With a 150-50mm it has helped me get shots that adapt to lighting better. However, I have been in search of a M43 or light weight option for travel. On the other hand, M43 lenses are getting HUGE. Then the smaller size issue is a moot one. You are to me, one of the top educators on UA-cam, Simon!
Om1 and 300mm
@@ForrestHoguethanks. It’s on my short list.
That depends of what use you need. If you do most Macro and Bird Photography, then a 40 megapixels APSC Camera will be very nice, but if you do fx Landscape Photography, then a 60 megapixels full frame Camera will be very nice.
I upgraded from my d3100 go a d7100. Most of the knowledge that i put into practice was stuff i learned from your videos! I thought i would drop photography like i drop other hobbies but its beem consistently fun
The D7100 is a wonderful camera and it takes beautiful pictures. That is my only APS-c camera. You can get some incredible cheap glass for the D7100 with legendary D lenses like the 180mm D and the 60mm D macro (the holy grail for macro being the 200mm f4 D, which is as good as any macro lens on the planet). You can always check out images for specific lenses on flickr. And of course, there are plenty of nice G lenses and even cheap as dirt AI-S F lenses.
I started about two month ago with a Canon SL2/200D, so the compactness is a charm and it takes pretty nice shots. Currently with a 55-250 stm for wildlife and the kit for landscape.
I guess if in the future I want to switch to full frame I'll try to look for something relatively compact like the r8
I see it this way: Since every Nikon (I use Nikon) crop camera is 21 mp and because a 45 mp cropped down full frame is 28 mp, the full frame can capture everything an aps-c can, and more. And I rather have an uncropped image and crop it later by hand, than an already cropped image in the first place.
Still, I would mostly recommend aps-c to friends. To me, size and price are not so important. But for most others, it is. And the differences are big. Aps-c is definitively the much better price vs. performance.
Congrats on the 500k. Well deserved! My favorite photography channel by far!
Wow, thanks!
Surprised it's not 5 million! Many haven't discovered you yet. Simon by far has the best and most useful training and info videos! Very easy to understand and the way he describes everything is crystal clear to understand by even people that have no knowledge of any of this subject.
@@RonL2023 couldn't agree more
I'd say, it totally depends on ones uses. I owned FF DSLR's WAY back in the day, and they were great for landscapes, or anything I could get close enough to.
My first mirrorless camera was the R5, and it was a fine camera for a lot of things, but shooting mostly small birds, I was constantly struggling to get enough reach, even with an 800mm lens, 100% crops were the norm. Finally I rented the crop body R7. Loved it so much, I bought one. Then the R5 sat on the dresser collecting dust. Finally I sold it and bought a second R7 for my backup. That was 2 yrs ago, and I've never looked back.
Shooting with the 800 F11, I now have a 1280mm equivalent reach, which after close to 300K shots taken with this combo, feels pretty normal to me. Can't wait to get the 200-800 (on order) which will be everything I have now, but WAY more versatility. I've actually already rented it, and I consider that lens, on the R7, to be the Holy Grail for small bird photography.
For myself, 'upgrading' from the R5 to the R7 was a great decision :)
Big congrats Simon, on the 500K subscribers :) You have a fantastic channel, and I always have to watch new episodes as soon as you post them :) Thank you :)
Along with impeccable photography, It is great to watch a well planned scripted and edited UA-cam video!
Thank you very much!
I have all 3 😊 love all 3, Olympus ep 1, Fujifilm xt1, Sony a7iii the biggest difference are the lenses and the low light ability off the full frame. Use my xt1 as a carry on when cycling, waterproof and easy to replace, Use my Sony for low light and fast moving objects. As for lenses cost … FF are cheaper especially 2nd hand.
Congratulations on the number of subscribers. This doesn’t surprise me as I was following you back when you had 10,000 or less.
Another great video which makes understanding cameras, Photography, and other subjects related easy to understand.
I recently made a huge jump from a Canon R10 to a Canon R5, and wow! The difference is apparent, but the lost of focal range is as well. I am a nature and wildlife photographer, but will take on any challenge. I can confidently say that it is great to have full frame, but currently being limited to only 500mm isn’t the greatest at times.
I'm considering a full frame camera but still on the fence simply because as a mere hobbyist I'm not sure the expense is justified, even if I purchase a used camera (I already have two EF lenses).
After shooting with my gf's Rebel T7 crop sensor for a year, I decided to get my own. After months of picking through details, I settled on the EOS RP full frame. I've taken it in the woods, to the beach, to the city. Wonderful camera for my area of Nova Scotia in the south. I picked up a 2nd hand 70-300 and have even gotten some good shots of wildlife.
Amazingly good camera for the cost.
Clear explanation as always. I actually use both full and crop frame sensors. Each has a unique advantage over the other. For longer reach, I prefer APSC cameras, but for better bokeh on portraits, Full Frame is my choice. If I go for a hike, APSC and their lenses are lighter to carry.
I use a Nikon D700 for full-frame. I shoot social dance events and most of the time, the lights are turned down and people are moving quite fast, not to mention the dance venues can vary from a HS gym to a rustic barn. Having a FF can give me a true 24 or 35mm FoV, with the added benefit of a 1.8/1.4 aperture.
I love my D500, but the D700 helps me out tremendously.
Superb as usual
Superb as always
I just upgradee to R5 from APS-C and the lowlight performance increase blew my mind, definetly worth the upgrade. Sure, for my wildlife photography I'm losing a bit of focal length but I'd rather take that and then crop the image in post compared to having extremely noisy pictures when shooting in low light.
Yeah, it's like using a cheat code in a video game, isn't it? Bye, bye, grainy photos.
You asked for comments about switching from crop to full frame. In my case I currently shoot with the MFT Olympus/OMDS OM-1, and I was considering on switching to a Nikon Z8. The Z8 in many ways is similar to my OM-1, both are jacks of all trades. Both can do high res landscape (OM-1 using sensor shift), both shoot fast bursts for sports and wildlife, and are both very good general purpose cameras. Cost wasn't much of a factor, all of the lenses I have would have paid for a smaller set of lenses for the Nikon, but typically f/4 instead of f/2.8. The improvements in lens weight, quality and higher ISO shooting, make it possible.
Each system has its advantages which I won't go into. But my main reason was thinking of moving to Nikon over OMDS was my concern that OMDS may not keep up with the improvements in technology. I'm fairly certain that Nikon, Canon and Sony all have better AF than the OM-1. It's a question of will new technologies that make things easier for photographers (e.g. Canon's R1 sports tracking modes) be something OMDS will be able to keep up with. Thom Hogan was even raising the question if Nikon would be able to keep up, his verdict was probably.
But in the end I decided to stay with the OM-1. Main reason, moving to the Nikon wouldn't currently improve my photography substantially. I am still the weak link. Perhaps in two years I'll reevaluate my decision.
BTW, I really enjoy your videos. I know most of it, but every now and then I pick out something I didn't know or a different perspective.
What I realized the most as a beginner photographer is that you’re always hungry for new gear. You’re constantly looking for something that can do everything when there’s simply no such option. It’s easy to just constantly look for ways to upgrade your gear instead of trying to master what you have already. This is especially true for us guys since tech channels are heavily targeted towards us. It quickly turns into some kind of obsession where we analyze, compare and disregard stuff that’s barely a year old. I build computers, take photos and produce music so I know this better than anyone. xD
Right now I’ve settled for a Fuji X-H2S and one tele, macro and wide lense. It’s taking some time not to look for new stuff but I’m at ease now with what I have, Because I realize it’s already a LOT. (I’m still craving a brand new drone though…)
I know that feeling, every time something new comes out it’s hard to resist the temptation, but recently I’ve found cameras so good that the only thing holding me back is me !! I’ve been digital since 2004 and film for many years before that but I would say when I got the Canon R5 2.5 years ago it felt like the Swiss Army knife of photography even compared to the 5Div I had before (not that the 5Div wasn’t a top camera) but I had finally decided to switch to mirrorless. BTW drone laws are so strict here in NZ they aren’t worth the agro.
Wow! I like this camera 📸
Congrats on half a million subs!!! Very well deserved! I'm one of those who did not switch to full frame due to the advantage of crop sensors for wildlife.
I went from a canon 80d to an RP to an R6. Going to full frame instantly felt so much better. I like the look, color depth, and contrast. I’m sure there are some great crop sensor cameras but I won’t go back.
thanks for the education on the advancement of cameras, I had a Brownie, graduated to an 127 and then to 35mm, I have 62 years of photography taking, you teach me lots Simon, thank you, do your viewers even know what a Brownie is ?
I switched from ff to apsc, fuji, but currently selling my fuji gear to go back to ff. Good lenses are also heavy on apsc if you want the same dof. Ff also isn't heavy anymore, check the r8 and even r6 isn't so heavy