In the end price matters happy with my ZVE10 , Cheap lenses, Small file size, Cheap SD card , Compact form factor And easily Upgradable in 3-4 years easy on pocket 😊
I started to have an interest in photography about 2 years ago and got myself a Nikon D3500. Sadly, it took a very small bump in my backpack and the screen wont turn back on and that made me put the hobby aside till about 5 months ago. Picked it back up and got a loaner Canon T6i with a full frame Samyang 85mm lens (Again, I was lacking in knowledge of anything camera related) from a friend. I wanted to get a better camera but knew nothing. Started to watch all of these youtubers talking about Sony full frame cameras in almost every video that comes up. Almost got one but then I saw a video on the Fujifilm X-t2 and I fell in love. Im already use to having an APSC camera so why not get something im already use to. After doing a ton of forum reading and youtube watching, I decided to get a X-H1 with a 35mm fuji lens. I'm very excited for its arrival. Great video btw!
Hey Thomas! Love your content! I'm thinking of getting the Sony ZV-E10 for recording lecture videos, especially at a distance of around 15 meters. Do you think it's a good choice for this purpose? If yes, could you suggest any specific settings or lenses that would work best? If not, I'd really appreciate your recommendation for a camera that's suitable for recording 90-minute lectures at a distance of 15-20 meters. Your videos are awesome, by the way - keep up the great work! 📷🎥
Well said. Steering people away from spending unwisely is the right way to go. I have the ZV-E10. What a wonderful camera. So small, takes great photos and doesn't stick out like if you have an A7SIII. I also have and love my A7R3 and that is used strictly for photography where it shines. 24mp sensors can get close to photo quality but, in the end, the 42mp runs away for a variety of reason. To be clear, the ZV-E10 takes amazing photos. I just used the R3 for bird, bug and anything small macro photography.
First off. Great Video. You explained well your reasons for shooting APSC. The ZV-E10 was my first APSC camera that I used for my TH-cam channel. I love it. My only wish is that it had better stabilization, and that's about it. I did go back and forth between upgrading between the ZV-E1 and the A6700. In the end, i decided to go with the a6700. Pre-ordered it. I think it is a great upgrade from my ZV-e10 and a well balanced camera. I love the features and sensor on the ZV-e1, and the a6700 has about 90% of them. But a few times a year, I shoot, Interviews, Podcasts, and Seminars I speak at that go over an hour. The ZV-e1 may overheat, and I just can't take that chance when filming, as I cannot control the temperature of the all the rooms I shoot it.
Have you been happy with the a6700? Im a hobby photographer with only Ricoh GR IIIx, but im thinking of stepping up my game and im debating between FF and a6700. I'm also planning to shoot cinematic b-roll. I think the a6700 would be the perfect levegare camera to get in the game, but i still want to hear from it. Thanks :)
great video. well explained , everything makes sense. i think the same way , thats why i stick with panasonic gh cameras. the whole package is hard to beat if you are not rich
after going full frame for few years. I went back to apsc as back up. Picked a used 6100 and it is great. I am enjoying it now more than the FF. The form factor is great. Rocking all FF glasses on it. I hold on my glasses instead of the camera due to larger sizes but it feels compact actually. The best thing is that the glasse are so affordable and great ranges better than FF line ups. 1.4 lenses are so cheap. trio prime prices equivalent for a single ff lenses. I also knew better that 50% of magic happens on the desktop so really even with a normal photo with adequate editting skills you will easily ace most of the gear heads on socmed.
Thanks for this informative and well-structured video. You just gained a new sub. I assume you likely prefer Sony, but nonetheless wonder what you think about an R7 with an adapted 18-35 Sigma and a black pro mist filter. Really can't justify the price of going full frame safe for the S5IIx, which is not exactly FF, has an unreliable app, and, let's face it's not on par in terms of AF with Sony and Canon. Regards!
Great content Thomas ! If I may just add my opinion, the equivalent of an apsc 16mm f1.4 would rather be a 24mm f1.8 (f2.1 actually), because the amount of light you get from a certain aperture in apsc also divides by the crop factor. So that makes the equivalents much "cheaper" than the equivalent focal lengths with the same aperture ;)
True, correct me if I’m wrong, but the amount of light hitting the sensor is still the same as a full frame f1.4, but the image has the depth of field equivalent of a f2.1?
well said. i've been using zve10 since it came out and definitely love it! just need a few upgrades, such as a cine lens would be great. anyway, im going to customise my full setup rig just like yours, soon ahaha
I'm already at a disadvantage with DSLR as a street photographer until I can afford mirrorless, so I'm not about to add more bulk by going to a full frame camera. OR having to buy even bigger lenses because of decreased focal length on a ff sensor.
I also find that I prefer the close focus distance when I’m shooting super 35. Apsc lenses like the 18-35 let you focus way closer than a FF 24-70 would
@@thomasjmcclure nah for sure they did. I mean I was shooting on a canon 90d most of my career, recently switched to a fx30 and the lowlight performance of that camera far exceeds what my 90d could do. And tbh if you're using super 35 you should have a decent light kit anyways.
Yeah it’s just one of those little things that bugs me when I shoot with my c70 speedboosted vs pass through adapter. I suddenly can’t get so close and focus on the thing I want big in the frame.
Great. But you are wrong about tele, compression and APSC. The focal length of the lenses is what gives you the compression effect or perspective of the image. Basically for the angle of view in relation with the position of the subject of focus. The size of the sensor is nothing to do with that. The crop sensor only makes a crop of the theoretical same field of view of the full frame with the same lens. Is like you cropped an image from a full frame in Lightroom.
True, i didn’t articulate that quite right, the reason I prefer the crop is because it is easier to get a more “zoomed in” image, not necessarily more compressed. however getting lenses that enable you to achieve a zoomed in image is more affordable than that of full frame.
@@thomasjmcclure yes, APSC is great for reach far subjects, not only is more affordable, it's lighter and smaller and that is a great advantage when hiking or in the middle of nature
"Is like you cropped an image from a full frame in Lightroom" is not correct. If I have a 32MP APSC I will need a 82MP FF camera to be able to crop to 32MP. 82MP FF camera does NOT exist.
I hate APS-C because I have a large inventory of full-frame lenses and wanted to use them on a full-frame digital camera. For example, my favorite go-to lens was a 35mm f/1.4 wide-angle. However, on an APS-C digital body, my 35mm wide-angle performed like a normal lens. To obtain the same angle-of-view, I had to mount my 24mm f/2 lens on my APS-C. However, I ran into two problems. 1. I lost one f/stop of light gathering. 2. My 24 was a manual focus lens and my digital APS-C camera was primarily an auto focus camera. I hated being forced to do something that I was trying to avoid -- buying a new 23mm f/1.4 auto focus lens. By the time Nikon and Leica produced full-frame cameras that I liked, I had accumulated an inventory of eight APS-C lenses.
Interesting reason to “hate” it lol. If you have already invested in good full frame lenses, then going with a full frame camera makes Waaaay more sense! (Most people when making a decision like this are beginners, or don’t have a large collection of lenses) I don’t think the field of view difference is a problem, as much as it’s just something to be aware of. I really don’t find it makes a difference for me personally. Just something to be conscious of when choosing a lens for a specific shot.
@@thomasjmcclure Another example where it affected me was with my Leica rangefinder. The three lens kit I normally used was: 35mm f/1.4 90mm f/2 21mm f/1.4 Using those three lenses on my APS-C digital gave me the equivalent useless focal length equivalents: 53mm normal lens 135mm 31mm To shoot with an APS-C lens kit that would meet my needs, I had to buy the following APS-C lenses: 23mm f/1.4 56mm f/1.2 16mm f/1.4
@@thomasjmcclure Another example where it affected me was with my 28mm perspective control lens that I used for exterior architectural work and product shots. The 28mm wide-angle focal length was perfect for what I needed. However, on an APS-C body, it was totally worthless to me because it performed like a 42mm normal lens.
@@thomasjmcclure Another example where it affected me was with my widest wide-angle lens. For interior architectural shots, my widest lens for my Nikon SLR was an 18mm lens that gave me a 90 degree horizontal angle-of-view. On the APS-C body, the 18mm delivered an angle-of-view similar to a 28mm lens on my full-frame cameras. To obtain the 90 degree angle-of-view I needed, I had to buy a 12mm APS-C lens for my APS-C digital cameras.
So it seems clear that your issue is just the difference in field of view on apsc compared to full frame. That’s where it’s just important to have the right lens for the job. If you have a bunch of full frame lenses, and need those focal lengths for specific things, then make sure to use a full frame camera. That’s not a “problem with apsc” it’s just that you don’t have the right lenses for an apsc camera for what you’re wanting. It’s important to pair the right lenses with the right camera for each job/shoot you have. The difference in field of view isn’t a “bad” thing, it’s just A thing to be aware of.
I use MFT Lumix G7 because its weight and size, unfortunetelly this particular camera has unuseable autofocus, it is fine, except if I am in the frame :-) so now looking for an "autofocus beast"
I find APSC to be the style ive enjoyed using the most. I learned on a GH4 back in the day and really loved it. still love the bmpcc 4k to this day. But I really enjoy Sony's camera lineup, style, autofocus, ecosystem and lens choices etc. but I do enjoy M4/3, and theres a lot of great m4/3 cameras out there
Hey, I am a beginner wanna buy a camera for Street and Portraits Suggest me a camera, ZVe10 (EVF is not necessary) or 6400 with Kit lens or 6100 with Sigma lens or Nikon z50
I’d agree that the zve10 with a good lens like that is gonna do amazingly for the money. But if money is tight, I’d aim for a cheaper body with better lenses that a really good body with bad lenses
What I have noticed is that people like to say that shooting full frame makes you a pro, and to me that's a terrible statement. The equipment becomes nothing without skill behind it.
in general yes, especially first party lenses ie canon lenses RF are very expensive some of the most expensive but since you're looking at 6D mk 1 there will be alot of option open to you that are pretty cheap. BUT those lenses and bodies from that generation are very big and very heavy. If you're just starting out Id actually be inclined to push you towards a fuji X100 fixed lens camera they keep there value if dont like the hobby so you'll get your money back and its an enjoyable camera to use that will really teach you the fundamentals of photography very quickly with the very visible dials many get frustrated with the canon button press spin this operation. And since it only has the one lens (well there are adaptors so 3 lense) if will stop you from buying unnecessary photography gear and will let you concentrate on just taking pictures.
What’s your thoughts on APSC? Love it? Hate it?
I shoot on the FX30 and love it. I don't mind at all that it is APSC and not full frame.
APSC for video, FF for photos
I shoot full frame, it supports the real gem lenses.
I need the better low light performance because i do a lot of dark work.
In the end price matters happy with my ZVE10 , Cheap lenses, Small file size, Cheap SD card , Compact form factor And easily Upgradable in 3-4 years easy on pocket 😊
Absolutely! I’ve just ordered an a6700 which i think may be the best progression from the zve10 when people wanna upgrade
I started to have an interest in photography about 2 years ago and got myself a Nikon D3500. Sadly, it took a very small bump in my backpack and the screen wont turn back on and that made me put the hobby aside till about 5 months ago. Picked it back up and got a loaner Canon T6i with a full frame Samyang 85mm lens (Again, I was lacking in knowledge of anything camera related) from a friend. I wanted to get a better camera but knew nothing. Started to watch all of these youtubers talking about Sony full frame cameras in almost every video that comes up. Almost got one but then I saw a video on the Fujifilm X-t2 and I fell in love. Im already use to having an APSC camera so why not get something im already use to. After doing a ton of forum reading and youtube watching, I decided to get a X-H1 with a 35mm fuji lens. I'm very excited for its arrival. Great video btw!
I have a friend that has the x-t2 and it’s a pretty sweet camera!
Hey Thomas! Love your content! I'm thinking of getting the Sony ZV-E10 for recording lecture videos, especially at a distance of around 15 meters. Do you think it's a good choice for this purpose? If yes, could you suggest any specific settings or lenses that would work best? If not, I'd really appreciate your recommendation for a camera that's suitable for recording 90-minute lectures at a distance of 15-20 meters. Your videos are awesome, by the way - keep up the great work! 📷🎥
Well said. Steering people away from spending unwisely is the right way to go. I have the ZV-E10. What a wonderful camera. So small, takes great photos and doesn't stick out like if you have an A7SIII. I also have and love my A7R3 and that is used strictly for photography where it shines. 24mp sensors can get close to photo quality but, in the end, the 42mp runs away for a variety of reason. To be clear, the ZV-E10 takes amazing photos. I just used the R3 for bird, bug and anything small macro photography.
First off. Great Video. You explained well your reasons for shooting APSC. The ZV-E10 was my first APSC camera that I used for my TH-cam channel. I love it. My only wish is that it had better stabilization, and that's about it. I did go back and forth between upgrading between the ZV-E1 and the A6700. In the end, i decided to go with the a6700. Pre-ordered it. I think it is a great upgrade from my ZV-e10 and a well balanced camera. I love the features and sensor on the ZV-e1, and the a6700 has about 90% of them. But a few times a year, I shoot, Interviews, Podcasts, and Seminars I speak at that go over an hour. The ZV-e1 may overheat, and I just can't take that chance when filming, as I cannot control the temperature of the all the rooms I shoot it.
I’m pretty excited about the a6700! It’s an interesting mix of the fx30 image, ZVE1 features and a nice small portable body
@@thomasjmcclure Exactly. Those are my thoughts.
Have you been happy with the a6700? Im a hobby photographer with only Ricoh GR IIIx, but im thinking of stepping up my game and im debating between FF and a6700.
I'm also planning to shoot cinematic b-roll. I think the a6700 would be the perfect levegare camera to get in the game, but i still want to hear from it. Thanks :)
Thank you. Just love my new a6700. Before I used a ZV-e10, but I missed the viewfinder.
great video. well explained , everything makes sense. i think the same way , thats why i stick with panasonic gh cameras. the whole package is hard to beat if you are not rich
after going full frame for few years. I went back to apsc as back up. Picked a used 6100 and it is great. I am enjoying it now more than the FF. The form factor is great. Rocking all FF glasses on it. I hold on my glasses instead of the camera due to larger sizes but it feels compact actually. The best thing is that the glasse are so affordable and great ranges better than FF line ups. 1.4 lenses are so cheap. trio prime prices equivalent for a single ff lenses. I also knew better that 50% of magic happens on the desktop so really even with a normal photo with adequate editting skills you will easily ace most of the gear heads on socmed.
Informative video as I was stuck between buying a A7IV and FX30. Btw what's the name of the watch you are wearing in this video ?
Thanks for this informative and well-structured video. You just gained a new sub. I assume you likely prefer Sony, but nonetheless wonder what you think about an R7 with an adapted 18-35 Sigma and a black pro mist filter. Really can't justify the price of going full frame safe for the S5IIx, which is not exactly FF, has an unreliable app, and, let's face it's not on par in terms of AF with Sony and Canon.
Regards!
I use APS-C GM lenses on my Sony a1. Best of both worlds - without the weight.
Great content Thomas ! If I may just add my opinion, the equivalent of an apsc 16mm f1.4 would rather be a 24mm f1.8 (f2.1 actually), because the amount of light you get from a certain aperture in apsc also divides by the crop factor. So that makes the equivalents much "cheaper" than the equivalent focal lengths with the same aperture ;)
True, correct me if I’m wrong, but the amount of light hitting the sensor is still the same as a full frame f1.4, but the image has the depth of field equivalent of a f2.1?
well said. i've been using zve10 since it came out and definitely love it! just need a few upgrades, such as a cine lens would be great. anyway, im going to customise my full setup rig just like yours, soon ahaha
Awesome! I actually just got sent a cine lens set that’s very affordable and may be perfect for the zve10. Should have a video made in a couple weeks!
I'm already at a disadvantage with DSLR as a street photographer until I can afford mirrorless, so I'm not about to add more bulk by going to a full frame camera. OR having to buy even bigger lenses because of decreased focal length on a ff sensor.
top of the top is to buy one APSC and one FF ;) ahah ! . tx a lot for your thought on this hot topic dude !
Which camera and lens are you using to make this video ? Focal length ? Distance between camera and yourself ?
I also find that I prefer the close focus distance when I’m shooting super 35. Apsc lenses like the 18-35 let you focus way closer than a FF 24-70 would
Interesting, i haven’t thought about looking at the difference in the typical focal distance between the two lenses!
Modern apsc/super 35 sensors perform insanely well. The only truly noticeable gap is in lowlight.
True, lowlight for apsc is kinda where full frame was about 5-6 years ago. The a7siii and fx3 really changed the game for lowlight i think
@@thomasjmcclure nah for sure they did. I mean I was shooting on a canon 90d most of my career, recently switched to a fx30 and the lowlight performance of that camera far exceeds what my 90d could do. And tbh if you're using super 35 you should have a decent light kit anyways.
Yeah it’s just one of those little things that bugs me when I shoot with my c70 speedboosted vs pass through adapter. I suddenly can’t get so close and focus on the thing I want big in the frame.
Appreciate you man!
Great. But you are wrong about tele, compression and APSC. The focal length of the lenses is what gives you the compression effect or perspective of the image. Basically for the angle of view in relation with the position of the subject of focus. The size of the sensor is nothing to do with that. The crop sensor only makes a crop of the theoretical same field of view of the full frame with the same lens. Is like you cropped an image from a full frame in Lightroom.
True, i didn’t articulate that quite right, the reason I prefer the crop is because it is easier to get a more “zoomed in” image, not necessarily more compressed. however getting lenses that enable you to achieve a zoomed in image is more affordable than that of full frame.
@@thomasjmcclure yes, APSC is great for reach far subjects, not only is more affordable, it's lighter and smaller and that is a great advantage when hiking or in the middle of nature
"Is like you cropped an image from a full frame in Lightroom" is not correct.
If I have a 32MP APSC I will need a 82MP FF camera to be able to crop to 32MP.
82MP FF camera does NOT exist.
I hate APS-C because I have a large inventory of full-frame lenses and wanted to use them on a full-frame digital camera.
For example, my favorite go-to lens was a 35mm f/1.4 wide-angle. However, on an APS-C digital body, my 35mm wide-angle performed like a normal lens.
To obtain the same angle-of-view, I had to mount my 24mm f/2 lens on my APS-C. However, I ran into two problems.
1. I lost one f/stop of light gathering.
2. My 24 was a manual focus lens and my digital APS-C camera was primarily an auto focus camera.
I hated being forced to do something that I was trying to avoid -- buying a new 23mm f/1.4 auto focus lens.
By the time Nikon and Leica produced full-frame cameras that I liked, I had accumulated an inventory of eight APS-C lenses.
Interesting reason to “hate” it lol. If you have already invested in good full frame lenses, then going with a full frame camera makes Waaaay more sense! (Most people when making a decision like this are beginners, or don’t have a large collection of lenses)
I don’t think the field of view difference is a problem, as much as it’s just something to be aware of. I really don’t find it makes a difference for me personally. Just something to be conscious of when choosing a lens for a specific shot.
@@thomasjmcclure
Another example where it affected me was with my Leica rangefinder. The three lens kit I normally used was:
35mm f/1.4
90mm f/2
21mm f/1.4
Using those three lenses on my APS-C digital gave me the equivalent useless focal length equivalents:
53mm normal lens
135mm
31mm
To shoot with an APS-C lens kit that would meet my needs, I had to buy the following APS-C lenses:
23mm f/1.4
56mm f/1.2
16mm f/1.4
@@thomasjmcclure
Another example where it affected me was with my 28mm perspective control lens that I used for exterior architectural work and product shots. The 28mm wide-angle focal length was perfect for what I needed. However, on an APS-C body, it was totally worthless to me because it performed like a 42mm normal lens.
@@thomasjmcclure
Another example where it affected me was with my widest wide-angle lens. For interior architectural shots, my widest lens for my Nikon SLR was an 18mm lens that gave me a 90 degree horizontal angle-of-view. On the APS-C body, the 18mm delivered an angle-of-view similar to a 28mm lens on my full-frame cameras. To obtain the 90 degree angle-of-view I needed, I had to buy a 12mm APS-C lens for my APS-C digital cameras.
So it seems clear that your issue is just the difference in field of view on apsc compared to full frame. That’s where it’s just important to have the right lens for the job.
If you have a bunch of full frame lenses, and need those focal lengths for specific things, then make sure to use a full frame camera. That’s not a “problem with apsc” it’s just that you don’t have the right lenses for an apsc camera for what you’re wanting.
It’s important to pair the right lenses with the right camera for each job/shoot you have. The difference in field of view isn’t a “bad” thing, it’s just A thing to be aware of.
Are full frame lenses more more expensive than aps-c ones? I want to start photography and I'm on a budget and want to buy a used 6D mark I.
Yeah very much so. you can get high quality APSC lenses for around $500, for a full frame equivelant it'll be around $800 - $1200
I use MFT Lumix G7 because its weight and size, unfortunetelly this particular camera has unuseable autofocus, it is fine, except if I am in the frame :-) so now looking for an "autofocus beast"
Full frame works better for me in that it lets in more light, so what would normally be a low light situation isn't.
Great video
Thanks!
If you're gonna go crop censor why not go micro 4/3? Lenses are way smaller and cheaper 😮
I find APSC to be the style ive enjoyed using the most. I learned on a GH4 back in the day and really loved it. still love the bmpcc 4k to this day. But I really enjoy Sony's camera lineup, style, autofocus, ecosystem and lens choices etc. but I do enjoy M4/3, and theres a lot of great m4/3 cameras out there
@@thomasjmcclure ya im unsure what to use. Way more options than 20 years ago when we all used camcorder 📹. Wish sony made m43.
Hey,
I am a beginner wanna buy a camera for Street and Portraits
Suggest me a camera,
ZVe10 (EVF is not necessary) or 6400 with Kit lens or 6100 with Sigma lens or Nikon z50
I had the same dilemma a few weeks back. Got ZV-E10 with Sigma 16-50 f2.8 DC DN. Great bang for the buck!
I’d agree that the zve10 with a good lens like that is gonna do amazingly for the money. But if money is tight, I’d aim for a cheaper body with better lenses that a really good body with bad lenses
The other thing I’d say is don’t be afraid to shop used to save some money!
@@thomasjmcclure Absolutely. I bought my Sigma 18-50 and Viltrox 13mm used and would do it again in a heartbeat.
What I have noticed is that people like to say that shooting full frame makes you a pro, and to me that's a terrible statement. The equipment becomes nothing without skill behind it.
Nice channel fellow gear traveller here 🫡
Without ibis why they make videos? Just stupid marketing
BOKEH is so F-ing overrated.....please ! where is the emphasis on, subject matter or bokeh ?? 🤔🤔🤔
your video is over digitally sharpen
Are full frame lenses more more expensive than aps-c ones? I want to start photography and I'm on a budget and want to buy a used 6D mark I.
in general yes, especially first party lenses ie canon lenses RF are very expensive some of the most expensive but since you're looking at 6D mk 1 there will be alot of option open to you that are pretty cheap. BUT those lenses and bodies from that generation are very big and very heavy. If you're just starting out Id actually be inclined to push you towards a fuji X100 fixed lens camera they keep there value if dont like the hobby so you'll get your money back and its an enjoyable camera to use that will really teach you the fundamentals of photography very quickly with the very visible dials many get frustrated with the canon button press spin this operation. And since it only has the one lens (well there are adaptors so 3 lense) if will stop you from buying unnecessary photography gear and will let you concentrate on just taking pictures.