stop down, right? Well, unless I want to raise my ISO and/or lower my shutter speed, I’d rather just keep them the way they are to reduce grain/motion blur. I very often come across the annoyance of not having my entire subject in focus! So why not just. my point is, I have noticed when shooting on full frame at F/1.8 (or even sometimes F/2.8), that although I appreciate the amount of light my lens allows my sensor to receive for a quicker shutter speed. I understand if I could’ve explained it better, but I tried my best. Geez that’s a confusing explanation, but it makes sense if you can make it through the tunnel of confusion on this topic. Because technically, it's like you’re shooting a full frame 35mm F2 lens on the APS-C camera, just cropping it 1.5x due to the APS-C sensor being “cropped”. This is why 35mm at F2 on an APS-C sensor will produce a wider (more in focus) depth of field in comparison to a 50mm at F2 on a full frame sensor, even if the focal length appears the same. (Skip to “ANYWAYS” if you now understand the difference of DOF on full frame and APS-C)īeing that the APS-C sensor at its 35mm focal length is compressing the wider “actual” field of view of a Full Frame true 35mm image (remember my example above about adding a 1.5x crop to a Full Frame 35mm lens image), your results will resemble only the field of view of a Full Frame 50mm image, because the APS-C sensor again, is only cropping the composition of a Full Frame 35mm focal length image (which in result, is equivalent to a Full Frame un-cropped 50mm image), but not receiving any less light than a Full Frame sensor at F2. (the exposure will be the same).Ī further, yet non-essential explanation for my point: (the depth of field and composition on an APS-C sensor with a 35mm set at F/2 is similar to capturing an image on the Full Frame sensor with a 35mm set at F/2, then cropping the image 1.5x in post, to match the field of view and depth of field of the APS-C’s image.) With that being said, the only difference between the 35mm on the XT-4 and the 50mm on the A7iii, both at F2, with the same composition, would be the depth of field. You will capture an image with a wider (more in focus) depth of field on the X-T4, though the exposure and composition will (or should) be identical to that of the A7iii’s full frame sensor image. Skip to “ANYWAYS” if you already understand how sensor size and depth of field/field of view equivalency works.įirst off lets get something clear: An APS-C camera using the same full frame equivalent focal length, and the same literal aperture as a full frame camera (For example an X-T4 with a 35mm set at F/2 and a Sony A7iii with a 50mm set at F/2) will produce different results optically from the image captured on the Full Frame camera. also, one underrated advantage?Ĭaution: Very complicated explanation of DOF and Field of View equivalence between APS-C and FF Below. I loved the style of camera (dials and such), and it's creative workflow, though I know moving down to a smaller sensor comes with its disadvantages. I have been thinking of switching from a Sony a7iii to a Fuji X-T4 for a couple days now, and mainly the reason is due to the nostalgia I feel from the X-T2 I sold awhile ago, as well as the point I am trying to make in this post.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |