Crop Sensors vs Full Frame :: Crop Or Crap?

[@yanasitta]

You should think about upgrading to a full length stick from that crop stick.

[@troybailey1317]

you win the internet today sir

[@lrb05131963]

yanasitta ,maybe get a modern day Laser pointer...😃

[@aspirantpolymath]

But it lacks that satisfying ability to smack things! The stick made the video for me. That is some old school teaching right there.

[@stefanwrabetz5650]

Ah, but if you get a powerful one, you can sizzle things!

[@skim5481]

this comment made my day hahaha

[@jsong21]

This is probably the best photography lesson anyone has ever given.. Literally. This should be the first lesson for photography 101

[@CrashPCcz]

+jsong21 Yet in another wideo, he squeaks like little girl, arguing about how MF is way better than FF...

[@Ricardoelsupremo]

+CrashPCcz which one?

[@CrashPCcz]

I stumbled across that one somewhere on DPReview forum. It felt epic, knowing about this video for ling time. If I manage to find it, I´ll bring it. :-)

[@venikravitz]

Yes, it should be for beginners, who still do not understand the differences between the Pro HQ lenses and the cheap ones. One day they will. If you do not understand the differences you can use even the cam of your phone. The example with the both cameras into the video is more or less advertising, and cannot be an example for CROP vs FF.

[@hazelnut1401]

sport photography and wildlife photography made 35 mm camera king of all format and this moron can shoot biggest event on earth olympic with apsc camera and medium format

[@thegusmen15]

everytime i think about spending another $2K to get a new full frame body, i come here and watch this video again.

[@WSWEss]

... but the noise in hight iso....

[@tomrabel3526]

GBlaugrana I get your pint but I have shot a crop system for years and finally saved up enough for a D750. Sadly due to financial issues had to send it back after a week of shooting with it. Here's what I learned. What they tell you: The only benefit to full frame over crop is low light noise and bokeh. What I learned: Though the low light performance was great, most opinions I've listened to don't tell you HOW great. Example, my crop camera would never venture too far past ISO 1000 due to poor noise and camera shake due to low shutter speed. In those cases, I pull out my speed light but that adds more complexity to setting up the shot such as clashing white balance (ambient vs flash) and harsh shadows. With Full frame I was MORE than comfortable shooting in dim to dark situations at ISO 8000 and still get great image quality using only ambient light! Meaning you get to keep the mood lighting of your shot without screwing it up with a flash. Huge advantage. As far as other benefits you never hear about, there are actually quite a few. Yes bokeh is more present, that's simply because your depth of field, compression, and viewing area are more visible. Bigger the sensor, the more you'll see. This brings up another point, lenses behave properly on a full frame. 50mm is really 50mm and not 75mm. 85mm (~130mm on crop) is one of the best lenses I use and became my only lens to use on the D750 as it was wide enough to do group portraits and have amazing depth with the shallower depth of field of the FF. That brings me to my last point. Compression, or at least that's how I understand it. With the larger sensor, all of my images seemed richer in detail. That is, details I felt would normally be hidden or flat in my crop camera stood out and were ever present in the FF shot giving the photo a feeling that the subject was much closer to you and not zoomed in from far away like I feel I get with crop. I've reviewed many shots between my two cameras (Crop and FF) and the FF has a slight edge every time on image depth (I won't say quality, such as sharpness and color, because that isn't much different however the depth and separation of layers [foreground, subject, and background] of the image itself is). In short I learned 1) that the Full Frame was more solidly built (D7100 was my crop camera), 2) much more pleasant to shoot with as it was more forgiving in challenging situations such as lighting and tight spaces, and 3) created images with a depth and richness only found it the full frame sensors that you just don't get with crop. Question is, does all this justify the high price tag? That is up to you. FYI: As of this post, you can get a refurbished D750 for $1,399 from Adorama.com. That's what I had originally and it was pretty much a new camera with only 200shots (presumably for testing) on the shutter.

[@WSWEss]

yes.. ill sell my crop camera and buy a full frame

[@DogeFrom2014]

+WSWEss But just ask yourself, when was the last time you've ever needed high iso? Do you always film in the dark? I'm just a noobie at photography but I've already deeply understood Zack's point, and it's that full-frame sensors are pretty much a fashion statement lmao, its primary focus is only so you can show off to your friends. Buy full frame sensors? Congrats! You're an attention seeker!

[@tomrabel3526]

DOGE™ I get you're point too. No you don't always shoot in the dark, but that's not where you'd be most concerned about it. Try shooting your crop indoors without a speed light. The idea behind the high ISO isn't that you'll need the shot in the pitch black corner of a room. It's the idea that you can maintain a high shutter speed (which reduces light exposure) and smaller aperture for larger depth of field (also reduces light hitting the sensor) in a situation where light is limited. Try taking your crop sensor camera inside and adjust it to 1/250th and f8. Chances are pretty good that you won't get much of anything unless you crank up your ISO which on a crop isn't a good idea. With the FF you can do any of that without much worry of loosing image quality due to noise. This is why pros use FF, versatility. By no means is crop bad or useless, I've taken award winning shots on my D7100. My point was to express why FF is desirable. Any other pros I've asked that have made the switch have said it was the best decision of their career and that they'd always choose FF if the situate allowed. I believe Arias himself said that as well. Now for a casual shooter, that kind of advantage isn't necessary since you won't use the FF to its fullest potential. But if you have the extra cash, go for it!

[@agro0]

This video should be shipped with every camera sold :D

[@MrWilander88]

the best comment so far

[@johnnycincocero]

L. Willis But then I'd get a bad case of buyer's remorse.

[@lakkot.b8695]

Like with a medium format Hasselblad that the author of this video uses for his pro work? Maybe if he used Fuji for that, I would treat this video more seriously

[@indiranikos]

Good point

[@darmawanpangaribuan1]

Lumix enginer didnt watch this video before they start producing their fullframe camera.. lol..

[@SL-jo4om]

I remember watching this video about 4-5 years ago and reading a lot of skeptical comments such as "APS-C is finished, etc." here and elsewhere. Looking at the way Fujifilm APS-C and medium format systems have evolved since then, I have to say Zach was not only right (obviously) but also prescient.

[@FrostlordTheWizard]

More than 5 years later it is still among the best videos on the internet. I watch it at least once every 2-3 months. "4x5, 8x10 spanks you all, goodnight!" Gets me every time! :D

[@Metal_Vistas]

I can't even count the number of times I have posted a link to this video, rather than engaging in this never-ending debate. Thank you for saying all of this for me... and for saying it better than I would have said it. Because I don't have a stick. Or a squirrel.

[@tkaz123]

This is how videos should be. Comedic, relaxed, and still to the point. Amazing videos brother.

[@Juventinos]

8 years on and this still is the best video on the internet.

[@Mrgijs]

Everyone in photography or videography should watch this video!

[@nicodimus2222]

Unless you are shooting photos that will be printed very, very large (which almost nobody does) or shooting in very low light, you won't see any significant difference between APS-C and FF image quality. People would be better served by spending more time putting interesting things in front of their lenses and exercising their creativity.

[@paulmole1960]

Yep

[@martinjohnston4274]

+1

[@echt114]

Why would you limit yourself to printing?

[@nicodimus2222]

A print can show a lot more detail, because it isn't constrained by a locked number of pixels the way a TV or monitor is. You can put a 50MP image on a UHD display, and it will only ever look like an 8MP image because that's all the display can physically show. If you made a print the same size as the display, it would show all 50 MP in the same-sized area...loads more detail.

[@echt114]

nicodimus2222 That's only if you REDUCE the actual size of the image on the monitor. If you look at it at 100%, I find it FAR better than printing. When I make skyline photos, that's the only way I want to look at them. Not to mention that printing at such levels is ridiculously expensive.

[@georgescanvas]

Best video on KZbin I have seen for a long time. You put it all in perspective. We are in an age of greed and excess. Upgrade, upsell, replace, retire.

[@parula321]

OMFG!! This is the absolute best! I run into so many photography equipment snobs. Its not just full frame vs aps-c, its also flash vs natural light, f/2.8 vs f/4, This filter vs that it gets soooo annoying. The only way to shut these snobs up is to show them your awards that you have earned with basic equipment!

[@DCFotographs]

+"SUCH IS LIFE" wow thats something you dont hear everyday, but i kinda want to do the same thing for my canon 70d. just get rid of it and pick this up with some good glass.

[@carly9355]

+parula321 Agreed! I am a firm believer that "better" equipment and lenses doesn't produce better pictures, it is photographer.

[@Supermanohman]

+parula321 I agree however I personally won't use anything under APS-C simply because I do large landscape shots and I need to be able to use a wide angle lens.

[@yoyoma2357]

+Vic Vinegar What? Where is your scan back.... If you actually want landscape printed 6 miles wide... Stitch I've got 3mp camera point and shoot multiple picture shots stitched 24 high and 6 feet wide... Still sell the photo quite often. It ain't the gear. It is light, timing, and the photographer.

[@Supermanohman]

Yoyo Ma I could do that but for me it's easier to use a single wide angle lens and take 1 shot of a landscape. I've only been doing photography for a year and I like APSC and I can't see myself using anything smaller. I have a APSC wide angle lens which was $250 and for me that's a lot. I just can't see myself going down in sensor size.

[@MichaelGAubrey]

Just watched your burn out video. And I had to go back and rewatch this one. It's still one of my favorites.

[@Hegetron]

Same 😊

[@TishawnFahie]

Wow I'm glad I found this video was about to dump my 70D for a full frame with all the hype about it until you made put the argument into better perspective thank you sir.

[@saadxt]

Same here. I was thinking about dumping my 80D for 6D and I just realized, it doesn't really matter.

[@0IKakashiI0]

Try first then decide.

[@antonisnonisx]

Same same,

[@charishalomvictor]

every camera has its advantages look at the full package, a camera offers , full frame sensors are better, but it is not everything, crops are great too. Lenses all plays a part. At the end of the day it is the photo, is it good enough, not the gear, but yes you need good enough gear to get good results if crops work for you fine, if film work for you fine, if full frame or medium format work for you fine! The best camera for you are the one you own and use. When you can afford it upgrade, but use your present camera as well as you can, because I agree with him , the photographer is the main party to take a great photo.

[@passcomcompass2623]

You should definitely dump the 70d lol, he was targeting the fuji in this video, although all are aps-c, fuji have significant advantages over canon/nikon/sony because of their dedicated lens, Fuji treats aps-c as an ultimate product while all other companies market aps-c as a gateway size for beginners, later luring them in to full frame. And differences in lens quality can be huuuuuge. Of course unless you're using good quality FF lenses on the aps-c bodies than don't bother switching.

[@Yankeededandy62]

I thought I was the kingpin with my newly purchased full frame Canon 6D. Then I watch your video and I'm a normal person again. That was fun to watch

[@craigmarshallbodybuilding]

When I first started shooting digital there was no full frame. I used to create 30x40 inch prints from the 5 megapixel D1X. I still have a 6 megapixel D100 and can easily print good quality large prints from that. I didn't have the money to buy full frame so continued with my crop sensors. I photographed with my D200 until end of 2013, and when I purchased a new crop sensor the D7000 the image quality is just fantastic. I argued once that I can print images up to 60 inches on a crop sensor, then tell everyone it was captured on a medium format sensor and no one will have any idea it was shot on a crop sensor. This was not well received, and most people called my a liar. Here is my point, if you have to examine images side by side to see the difference in quality then people are certainly not going to have the slightest idea or care about what camera was used. I can shoot it on a crop sensor, print it at 60 inches, then tell you I used a Phase One P25, and everyone will believe me.

[@AntPDC]

Absolutely gorgeous lighting - ravishingly executed.

[@FrankNazario]

this has to be one of the most compelling videos about the debate ... thank you so much for sharing your knowledge.

[@erikcooper7646]

"Let's start talking' about full frame", holding an 8x10 print! Loved it!

[@WolfoxLive]

I don't know if anyone remembers this but during the early age of digital cameras (even before 5D MK 1 introduced), camera manufacturers began pumping APSC cameras to market, saying that your photos will look pro, you don't need full frame or medium format. That's how they marketed those cameras. Now they say just the opposite, they say we need FF or bigger. what happened here really was back in the day APSC market was new, profitable. Over time it became overcrowded, profits fell. They needed a more pristine, profitable market where the margins are higher. So, use your mind, don't be manufacturers toys. It's marketing. Tomorrow they are going to say we need something that don't exist yet to take better pictures.

[@BigPapaJames]

Going through some of your previous videos and I would love to see you make an updated version of this with all the changes in sensors and cameras in general since 2014. Today, my go to camera is my Canon 80D that I absolutely love and I can spend a day shooting with that camera and it is like hanging out with my best friend... and the results are amazing. Anyway, if you do decide to make an updated version of this video, I would enjoy hearing your thoughts on 4K, 6K & 8K video and it's practicality for the general photographer and cost to shoot and process.

[@floridahummer]

the annoying thing is your right,its up to the photographer .good lesson

[@Needacreate]

Zack is doing a brilliant job of exploding the die-hard myth that the difference between FF and APS-C matters remotely as much for professional-grade photography as so many of those people fretting about "needing a FF" would have it. Not only a wise, but also a quite entertaining video. So spot on.

[@hoomanj2025]

This video should win a medal compared to 90 percent of videos out there. His Advice is Pure GOLD in my opinion. This is exactly the same advice I got from Ken Rockwell, he said focus on what's important taking Good photos and less on sensors and lenses.

[@OmarFadul]

Finally, a real deal photographer out there!

[@AlexRamosDrTaz]

I've watched this video a few times since 2014... never gets boring. I've gone from FF (mostly film, some digital), to APS-C and recently I've embraced m43. My primary setup now is a pair of Olympus cameras. Never printed anything bigger than 16x20 inch so I don't really care. Oh ya... if you find that video from Joe Edelman taking m43 photos with high end Oly bodies and lenses to billboard sized proportions, you will leak yourself IMO faster than you can find a bathroom. Happy shooting!

[@BillFerris]

In summary, if you make a great photograph, it doesn't matter what equipment you used. The image is still great. If your photography is bleh, buying a new camera won't change that. If you're hesitant to get an APS-C body because of concerns about image quality, don't worry. Today's APS-C sensors are amazing. By the same token, if you're making great images with a full-frame DSLR, there's really nothing of significance to be gained by switching to a crop-frame or mirrorless system. Your photography won't get any better by switching. In short, don't fix what ain't broke.

[@GamingBear_Q_E_D]

I am sorry, just found your channel, getting back into photography since it was knocked out of me as a teenager as not a proper job, now at the other end of life, i'm going back to what I hid but truly love ... thank you

[@steven2809]

Being an ‘old guy’ from the UK I found this hilarious and not wrong! When I started reading Amateur Photographer in the early 70s, press photographers were using Rolleiflex 2 1/4 square! Great portrait and celebrity photographers used Hasselblad 6 x 6 cm and some still do! The convenience of the ‘small format’ 35mm was king for photo journalism and reportage. Think Don McCullin, Magnum photographer’s etc.... As Ansel Adams (I think...) said: It’s the 12 inches behind the camera that matters....(!) Loved your monochrome style with that Ilford FP4 vibe...that dates me! Wise and entertaining words.....👍

[@alfredconqueror4422]

now i feel a lot more better with my d5200

[@KenethGray]

Lol me too about my 5300

[@ivanriobla]

+Alfredo Muciño me 2 . .d5200 in the house Lol...

[@spencergeorge4941]

+Faramir Braufighter I've been using my D3300 for a while... and I couldn't ask for a better camera for the price. As with any camera, if you take your time with the shot, it'll turn out beautiful.

[@Themoigt]

+Spencer George I've seen better shots with a d5200 than witht a d810. And I make better shots with my little d3200 than a lot of people with d810 and full frame.

[@spencergeorge4941]

Goes to show, its not the camera, its the idiot behind it. Full frame/ Professional cameras have their place, but amateur/semi-pro are equally capable

[@HenryStradford]

Crop Sensors vs Full Frame :: Crop Or Crap? By Zack Arias

[@SilverCoreLabs]

LOL! Years ago I won a photo contest with an image taken with a Sony MVC-CD1000! Yes, that's right! I had the right light, moment, composition, etc. I was up against Nikon's, Canon's and etc. I have cameras with many different size sensors all the way to "full frame", and they all produce great images if you control the light, environment, etc... and have the right lens. Loved the video!!!

[@iSOBigD]

regardless of skill, with a better camera all else being equal you will always have the better shot or image quality. it's too easy to go overboard and say "I'm great I don't need auto focus or instant photos" until you actually need to deliver results on the same day or shoot moving targets without time to plan or pose. No crap photographer will get great shots just due to having a $30k camera, but at the same time no pro photographer can get a clear image of a moving target at over iso 6400 at night using a tiny sensor and natural lighting. You need a good combination of the right skill, knowledge and gear for any given situation.

[@KeeperAndrei]

"You need a good combination of the right skill, knowledge and gear for any given situation" - Exactly. Very well said!

[@vic_the_roman]

Still love this video, even after all these years!

[@GENOBURRITO1]

Just when I was licking my chops to move towards a FF sensor.......I found this video and now, I am contemplating new glass for my apsc sensor instead. Btw.....your videos rock! Thanks again for adding more turmoil to my life! Cheers!

[@DogeFrom2014]

Thank you, this video was really mentally satisfying to watch. I fucking needed this.

[@theory8sf]

Fuck yeah I'm getting the Fuji X-T2!!!

[@bobcarter4343]

The Photo club I belong to (1,200 strong) has members with all types of gear, from phone cameras to full frame gear and 10K lenses. We post our photos after shoots and learn from one another. Our president and a few other members shoot full frame with pro Nikon glass and his images are sharper but his gear costs many thousands and is out of reach of most. ($5k for the big Nikon) and huge money for the glass. For the most part when comparing the images taken by different members on a given photo shoot I would say that the best images are not dependent on the gear used, but rather the point of view, framing, and other creative factors. In many cases, the best images come from the less expensive APS-C gear. So I seem to be agree with Zack for daily shooting. If I made a living shooting I might have a different opinion but since I don't I am satisfied with the smaller frame format.

[@dekonildo]

I have watched this video countless times. Honestly one of the best things EVER released on KZbin.

[@ZackAriasATL]

Hahaha! Thanks!

[@JustLearning]

Mr. Arias you are not only informative but also very funny. This is one of my favorite videos on KZbin. I also liked the video where you explained how when you first started you bought too much equipment and then had to sell it to pay bills. It was a warning to me not to do the same. It was good to see you slowly recovered and were able to buy equipment again and get back into photography. You are the man!

[@mintslice2214]

I love the way you bash everything with ur stick - fucking hilarious LOL

[@RudolfWolph]

I was kinda curious to see how a video from 2014 would hold up... probably even more relevant now, if anything. If I was building a system from the ground up, I really would've been tempted by Fuji... but having inherited a bunch of lenses for the 35mm format, I figured it'd be easiest to just stick with the same sensor size and maintain the same capabilities I had on film. My photos don't look any better than they did on film either, but I wasn't shooting at 5000 ISO on film...

[@toocoolforu]

Personally I had a 4/3rd camera which was GREAT, but kinda sucked at low light. I decided to get something new after 5 years. Sony A7S. Holy shit the low light. The FF does make a difference for the bokeh and wide angle. Many other advantages like DR. For electronic sensors, FF today is cheap enough to make the jump and eventually wait for newer options. The lenses should make ones wonder too, because as sensor sizes increase, so does the glass. And FF is the biggest I'd ever consider outside a studio. APC sizes are great too with the current tech, but the DoF and DR won't match the current FF.

[@igoratfoodbeventurercom5343]

+toocoolforu As with everything, always comes down to what and how you shoot. Unless you literally HAVE to run, and gun at midnight, anything+tripod can suffice just fine. Only new argument against FF today would be D500 for the beast of a package you get for the price like never before, so its sensor size becomes somewhat secondary of a decision.

[@ytano5782]

The Sony A7S is an outstanding low light performer. But it has nothing todo with the FF-Sensor. This cam beats every FF, too. If you use the same sensor technology, the noise is comparable, if you shoot exactly the same picture. Many people compare FF and m43 at the apperture. In this case the FF will have 4 times lower noise. But you choose the apperture depending on the deep of field. So you must compare 1.4@m43 with 2.8@FF. Voila, same DOF and same noise. FF advantages (2.8-Zooms, there is no 1.4-Zoom at m43; higher MP), but not in DOF and noise.

[@bigbro890]

Funny. The guy in the video was just talking about you

[@Jessehermansonphotography]

+André Adami a7s is the king of low light... period

[@et8773]

toocoolforu Sony sucks, though. I’ve used the a7sii and a6300, even the RX100, for more than 2 years now. Full frame Canon/Nikon still wins!

[@raquelra5878]

I was here thinking of buying a Full Frame camera... So I've decided to watch this video again...and my insane impulse have just vanished!!! Thanks a lot for this video... It always saves me from wasting my money...

[@dieseldavey]

Absolutely fantastic, truthful and brilliant way to put this point of view over. 10/10

[@IainHC1]

I keep coming back to this! :-) Love it :-)

[@KenTheoriaApophasis]

from 10:05 to 10:20 is SO FOOKING ACCURATE AND FUNNY i pissed myself and twitched and drooled in a fit of uncontrollable laughter Haaaaaaa! EPIC WIN

[@MarioCunhaPhotography]

Cant agree with you more! I have seen this video a few years back and I have revisited it today when sharing it with a friend and I laugh the same way I did years back ahahah :D

[@94Ninsound94]

Sounds like trap music 🤣

[@jpracingph]

I didn't realize Zack Arias was funny as hell! Theoria is his long lost brother! LOL Subbed!

[@yourbestfriendjoshua]

This was absolutely FANTASTIC. I learned so much, and got some good laughs at the same time. Thanks for posting.

[@burhan977]

Zack you nailed it, thank you very much, I almost lost my sanity in order to decided which one I should buy. You saved me dude.

[@postiesteve]

+MUHAMMAD BURHAN UL HAQ He saved me making a costly mistake too !

[@VasilisKaramanlis]

First time i saw one of your videos and i really enjoyed it!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@danielson_9211]

Love rewatching this vid LOL.

[@ZackAriasATL]

Thank you!

[@gunnerneikoify]

Where do I get one of those pointer sticks you use??? :)

[@toxicvisuals9376]

Go into the woods and pick one up...

[@gunnerneikoify]

Gian But does the woods have quality sticks like he uses though???? :)

[@gunnerneikoify]

Gian At what temp and amount of time do I have to heat my stick from the woods??? I don't want to over or under heat it, I want a top QUALITY pointer stick when I'm done!!!! :)

[@gunnerneikoify]

Gian Cripes, I'll just throw it in a bonfire heating it that way and hope for the best!!!!!! Maybe cook a few marshmallows while I'm at it!!!! :)

[@46ace]

Ikea...( I follow Zac's blog; he bought a bundle of those to use in a portrait set.)

[@Rocking_J_Studio]

I agree 1000%!! I shoot both depending on the need. I also shoot 35mm & 6x6 film depending on the situation. Whatever tool is right for the job is right regardless of sensor or negative size!

[@LarzB]

I've seen it long time ago and somehow it popped back into my vision and it's just fun to watch.. very entertaining and true.. people get so stuck up on the gear that they forget to shoot or waste their time on frivolous topics

[@frubo]

Fujifilm just announced a mirrorless medium format camera. 70% larger sensor than full frame. They're calling it a "game charger".

[@michaelbauers8800]

I saw that, and thought it was really interesting at the price some people said it would be. Would it really be a $1000 medium format camera? That's an amazing price point for MF from that I know about MF

[@DavidSdeLis]

It is amazing, indeed.But if (good) Fujinon APS-C lenses are quite expensive, you don't want to imagine the price of those medium format lenses! Or the weight, for that matter. To put it in perspective, the "natural" focal length for full frame (35mm) cameras has always been 50mm (except when everybody started to get fixed lenses rangefinder cameras in the 70s, they preferred 40mm or maybe 45mm). And thus a good all around 50mm lens would be f/1.8 (some f/1.7; the really expensive f/1.4). For a Mamiya 645 (6x4.5 which is the crop sensor of medium size) the natural focal length is 80mm, and about f/2.8, which is a huge lens! Have a look: www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/567932-REG/Mamiya_210_603_Normal_80mm_f_2_8_Autofocus.html "only" $2,000 and this is just for the equivalent of a Fujinon 34mm f/0.9 (bigger aperture to gather same amount of light into a smaller sensor: those are really big lenses) Imagine the size and price for a telelens! The equivalent to a 135 format 300mm telelens would be around 520mm...

[@licensedinkaos]

It's $6500, with the cheapest lens running at $1500. Cheaper than the competition, still, but not at all attainable to anyone other than pro status (and even then, still a sizable amount for pros, I'd imagine).

[@Tzadeck]

I was playing around with one of these in a store the other day. Pretty badass thing, with a somewhat attainable price. Personally, it even hurts me when I have to spend $500 bucks on a lens... let's hope someone pays me the big bucks someday.

[@TomStratton]

My last film camera was a Mamiya 645 Pro. I was a moron. Currently I have X100s and 70D crops. I'm still a moron, but I have room in my bag for a burrito.

[@Black_Star_Racer]

Zack you are awesome

[@kiwipics]

I've shot Sinar 10x8 - 5x4, Blad 6x6, Mamiya 6x4.5, Canon 35mm and both FF & crop DSLRs. I don't worry what the camera / sensor is, because it's the eye and how you use it ..... Zak, you always say what I'm thinking and can guess who you mean when you mention the DXO madness. Great video ....

[@RudolfSzecsi]

I was thinking about full frame, but your guide helped me to decide. Thank you!

[@ZackAriasATL]

🙌🙌🙌

[@echt114]

All frames are full unless you're using a lens designed for another sensor. Nothing is cropped unless you're using a lens designed for a larger format. "35mm camera" was used throughout the film era to describe cameras that used 35mm film, so why can't people use the same term to describe cameras that use 35mm sensors? Why the ass-kissing blatantly complementary "full frame"? At some point responsible people should stop promoting the nonsense. Call APSC cameras "23mm." Call Micro 4/3 cameras "17mm". It's descriptive and easy for anyone to understand, and it doesn't subtly promote or slight certain sensor sizes.

[@jakebrake3332]

Amen

[@vianditya]

Amen

[@13squier]

It's true it's sort of arbitrary what is considered "full frame" but something has to be a standard point of reference. Without it focal length and f-ratio becomes inscrutable. So full frame is 1x, based on the 135 film standard and all the available lenses for system cameras. Knowing that, you can determine what is normal, wide, and tele on different size sensors. E.g. what equivalent field of view a 9mm lens will yield on a 1" sensor with 2.7x crop (50mm.) Or a 100mm lens on 6x7 with 0.5x crop (50mm), and so forth.

[@peter_shadow7559]

@@13squier Thats true but not necessarily that standart format has to be "professional"

[@arshil]

10:03 you wanna get in that fight? ababebebe anamememe xD

[@dsofe4879]

One dude in my photoghraphy class has a 5D III and a 24-70mm L. He borrowed it from his roomate and has never done any photography before. Another guy has been taking pictures since he was 9, and has a scratched up 1100d with the 18-55mm kit lens. Guess who shoots the better pictures?

[@ardiuna]

dude with 5D III

[@punisher5320]

5d

[@dsofe4879]

Mohammad Ardy Wiguna Pan x nope. a 5D doesn't do you any good if you can't compose and expose correctly.

[@drakeking6302]

Obviously the dude with the 5D III. kappa

[@ardiuna]

+United States of Embarrassment because they both still 9 yo xD u didn't tell me their ages.

[@jaquestatifilms]

Well said. I also liked the squirrel and your noises of frustration. Thanks

[@flippobobby]

A delightful video that's not only educational but fun to watch!

[@tomrabel3526]

I love this video by Zack. But you know what topic gets the most heat now? Mirror-less vs DSLR. Now to get my point across, the topic came to be when we were discussing the advent of MASSIVE megapixels in DSLR bodies (Canon 5DSR) and the susceptibility Full Frame bodies have to mirror shake, so you have to use mirror lockup. Well since the Sony A7 made it's debut, my thought was... maybe some day, since the megapixel war is always growing, the big DSLR manufactures will realize a fix to that problem is moving to a mirror-less system. Think about it, you wont get mirror shake and without those burly full frame mirrors slapping around, you'll get faster continuous shooting. Also less moving parts means longer life. You can imaging the comments I got were like trying to tell a teenager video games are bad for your health. What are your thoughts on it Zack? The Fujifilm you had with you in this film was mirror-less. Does it suck? j/k Do you see the big boys in the DSLR arena moving to mirror-less systems? Granted it's still in its infancy... though, so is the DSLR. The mirror was designed so you had an accurate view of your subject through the lens as you could not look through the film. Now we have EVF's which do pretty much the same thing using the cameras sensor.

[@brownshugahgirl]

great point

[@sohankonar9744]

2 years later, most new photograhpers are adopting mirrorless.

[@JordanMattKim]

Didn't realize it was a commercial until the last part of the video.... :)

[@patrickfitzgerald2861]

Fun! But FF still provides the best image quality over the widest range of lighting conditions, while still maintaining a reasonable amount of portability. I don't yet own a FF camera yet, but that Sony A7R II sure looks appealing!

[@patrickfitzgerald2861]

I just returned a Sony A7II because I could not use the (for me) tiny and poorly placed controls, and the battery life was horrible, so for now I'm sticking with my "man-size" Canon APS-C. The X-T2 looks like a great camera, but a bit pricey for my budget. Enjoy!

[@patrickfitzgerald2861]

Underlining Zack's point in this video, I find it really interesting that Fuji has decided to ignore FF entirely and go even bigger with the upcoming GFX. Their engineers believe that APS-C sensor noise will eventually equal FF, so it makes sense. And if they can figure out a way to sell the GFX for around $5K with a 3x zoom I'll bet landscape and portrait photographers will jump all over it. Go Fuji! Oh, and I've got an EOS M5 on the way, so I'll get to have an EVF too if I keep it.

[@fascoh1949]

I really love Zack's approach. it's just so on the money and makes all the sense in the world !

[@croppedsensorphotographer2973]

This video is the reason I started my channel and do Workshops. Thank you.

[@johnchapman2856]

The stick tapping XD holy shit so good lol lol

[@boredhousewifelife]

He's still got those famous sticks from IKEA, well at least one :)

[@phrenzy1]

Carrie Carden famous ikea sticks?

[@boredhousewifelife]

phrenzy1 yeah, from the short film he did called Transform. Have you seen it? It's a must watch. Powerful and inspiring stuff.

[@karlhans6678]

Carrie Carden How much does a photographer get paid for shooting pictures? do most photographers live off of this?

[@boredhousewifelife]

Karl Hans Well that all depends. It's really up to the individual. You can most definitely live off the money you make as a photographer. It's all a matter of what you're shooting, and the quality of your work. For years I specialized in wedding photography and did really well financially, BUT the stress and pressure that comes with shooting the most important day of someone's life is no joke. And then the amount of post work in editing was insane. So I earned every dime of the money by the time all was said and done. Because of some health issues and personal struggles I've had to take a break from taking on paid work. But I still love to get creative and express myself through my photography. Hoping that I can dive back into it full time sometime soon. So in short, yes there is money to be made. Lots. But you are only going to get back what you are willing to put into it. Hope that made sense and helped answer your question! Wishing you luck in whatever your journey into the future holds.

[@karlhans6678]

Carrie Carden Thanks for sharing this, I'm new to photography but I want to create great pictures like the ones I see from professional photographers. Thanks now I know a bit more what to expect.

[@eastcamp_]

you got yourself a sub sir, great explanation

[@artemorbid]

Best video i have have come across on Full frame and Apsc, very well done. Keep up the great work

[@pmphoto]

This is the most entertaining thing I have seen in a while, thank you sir and thank you to the twig you are using to point and smack things.

[@seal-nowweretalking6753]

I don't really see the point of this video if you're not going to tell the whole story, (not to mention the inaccuracy regarding a photographer who never made a lifelong career out of using 35mm FF because it hash't been around long enough. I suppose every Magnum photographer from Capa-Bresson-Ronis never had careers). What ZA is not telling us is the fact that people like myself have grown up using FF 35mm lenses calibrated for 35mm film cameras. Therefore when using those lenses, in order to retain the intended perspective, focal length and depth perspective, (yes he did touch on the latter briefly) we just feel at home on a FF digital sensor and yes, it makes the world of difference. Now I'm not saying that APS-C sensors or even M4/3 for that matter aren't relevant, professional candidates, (as one great writer said recently, "there are no bad cameras, just bad photographers") I've owned most of them, I'm simply saying that you cannot discredit the argument of those who choose not to use or be satisfied with APS-C on account of it not being big enough or good enough for their needs. Again, if you're going to ridicule that argument, at least be factual, informed and tell the whole story.

[@DirkMoeller]

Amen.

[@Antenox]

I'm pretty sure that ZA is talking about studio photographers when he said "no one has made a lifelong career using 35mm film." It seems like the online photography community likes to assume that you fall into one of just a few types of photographers when it hands out advice, i.e. staged/studio photographers, wedding photographers, and casual/beginner photographers. If you are anything else -- e.g. street photographer, landscape photographer, etc. -- you have to remember to mention it, otherwise you'll be getting advice like, "Use this MASSIVE BEAUTY DISH to change the lighting," as if something like that is practical for street photography or the wilderness.

[@lif3n0vic3]

he said Dslr, not 35mm FF. He also made a point to say life long career, 20 - 30 years.

[@texasrex93]

Actually you can discredit critics when they say "You aren't professional if you don't have a full frame camera," or some variation of that supposition. He's not saying one is better than the other. He's saying that neither size is any more or less professional than the other. It's all based on the person and the job.

[@gearreallydoesntmatter]

DSLR..

[@brotendo]

This was the longest Fuji endorsement I've ever seen.

[@scott31270]

Good video on the topic. I shoot Canon 1D Mark IV and loved the speed and extra reach the crop gave me in shooting sports versus 5D Mark III. However, when I am shooting portraits with my 85MM lens in studio there is a markable difference and the full frame camera produces a better looking shot. Would the average person on the street notice the difference? perhaps not, but I see the difference big time. When I want extra reach and speed, I love the crop. When I want a natural looking portraits, I want my full frame option.

[@stfanciscainta]

I shoot both a 1DX and a 7D mark II and there are average folks who do notice the different between the full frame and crop shots. Without me telling them which is which, most of the time they tell me they don't put their finger on it but they like the full frame shots better. I might not agree totally with Mr. Zack's video but he is sure an entertaining teacher.

[@monstermayank]

St. Francis Cainta How is the High Iso performance of 7d ii ? I am split between 6d and 7dii but can't trust 6d for professional work because of the Af points.

[@zoranv12]

Monstermayank "10 years" ago there were no cross type points, and we did a great job; If U need more than 11 AF points, than you're one of sold souls in todays marketing...I have 3 EOS bodyes, best 4 me is 6D. Better suits me than 7D and 5D; It's easyer to use, better low ISO, better portraits, lighter,... the main difference you'll notice between 7D in 6D (seriously, how often do you use more than center point??? And get what you aim at? Sharp? Really?) high ISO, low noise, way better indoor photos, more natural photos without speedlite etc, etc; 7D is Ok for Outside photo with enough light, but "bad use" of L glass; I never wanna go with CROP body; A frame more in a second is close to nothing. Learn how to do it; wan't to do it - because you've read somewhere 7D is better because of AF points,that's not true. Center point of 6D is much better than center point of any EOS today. On paper, Samung galaxy S5 is the winner...So why buy big fat EOS than :)

[@monstermayank]

Zoran Veličkovski Agreed that 6D is lighter but I have lost out on photographing opportunities as an amateur at 3.7fps so I know for sure that 4fps wont suffice to my needs. I would have gone for 7D mark ii but I generally have to reach for ISO 1600-3200 so crop sensor isn't for me it seems. I am not the sort to splurge money which is why used D750 is tempting me too because for the cost of just the 5Diii I can build a basic full frame kit with it.

[@zoranv12]

Monstermayank D750 is great camera, that came out a year too late for me :) I allready spent too much on Canon EF glass and speedlite.

[@meme4one]

It’s a big fujifilm advert, sadly, but the message is still correct.

[@nbichsel1]

nice perspective, I'm glad i bumped into this video since I'm looking for my first DSLR

[@seal-nowweretalking6753]

...and just to be clear, I understand that ZA says "there isn't a photographer around today who has made a lifelong career out of shooting 'DSLR', why ..because it hasn't been around that long". But my question is what is his point? Surely given the context of the discussion, by saying "DSLR" he's referring to the '35mm FF professional format', therefore we are dealing with semantics. The reason why myself and others prefer FF over anything smaller is that it represents the perspective that our eyes are used to seeing, perspective I might add that's been around since 1906. Furthermore, if FF offers no clear advantages over smaller formats, why is it then that the likes of Sony continue to pour efforts into cameras such as the a7 series? I would be willing to place money on it that you will indeed see a FF offering from Fuji in the not too distant future.

[@marcinprasal]

Absolutely spotify...sorry spot on!

[@KenTheoriaApophasis]

i haz U like very much

[@aurelienani204]

People using DxOMark scores are hilarious. "Oh, but eeeh, eeeh, look at the score... the dynamic range on the Sony sensor is 0.035 points higher. My $2000 Nikon Full frame has bett...." People from DxO and DPreview are the loneliest nerds on the planet.

[@biomechanism1]

+Aurelie Nani very funny comment I laughed, thank you.

[@KenTheoriaApophasis]

+Aurelie Nani i call it DIAPER AND PEE REVIEW

[@bensslightnature]

+Lone Mic Productions i agree with you, but take a picture with nikon d90, then take the exact picture with 60d, and see the difference. 60d looks like shit. :)

[@andyhaochizhang]

Well said. They used unpublished standards and equations too.

[@echt114]

The world is full of people who prefer to believe that perceptions and feelings trump facts. And full of the kind of people who aren't willing to take the small amount of time to understand exactly what DxO is measuring and what it means. Differences in performance can be small or large and objective tests will reveal the degree. If you're too stupid to distinguish between big and little differences, then yeah, you'll probably resent DxOMark.

[@Shirodx]

OMG, the REALEST video on youtube regarding crop vs full frame. I have been fighting myself regarding if I should get rid of my 60D and get at least a full frame. Granted I'm no pro but I do take a lot of low light photos but I can't really afford a full frame right now. And then there's the excellent performance of cameras like the GH4 but to go buy glass again... I love to shoot video's also (probably more than take picks, I'm just looking for the best of both worlds. This video was just amazing. It put everything in proper perspective for me and made my decision just a little bit easier. Thanks, pure jokes.

[@Jen-oo8ss]

I still love this video to this DAY! Thanks Zack!

[@smdvisionphotography]

I play this video once a year.

[@randymonster4105]

I STILL wouldn't want step down from my FF to any APSC, sue me.

[@krtinicnikola]

Nice video man :)

[@adityadatar5431]

"Negligible" Hahaha!

[@sylviastagg-giuliano6229]

It doesn't matter what year we are in now Zack Arias, you are the coolest!

[@ROVideos]

After he’s done talking there’s a nice background music that plays while you go down to the comment section. = increased watch time. This guy is a genius.

[@kvoudias]

I get upset when he hits everything with that stick!

[@andysmith8031]

A good photo is a good photo what ever you take it with. You can have a full frame and take shit photos

[@Rationalific]

All in all, modern APS-C cameras are not too far behind Full-Frame cameras. However, Full-Frame still represents the best. Here's the reason. It comes down to sensor size x lens size, not just sensor size. Due to the APS-C crop and thus the need to get farther away for the same framing, an aperture decreases by 1.5 times, meaning f/1.4 acts like f/2.1 (1.4+.7=2.1). Only with some Sigma lenses (such as the 18-35 f/1.8) can APS-C approach Full-Frame. The thing is, though, if APS-C lenses had larger apertures than Full-Frame had, the depth of field and light-gathering deficiencies would be overcome. However, for the most part, APS-C doesn't have larger aperture lenses than Full-Frame. However, going to larger formats than Full-Frame, you will notice that apertures decrease. Who cares if a camera has a huge film format if its lenses have the equivalent maximum aperture of f/11. See that tiny lens on the huge frame camera? That shows that it is gathering less light per amount of time than a camera with a larger aperture lens. It's why in the old days, shutter speeds had to be so slow. The film format was huge (and inefficient), and the lens was tiny, so it's like watering a huge garden with a tiny hose. It's better to have a smaller garden but a large enough hose. That will lead to the optimal outcome. So going larger than full-frame doesn't really have any advantages (except to those who need tons of megapixels, because you can theoretically jam more into a larger sensor) and smaller sensors have disadvantages (because the max apertures are not any larger than on Full-Frame, for the most part), so Full-Frame represents the "best" situation. However, with that said, if shallow depth of field is not an issue and there is enough light to be at a low ISO, the better bang per buck of APS-C and smaller sensors make them the better choice. On the other hand, if you need a shallow depth of field and take lots of low-light photos, then Full-Frame is the best (by maybe a stop). And larger than Full-Frame basically has no major benefits because the lenses do not also increase in size, and in fact their max apertures are smaller. And finally, this means that if you get a Full-Frame camera, you should also get the largest-aperture lenses. If you don't use the largest possible aperture lenses on Full-Frame, then you have no benefit over an APS-C camera with larger-aperture lenses. And again, if you don't need what larger apertures bring, then you don't need a larger sensor, either.

[@BF4pawntard]

Rationalific Did you not watch the video

[@Rationalific]

BF4pawntard Yes, and what I got from that is that "Full Frame" is not so large when you look at the history of film format sizes, and in comparison to those, Full Frame sensors are not so much larger than APS-C sensors. Isn't that the basic gist? And what I am saying is that that's only half of the story. The other half is LENSES. If a lens cannot take advantage of a larger sensor (meaning letting MORE light in per unit time), then sensor size doesn't matter in the slightest. A medium-format camera at f/11 is nothing but a waste of money compared to an APS-C camera at f/1.4. And my point is that in many cases, Full Frame represents the best optimization between sensor size and lens aperture size. In other words, you can find an f/1.2 lens on a Full Frame Canon and many f/1.4 lenses on other Full Frame camera brands, but you cannot find an f/1.2 or f/1.4 lens on a medium-format digital camera, so that step up in sensor size does not represent a step up in light gathering ability. In the case of larger-than-full-frame cameras, the LENS is the bottleneck that does not allow performance to increase the same way it does from APS-C to Full Frame.

[@senged]

I admire your patience on explaining stuff which I basicaly thought was common sense. Apparently not. Even The experienced person in the video does not talk about lenses and effective appertures. To add to your examples, you cannot find large effective apperture lenses on crop sensor cameras either. For instance, 24mm f1.4 is a very artistic combination if you know how to use it but you cannot get anything close to that on an apc camera (nor at larger sizes). The closest you can get as I know of is Samyang 16mm f2 which didn't exist until recently. Even that, translates to a 24mm f3 on a full frame camera. There is more thatn 2 stops of difference and much deeper depth of field (if you need it). This is is the case in mostly used focal lengths in photography, from 24-85mm. Even an 85mm 1.4 on a crop sensor, translates to 127,5mm f2.1 on a full frame (where you have a slightly better and dedicated 135mm f2 lenses). One can argue that crop sensor technology will catch up with newer larger apperture lenses but that isn't the case for near future. Optically making a lense equivalent to 24mm f1.4 is (i.e. 16mm f0.95) is very difficult. In summary full frame is still and for a long time will be a sweet spot. If you are shooting specialty like long range wildlife or macro, that is where crop sensors shine.

[@Rationalific]

Cengiz AKKALE Exactly! You hit the nail on the head. To add to what you said, an APS-C sensor camera with a 16-50mm f/2.8 lens (with a 1.5x crop factor) is equivalent to a full frame camera with a 24-75mm f/4.2 lens. 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses are available for full frame, but to get the equivalent for APS-C, you would need a 16-47mm f/1.9. But that lens doesn't exist. (The closest is the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8, and that lens is very unique.) Similarly, for a medium format setup (with a 0.79x crop factor) to merely equal the full frame with the 24-70mm f/2.8, it would need a 30-89mm f/3.5 lens. Fuji's new medium-format GFX system just announced a 32-64mm F4 lens. It will cost somewhere close to $10,000 for the camera plus lens (which is actually cheaper than most digital medium format systems), but as you can see, the lens has a shorter zoom and a smaller aperture than it would need to be just to equal a 24-70mm f/2.8 on full frame. (It is actually the full-frame equivalent of a 25-51mm f/3.2.) As for the Pentax 645z medium format camera, looking through the lens lineup, I see that the largest apertures on any of their PRIME lenses is f/2.8 (with its zoom lenses having even smaller apertures). An f/2.8 on that medium format system is equal to an f/2.2 lens on full frame. Why get an f/2.2 equivalent lens on medium format when you can get an f/1.4 or even f/1.2 aperture on full frame systems? (And in fact, an f/1.4 on a 1.5x crop APS-C is even equivalent to an f/2.1 lens on full frame, meaning that an APS-C camera with its fastest prime would be comparable to a medium format system that has its fastest prime being f/2.8.) To me, there is no reason to go medium format, since APS-C is best for those on a budget and full frame represents a peak that medium format doesn't really overcome. As we have both shown, full frame is truly the "sweet spot" unless someone desperately needs more than 50 megapixels and doesn't like the Canon 5Ds(r) cameras...

[@echt114]

Wide aperture lenses are absolutely unnecessary for most people. Indoor sports or dark concerts, sure because you have no choice except to trade DOF for light, but not for many other purposes. The portraits where only a small portion of the face is in focus are ridiculous.

[@michelleeastburn8125]

The stick and the squirrel...and you wonder why I love your work.

[@SidLives]

The BEST video on crop vs full frame period!!!!

[@zoranv12]

...so, how much did Fuji pay you :) ? There's also 4/3 Olympus, 1,6CROP Canon, 1,5CROP Nikon etc; But Fuji is better all round camera because? There's just no way I'll go back on crop, after I discovered a whole new world of lenses for my Canon 6D, and yes, I replaced 60D for that slow bad bad camera, with horrible cross type except in center focus points. Why? Because of IQ I get in low light in concerts. There's no match for that. If there is, please let me know, I'll buy you a beer and weekend in Slovenia, skiing with Tina Maze. I'm talking about that much money and that low light capability.

[@TYUIO11111]

moron

[@zoranv12]

what's moron?

[@TYUIO11111]

:D

[@ComedyNewWave]

a noob with a 5d mark iii will shoot noob footage. Thats what Arias is trying to say

[@zoranv12]

OK, thanks for that;

[@DogeFrom2014]

That's it folks, you've heard it yourself, full frame sensors are nothing but a fashion statement!

[@JosephFerricags]

Hi Zack, I appreciate that this video was made a while ago but I do feel compelled to make a comment, even though it's probably off your RADAR. I can't tell you how many times I've watch it. It is one of the best examples I've ever seen that makes a logical argument in such an entertaining and informative manner (i'm a 35mm full frame shooter by the way). As the digital camera world moves from major change to incremental improvements, this style of informative information sharing is important. Thank you. castagiantshadow.co

[@TheShakeBoss]

Joseph Ferri i’m on the same boat. Have watched this video many times all these years and I’m still coming back. It’s simple, it goes straight to the point and it’s fun to watch. And it’s still relevant years later until technology brings us something new to discuss about.

[@joaoramos32]

love your style! I wish there were more youtubers like you. Great opinions + awesome sense of humor ahah

[@marthareis5873]

Still a joy to watch.