Any APSC lenses that work on full frame without crop mode?I was looking for a zoom lens that would be light and wide enough to vlog with, but the 12-24/16-35 2.8 are too big and heavy, and 14/1.4 and the 20/1.8 are as well, and don’t zoom.I found that my SEL1018 just happens to project an image circle that covers most of the full frame sensor without crop mode, as a7siii sensor doesn’t allow it on video, and it works well 12-18mm with stabilization on.Are there any other lenses known to work like this? I’ve read that the 55-210 can also work, but I can’t test it as I don’t own it.Otherwise, any super light wide angles that can be used for vlogging? Weight and size take precedence over zoom capability if I had to choose one or the other.
>>4397575Just use the 16-35 f4 pz. Its tiny and cheaper than some of the lenses you considered. If its too big for you, you have a medical problem.
>>4397575Im pretty sure the 10-18mm is the only one a kind apsc emount lens that actually covers FF. The 55-210 most definitely would not and you would get a big rectangular 'vignette'.
>>4397575if you cant afford ff glass, dont buy a ff
>>4397575Buy Canon or Nikon if you want small FF lenses
>>4397603Funny, funny joke. They’re generally larger except for a pair of crappy pancakes that have too much focus breathing and motor noise for vlogs anyways.
>>4397576The 16-35mm f/4 non-PZ is even cheaper at like half the price, not sure why he's not considering that either. One thing it has over the PZ is IS, I'm not a video guy but I've heard that lens IS is better than IBIS for it.
>>4397576>>4397608Still xbox hueg[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image Width861Image Height333
>>4397615If this is big to you, you have a legitimate medical issue and were hard filtered from photography before the a7c came out. For us normal men smaller cameras are just less annoying to run with.
>>4397615FF will always be big, unless its one of those Canon/Nikon fixed prime pancakes.
>>4397608>>4397576I did consider the 16-35 f4 pz, but the 10-18 is like half to 2/3 the weight of it, and gets way wider. I'm actually using the 16-25 f2.8 which is about 420g, but it's not wide enough and heavier than the 16-35 f4.With active, and especially dynamic active stabilization with a 1.4x crop, 16mm gets pretty narrow.I recently did lots of vlogging during a trip with friends, and while I hit the gym and would like to think I'm decently strong, holding 3-4 pounds (camera+cage, shotgun mic, lens, mini tripod/gimbal) out at arms length for more than a minute or two to not fill up the entire frame with my head and shoulders gets tiring fast.
>>4397599it's not that I can't afford glass. My main 2 zooms are the 16-25 f2.8 and the 24-70 gm ii which work well in most cases, but I recently thought I'd pick up vlogging during travel so I'd have a record of what I did with friends and family during the trip.I made do with the wider zoom, but it was too large and heavy to hold up w an a7s3 + associated gear continuously.
>>4397596A friend had the 55-210. Turns out it was a kit lens, and he was willing to let me experiment, so I unscrewed the plastic ring around the inside of the lens.you will be able to see vignette until around 100mm with no stabilization on, and it goes away much earlier with active stab. It's passable.
Is there someone who has a FF and the newer 10-20 f4 pz able to confirm if it works like the 10-18? (no vignette after zooming 1 or 2mm without entering APS-C mode)Also actual lens suggestions plz if you know any that work.
>>4397735So get a more compact aps-c camera, and use aps-c lenses.
>>4397738so you are suggesting I buy a camera and a lens instead of looking into lenses that work with what I have currently.The whole reason I made this thread is because I wanted to see if it was possible to get a less expensive and especially lighter alternative to either a FF lens or buying another camera and lens entirely
>>4397744Thread has already recommended your best optionsYou are too picky, and nothing will actually satisfy youSo you might as well get a whole new setup dedicated for vlogging, so that can disappoint tooWhat's the problem? You said money wasn't an issue
>>4397746Sure, aps-c is probably the most optimal, but I know that.I asked something really specific hoping for an answer within those conditions, and I gave my reasoning.I'd rather see if there's an option to pick up a lens for a few hundred bucks than drop twice that amount on a body and lens set. Yes, I'm being picky, but that's the point
>>4397789>hoping for an answerand you got them, you just didn't like what you read
>>4397735>it was sooo heavyI recommend you go to a sporting goods store and buy some weights and beef jerky instead of buying even more lenses for your snoy.
>>4397809>I want to know if I can do thing>"You can't really do thing">Guys quit fucking around, I wanted a real answer
>>4397822He couldnt hold two pounds at arms length i think hes malnourished. Bad for brain function.
>>4397737The difference between the 16-35 PZ and the 10-18 or 10-20 is 125-175g. If ~150g was a make or break difference, you wouldn't be using a cage, which you definitely don't need for vlogging.You'd be better off downsizing your accessories and using the appropriate lens.
>>4397873>vloggoids filtered by one third of a poundThe weight of a small hamburger lol.
>>4397873>>4397864Currently running a7s3 + 16-25 f2.8, a cage, light and shotgun mic, which is a little over 3lb. Okay to hold up if switching shoulders, but anything over 20-30 minutes on a hike gets a bit tough.I expected getting clowned in this thread desu, but I figured I'd ask anyway.I wanted to stay FF with the a7s3 for that sweet lowlight perf, but drop the weight a little by maybe swapping out for a zv-e1 + apsc lens (800g total?) but maybe grabbing an a6700 or zv-e10 mkii would be more optimal.The appeal is still there for me though, since I also carry a 28-70 gmii and a small 35mm prime in a camera bag, and trading a bit of img quality for weight while shooting video is a good deal imo.
>>4397923>3lb at arms lenth, so painful, so tiring, its toughyou would save more money and benefit more in the long term if you bought a set of weights and a quarter of a cowyou sound like you wouldn't make it through basic
>>4397923Did some research and answered my own question somewhat, so leaving here for reference if anyone finds it helpful. So far I've found these apsc lenses that are quite small and can be used in FF mode without too much compromise:Sony 10-18 f4: 225g: can be used well with active stab from about 11-12mm with minimal vignette. Probably the best and most well-known option.Sigma 10-18 f2.8, 260g: Also very usable. Slightly worse stabilization and wider aperture than the sony f4, with the same 12mm and onwards caveat.Sony 10-20 f4 pz: 178g: bit of vignette at wide end, but rectangular crop when going long starting at around 15mm. Can be removed in post, by using active and staying away from 19-20mm, by using dynamic active, or using by clear image zoom. Can also do surgery on the rear baffle to help with vignette. Finicky to use, and probably not the best choice.Sony 55-210 f4.5-6.3, 345g: cheap and light kit lens. If you remove the rear plastic baffle, it's very usable from 70mm onwards with active stabilization or remove vignette in post.sony 11mm f1.8, 181g: Quite usable in dynamic active. Very wide, light, and fast.picrel is the 10-20 f4 at 20mm w/o baffle surgery.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution144 dpiVertical Resolution144 dpiImage Width2546Image Height1412
>you have to buy and carry suboptimal compact designed lenses because you just have to okay!!
>>4397945*because you cant hold 3lbs at arms length
>>4397735Unless your camera has a digital crop stabilisation feature don't bother. get a DJI action cam for the money of that lens and you'll be much happier with the result
>>4397945>I need to save 150g by getting smaller lens, instead of simply removing a 200g cage
>>4397974But how will he mount his various recorders and gimbal for max error margin? Yeah sure you can get 10 bit video and 24 bit audio straight out of camera these days, and ibis+dynamic stab is great if you are not a spaz, but what if? Gotta film in raw with 32 bit float. >for a vlog!
