markwilliam1

Hey y’all! What is the difference between a APS-C lens and a FF lens? I would assume my Classic Minolta lenses from 1985 are Full Frame? Does it depend on the camera? I use Minolta lenses on my Sony a77ii for what it’s worth.

twowindsbear

The basic answer is: A FF lens projects an image circle large enough to cover a 35mm film frame or a FF sized sensor. An APS-C lens projects a smaller image circle only large enough to cover an APS-C sensor which is smaller, or "cropped" compared to the FF sensor. Yes your classic Minolta lens does cover the larger area. You can use a FF lens on an APS-C camera, but generally not the other way around.

rwilson1942 Loc: Houston, TX

APS-C lenses are for crop sensor cameras, they do not cover the full sensor on a FF camera.
Yes your old Minolta lenses are FF.
I have a A77ii as well and 3 Minolta lenses; the 50mm f1.7, 35-70mm f4 and the 'beer can' 70-210mm f4.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

You are going to get a lot of answers to your question. Some will be correct and many will not.

These terms apply to lenses associated with 35mm film frame sizes. Historically the distinction goes back many years...to the time that Olympus and perhaps others made "half frame" cameras alongside their normal 35mm models.

While the origin of small digital camera sensors traces back to manufacturability issues which then led to cost and reliability of supply issues. It has continued because people like having the choice of smaller and lighter and less expensive cameras and lenses.

Of course, the smaller size comes with disadvantages as well. As statedabove, smaller lenses usually produce smaller images, meaning that a lot of them are not suitable for making full frame images. That does not necessarily mean that they are not suitable for use on full frame cameras. I have one fairly modest DX zoom lens that works surprisingly well on a full frame camera.

In my case, there is one more important issue. Lenses have for years been designed and built to fit within various "grades," from novice to consumer to enthusiast to professional. Both build quality and performance improve from grade to grade. My chosen manufacturer makes only one true "professional" DX lens. The others are mostly consumer grade, with a few enthusiast lenses. Some employ clear compromises to allow lower selling prices. For that reason, many people have for years been buying only or at least mostly full frame lenses for their DX cameras.

While there isn't really a strong logical argument for going the other direction...buying DX lenses intentionally for use on a full frame camera, there is an argument to be made for being able to use those lenses, at least for a while. Folks who move to the larger image format need the option to continue to use lenses while saving for new ones. I like to shoot square format (24x24mm) with my small, light lenses occasionally. They work great doing that.

Some cameras, though, limit your options with this last case. Some won't even allow the lenses to be mounted. Some allow it, but forcibly change to use only the DX portion of the sensor with no recourse. Some work fine with whatever shooting parameters you choose. So you have to study and know what options are available to you.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Yes, your Minolta lenses are FF lenses, and when you put them on your cropped sensor a77ii body they get adjusted automatically by your camera. ie. a 50 mm lens for instance, on your a77ii body gets multiplied by 1.5 and becomes a field of view of 75mm lens. This will happen to any FF Minolta lens you put on your camera.
On the other hand, if you put that same lens on a FF Sony, like the a99ii, which is a full frame camera, it stays a 50 mm lens.
Sony makes APS-C lenses specifically for your Sony a77ii. Here is a list.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=sony%20aps-c%20lenses&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma
When I owned my Sony a77ii I did not mind the 1.5 factor as I shot mostly wildlife with the Minolta 400 and 600 mm lenses. But at the wide angle side I liked to get to at least 24 mm and found it hard using Minolta wide prime lenses.
So I got a Sony 16-250 mm aps-c lens that would give me a wide side.
Stay with the Minolta lenses whenever possible, they are a great value and give a very unique color in their photo's.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.

Canisdirus

I think Billnikon has nailed it.
Wide angle...get an APS-C lens.
For everything else...get FF lenses. The edges of the FF will be cropped out...which means usually the softer aspects of any lens will be eliminated. Then later on...if you go with a FF body...you will have lenses that will work with it...except for the single wide angle.

markwilliam1

Thanks Bill and other Hoggers!

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

An APS-C lens projects a smaller image that does not fill the full area of an FF sensor because it is designed for a smaller sized sensor. Some cameras have a menu setting to compensate so that you don’t get a vignetted image.

markwilliam1

Deleted

CO

UHH members have already said that full frame sensors are the same size as 35mm film. The APS-C sized digital sensors are the same size as the discontinued APS-C film.

(Download)

hrblaine

I'm pleased to see that you understand the diff between a 75mm field of view compared to what many incorrectly think would transform a 50mm lens into a 75mm lens. By digital magic apparently. Thanks for not misleading the OP, you are one of nature's noblemen! :-) Harry

Sarco

"So I got a Sony 16-250 mm aps-c lens that would give me a wide side.
[/quote]

Maybe my thinking is incorrect, thus I seek advice.
I recently purchased a used, but brilliant condition 10-24 Nikkor DX for my D5100. Side issue, it cost me just short of $120 USD and I think that I bought a bargain.
Anyhow it was this purchase that brought to mind the aspect of whether the short end 10mm is really any wider than a 15mm on a FF. I came to the conclusion that the lens is what it is, namely a 10-24mm but DX lens or not, it still performs like a 15-36mm on a FF. I also came to the conclusion that it may not be possible to get any really wide lens for a DX camera. (Short of going to a fish-eye)

I look forward to advice on this subject.

Ron

Canisdirus

15mm is wide-angle. Now there is ultra-wide-angle, and frankly, it's uses are limited.
It's increasingly difficult from an engineering standpoint to make a really good ultra-wide lens...especially if it is a zoom.
15mm is plenty wide enough for almost anything. I stopped at the Sony 20mm f/1.8 myself. Close focuses to 7 inches...sharp as a tack right to the edge. It's a combination of factors that separates the winner lenses.

Low light superiority will always go to FF cameras. The medium format will of course beat out FF...which makes sense.
Think of the sensor as a window. The smaller the sensor... 4/3'ds to crop to FF to MF...the less light is captured.

You can always downgrade your sensor size with a FF lens... but a price is always paid.