I think the notion of FF = heavier lens may not be true

Started Nov 8, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
RedFox88 Forum Pro • Posts: 24,697
Re: I think the notion of FF = heavier lens may not be true

EinsteinsGhost wrote:


Then there is the reach aspect. I use 200mm/2.8 on APS-c whereas the same reach on FF would require 300/2.8. Whole both are FF lens, the 200/2.8 is considerably smaller with same metal build and weighs only a third (about 750g).

No, you would need 300mm f/1.8 on 35mm to compare to 200 f/2.8 on aps-c.  That 300mm lens doesn't exist and would be very big, very heavy, and very, very expensive!

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow