canon R camera for wildlife with tamron 150-600 g2

Andy01 said:

yaqbpl said:

i dont care about pixel density that much, i just said that crop factor doesnt change reach, only pixel density change.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

When people say crop factor, they are not referring to how much you crop the image. They are usually referring to the size of a full frame sensor compared to the sensor in question. For Canon APS-C the crop factor is 24 mm divided by about 15.7(?) mm), or 1.6 for Canon APS-C.

Andy01 said:

Perhaps I am misunderstanding something, but I am a little confused.

You said above that "for crop factor i dont see asp c as having more reach (only pixel density plays role for me)" - I was a bit confused since crop factor DOES have more reach - 1.6x in the case of Canon (a 600mm lens will deliver 960mm of reach on a Canon crop body), and you say that "only pixel density plays a role for you" - which is sort of the same end result as having more reach (more pixels per duck).

Now you say you "don't care about pixel density that much", so I am even more confused.

From what I read in your OP you seemed to imply that you often crop, even with 600mm available.

I took this to mean that you need more "pixels per duck", which can be achieved by;

• Using crop (APS-C) camera instead of FF.
• Using a higher pixel count sensor (either crop of FF) - because it allows for more cropping.
• Getting a longer lens.

Click to expand...

Yes, indeed. The number of pixels per duck length will be proportional to focal length divided by pixel pitch. That's the appropriate figure of merit to use. Pixel pitch is the distance from pixel to pixel.

The number of pixels per duck (by area) will be the square of (the focal length divided by pixel pitch). Alternatively, you could use the focal length squared times camera number of megapixels times the square of camera crop factor.

Andy01 said:

So, in Canon world, the cameras that tick two of these boxes are;

M6 ii - not a great option with a huge lens (tiny body, tiny grip), older AF, and a redundant system. Cheaper (second hand).

90D - good ergonomically, older AF, almost redundant system. Cheaper than R7.

R7 - good ergonomically, great AF, current system.

Click to expand...

Good AF, but overshadowed for action and birds by newer, more expensive bodies.

Andy01 said:

So, it comes down to how well your current "old school" 3rd party lens performs with these bodies. From what I have read, many third party zooms tended to have issues with Canon DSLRs, so there is the possibility that it may not play AF accurately and reliably with a 90D.

Another option might be R10, which has the crop factor, but "only" 24Mp. Or, as suggested above, a lower pixel count sensor DSLR, like 800D.

On the other hand, some third party large zooms (including your's it seems) do have reported issues with some newer R bodies, including R7.

So you may not find any Canon cameras that will work flawlessly and reliably with your Tamron lens. Can you take your lens to a store and test it with a R7 to see if the AF pulses ?

Click to expand...

I think both @yaqbpl and ThrillaMozilla either confused you are did not answer your question. Crop factors like Canon's 1.6 make the central part of the scene appear larger, because the angle of view of the lens is reduced.

When I use my Canon EF 70-300mm on my 80D or 90D it for birding it acts like a 142-480mm, because it makes the bird appear larger. Since I am using it on a DX camera, the full sensor is being used for the bird. This is sometimes called the zoom factor.

The same reasoning applies when I use my Nikon AF=P 70-300mm ED on my Z30, since the Z30 is DX(APS-C). If I mount my Nikon Z 28mm on the Z30, there is no crop factor because both pieces are APS-C to APS-C and I can use the full sensor.

I hope this helps!

MyReality said:

I think both @yaqbpl and ThrillaMozilla either confused you are did not answer your question.

Click to expand...

Just to check - are you referring to me or the OP ? I didn't think that I was confused, but I suspect the OP might be (regarding the crop factor thing).

MyReality said:

Crop factors like Canon's 1.6 make the central part of the scene appear larger, because the angle of view of the lens is reduced.

When I use my Canon EF 70-300mm on my 80D or 90D it for birding it acts like a 142-480mm,

Click to expand...

I think you may have meant 112-480mm 142 / 70 = 2.029, which is more like MFT crop factor.

MyReality said:

because it makes the bird appear larger.

Click to expand...

That is exactly what I have been trying to tell the OP - fitting a 600mm lens on a FF (even if it is a Medium Format "cropped" to FF) gives an effective FoV of 600mm, but fitting the same 600mm to a Canon APS-C camera gives an effective FoV of 600mm x 1.6 = 960mm.

But OP continues to insist that a 600mm lens is 600mm irrespective of what sensor it is fitted to - which is technically correct, but the image FoV the lens produces is different from FF to APS-C sensors.

OP suggested that the bird would remain the same between these examples, and the only difference would be the amount of background around the bird when using a FF. I disagree - the bird would be closer to filling the frame in the APS-C example, and have many more pixels on the bird than a FF.

MyReality said:

Since I am using it on a DX camera

Click to expand...

I assume that DX might be Nikon speak for a APS-C ?

MyReality said:

, the full sensor is being used for the bird. This is sometimes called the zoom factor.

Click to expand...

I learn something new every day - I don't think I have ever heard it being called "zoom factor" - only crop factor.

MyReality said:

The same reasoning applies when I use my Nikon AF=P 70-300mm ED on my Z30, since the Z30 is DX(APS-C). If I mount my Nikon Z 28mm on the Z30, there is no crop factor because both pieces are APS-C to APS-C

Click to expand...

I would disagree with this (unless, of course, Nikon works differently from Canon with their lens naming) - a 28mm lens (whether it be APS-C specific or FF specific) fitted to a APS-C camera will always produce an image FoV of 28mm x whatever the crop factor is - in Nikon's case I think that is 1.5, so 28mm x 1.5 = 42mm.

The actual focal length of the 28mm lens doesn't change AFAIK.

In Canon world (since this is a Canon forum) - a RF-S 18-150 will produce an effective FoV of 28.8 - 240mm whether it is fitted to a R10 (APS-C) or R8 (FF) camera. It does not magically produce a FoV of 18 - 150mm when it is fitted to Canon APS-C camera. And yes, the R10 will use the full 24Mp sensor on this lens, whereas the R8 will use a cropped centre portion of the 24Mp sensor (about 9Mp).

Perhaps Nikon works differently with their (DX ?) crop system ?

MyReality said:

and I can use the full sensor.

I hope this helps!

Click to expand...

MyReality said:

I think both @yaqbpl and ThrillaMozilla either confused you are did not answer your question. Crop factors like Canon's 1.6 make the central part of the scene appear larger, because the angle of view of the lens is reduced.

Click to expand...

More pixels per duck is good. The number of pixels per duck length is proportional to the focal length divided by the distance between pixels. Larger is better. That allows you to compare different camera-lens combinations unambiguously. There shouldn't be anything confusing about that.

MyReality said:

When I use my Canon EF 70-300mm on my 80D or 90D it for birding it acts like a 142-480mm, because it makes the bird appear larger. Since I am using it on a DX camera, the full sensor is being used for the bird. This is sometimes called the zoom factor.

The same reasoning applies when I use my Nikon AF=P 70-300mm ED on my Z30, since the Z30 is DX(APS-C). If I mount my Nikon Z 28mm on the Z30, there is no crop factor because both pieces are APS-C to APS-C and I can use the full sensor.

I hope this helps!

Click to expand...

Andy01 said:

Perhaps Nikon works differently with their (DX ?) crop system ?

Click to expand...

Nikon APS-C crop factor is 1.5. Canon has slightly smaller APS-C sensors, so the crop factor is 1.6. You can just look up the sensor sizes in the DPR camera reviews.

ThrillaMozilla said:

Andy01 said:

Perhaps Nikon works differently with their (DX ?) crop system ?

Click to expand...

Nikon APS-C crop factor is 1.5. Canon has slightly smaller APS-C sensors, so the crop factor is 1.6. You can just look up the sensor sizes in the DPR camera reviews.

Click to expand...

That I was aware of - what I meant was around my understanding from the post that a Nikon DX 28mm lens had no crop effect when mounted to a Nikon crop camera - I understood that to mean (perhaps incorrectly) that in Nikon world, the crop (RF-S equivalent) 28mm lens on a crop (APS-C) camera would produce an equivalent FoV of 28mm.

Which seems to be different in Canon world where a 28mm lens (whether it be FF or APS-C) on a APS-C body will always produce an equivalent FoV of 28mm x crop factor, which for Canon would be 44.8mm and for Nikon would be 42mm.

That is what I meant about perhaps Nikon works differently. Is a Nikon DX 28mm actually a lens with a 18.6mm actual focal length (so that it produces 28mm on a crop body) - I wouldn't have thought so ?

Andy01 said:

MyReality said:

I think both @yaqbpl and ThrillaMozilla either confused you are did not answer your question.

Click to expand...

Just to check - are you referring to me or the OP ? I didn't think that I was confused, but I suspect the OP might be (regarding the crop factor thing).

Click to expand...

I was referring to your reply above to yaqbpl where you start off the reply with "Perhaps I am misunderstanding something, but I am a little confused."

Andy01 said:

Andy01 said:

Crop factors like Canon's 1.6 make the central part of the scene appear larger, because the angle of view of the lens is reduced.

When I use my Canon EF 70-300mm on my 80D or 90D it for birding it acts like a 142-480mm,

Click to expand...

I think you may have meant 112-480mm 142 / 70 = 2.029, which is more like MFT crop factor.

Click to expand...

True and my fault.

Andy01 said:

Andy01 said:

because it makes the bird appear larger.

Click to expand...

That is exactly what I have been trying to tell the OP - fitting a 600mm lens on a FF (even if it is a Medium Format "cropped" to FF) gives an effective FoV of 600mm, but fitting the same 600mm to a Canon APS-C camera gives an effective FoV of 600mm x 1.6 = 960mm.

Click to expand...

True again.

Andy01 said:

But OP continues to insist that a 600mm lens is 600mm irrespective of what sensor it is fitted to - which is technically correct, but the image FoV the lens produces is different from FF to APS-C sensors.

Click to expand...

Also true again. This is confusion between the physical lens and the view.

Andy01 said:

OP suggested that the bird would remain the same between these examples, and the only difference would be the amount of background around the bird when using a FF. I disagree - the bird would be closer to filling the frame in the APS-C example, and have many more pixels on the bird than a FF.

Click to expand...

You have the correct understanding of this.

Andy01 said:

Andy01 said:

Since I am using it on a DX camera

Click to expand...

I assume that DX might be Nikon speak for a APS-C ?

Click to expand...

Yes. DX=APS-C for DSLR's and mirrorless. DX is mainly used with DSLR's.

Andy01 said:

Andy01 said:

, the full sensor is being used for the bird. This is sometimes called the zoom factor.

Click to expand...

I learn something new every day - I don't think I have ever heard it being called "zoom factor" - only crop factor.

Andy01 said:

The same reasoning applies when I use my Nikon AF=P 70-300mm ED on my Z30, since the Z30 is DX(APS-C). If I mount my Nikon Z 28mm on the Z30, there is no crop factor because both pieces are APS-C to APS-C

Click to expand...

I would disagree with this (unless, of course, Nikon works differently from Canon with their lens naming) - a 28mm lens (whether it be APS-C specific or FF specific) fitted to a APS-C camera will always produce an image FoV of 28mm x whatever the crop factor is - in Nikon's case I think that is 1.5, so 28mm x 1.5 = 42mm.

Click to expand...

The Nikon 70-300mm that I referred to is not a DX(APS-C) lens, so Nikons crop factor applies. Nikons Z 28mm is a specifically designed APS-C lens for mirrorless sensors with the new mount. It does not have a crop factor.

This is my understanding and I was actually corrected about this twice on DPR, by other posters. One poster said(referring to my Z30), "What crop factor? It's APS-C to APS-C".

Andy01 said:

The actual focal length of the 28mm lens doesn't change AFAIK.

In Canon world (since this is a Canon forum) - a RF-S 18-150 will produce an effective FoV of 28.8 - 240mm whether it is fitted to a R10 (APS-C) or R8 (FF) camera. It does not magically produce a FoV of 18 - 150mm when it is fitted to Canon APS-C camera. And yes, the R10 will use the full 24Mp sensor on this lens, whereas the R8 will use a cropped centre portion of the 24Mp sensor (about 9Mp).

Click to expand...

It looks like there is a contradiction. I thought the new mount in mirrorless gave a 1:1 relationship in focal lengths.

Andy01 said:

Perhaps Nikon works differently with their (DX ?) crop system ?

Andy01 said:

and I can use the full sensor.

I hope this helps!

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Andy01 said:

ThrillaMozilla said:

Andy01 said:

Perhaps Nikon works differently with their (DX ?) crop system ?

Click to expand...

Nikon APS-C crop factor is 1.5. Canon has slightly smaller APS-C sensors, so the crop factor is 1.6. You can just look up the sensor sizes in the DPR camera reviews.

Click to expand...

That I was aware of - what I meant was around my understanding from the post that a Nikon DX 28mm lens had no crop effect when mounted to a Nikon crop camera - I understood that to mean (perhaps incorrectly) that in Nikon world, the crop (RF-S equivalent) 28mm lens on a crop (APS-C) camera would produce an equivalent FoV of 28mm.

Which seems to be different in Canon world where a 28mm lens (whether it be FF or APS-C) on a APS-C body will always produce an equivalent FoV of 28mm x crop factor, which for Canon would be 44.8mm and for Nikon would be 42mm.

That is what I meant about perhaps Nikon works differently. Is a Nikon DX 28mm actually a lens with a 18.6mm actual focal length (so that it produces 28mm on a crop body) - I wouldn't have thought so ?

Click to expand...

I wouldn't think so either. The brand of camera makes no difference. A 28 mm lens is always a 28 mm lens on any camera. The field of view depends only on the size of the sensor. Nikon is not any different in that respect.

The only exception is that for cameras with very small sensors marketing literature and spec. sheets misstate the focal length. They usually say "x to y mm", but they should say something like "x to y mm equivalent". Even then, you should find that the focal length is correctly marked on the lens itself.

A 28 mm lens is a 28 mm lens on any camera.

EDIT: Without reviewing previous conversations, I think I can guess what your question is. A Nikon DX lens is an APS-C-only lens. It will not illuminate an entire FF sensor. The focal length is still the same, though.

Various lenses are designed for different sensor sizes. The lens must project a large enough circle of light to cover the sensor. That's called the image circle. Nikon DX lenses have too small an image circle to cover a full-frame sensor.

MyReality said:

MyReality said:

I would disagree with this (unless, of course, Nikon works differently from Canon with their lens naming) - a 28mm lens (whether it be APS-C specific or FF specific) fitted to a APS-C camera will always produce an image FoV of 28mm x whatever the crop factor is - in Nikon's case I think that is 1.5, so 28mm x 1.5 = 42mm.

Click to expand...

The Nikon 70-300mm that I referred to is not a DX(APS-C) lens, so Nikons crop factor applies. Nikons Z 28mm is a specifically designed APS-C lens for mirrorless sensors with the new mount. It does not have a crop factor.

This is my understanding and I was actually corrected about this twice on DPR, by other posters. One poster said(referring to my Z30), "What crop factor? It's APS-C to APS-C".

MyReality said:

The actual focal length of the 28mm lens doesn't change AFAIK.

In Canon world (since this is a Canon forum) - a RF-S 18-150 will produce an effective FoV of 28.8 - 240mm whether it is fitted to a R10 (APS-C) or R8 (FF) camera. It does not magically produce a FoV of 18 - 150mm when it is fitted to Canon APS-C camera. And yes, the R10 will use the full 24Mp sensor on this lens, whereas the R8 will use a cropped centre portion of the 24Mp sensor (about 9Mp).

Click to expand...

It looks like there is a contradiction. I thought the new mount in mirrorless gave a 1:1 relationship in focal lengths.

MyReality said:

Perhaps Nikon works differently with their (DX ?) crop system ?

MyReality said:

and I can use the full sensor.

I hope this helps!

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Again, I am happy to be corrected, but I think that there is a big difference between a lens being APS-C only (as all Canon EF-S were) and saying that there is no crop factor.

An APS-C only lens just suggests that the lens will not work at all or not properly with a FF camera. This was certainly true for Canon DSLRs - they would not accept Canon EF-S lenses, and while they could physically mount some third party APS-C lenses, they usually would not produce the full image without visible cropping/vignetting.

To say that a APS-C lens fitted to a APS-C camera produces the correct FoV as per the stated focal length (ie. a 28mm APS-C shows a FoV of 28mm, not 42mm on Nikon) is an entirely different thing altogether.

Certainly in Canon world, if I mount my RF-S 18-150 on my APS-C R10 it does NOT produce fields of view equivalent to a 18-150mm on a FF camera - it produces FoVs equivalent to a 29-240mm lens on FF camera. So while the lens remains (and always will) a 18-150mm lens (and the exif data shows 18-150mm), the FoV it produces is never 18-150mm (either on APS-C or FF cameras).

But as I said, perhaps Nikon has done something different ?

Andy01 said:

MyReality said:

Andy01 said:

I would disagree with this (unless, of course, Nikon works differently from Canon with their lens naming) - a 28mm lens (whether it be APS-C specific or FF specific) fitted to a APS-C camera will always produce an image FoV of 28mm x whatever the crop factor is - in Nikon's case I think that is 1.5, so 28mm x 1.5 = 42mm.

Click to expand...

The Nikon 70-300mm that I referred to is not a DX(APS-C) lens, so Nikons crop factor applies. Nikons Z 28mm is a specifically designed APS-C lens for mirrorless sensors with the new mount. It does not have a crop factor.

This is my understanding and I was actually corrected about this twice on DPR, by other posters. One poster said(referring to my Z30), "What crop factor? It's APS-C to APS-C".

Andy01 said:

The actual focal length of the 28mm lens doesn't change AFAIK.

In Canon world (since this is a Canon forum) - a RF-S 18-150 will produce an effective FoV of 28.8 - 240mm whether it is fitted to a R10 (APS-C) or R8 (FF) camera. It does not magically produce a FoV of 18 - 150mm when it is fitted to Canon APS-C camera. And yes, the R10 will use the full 24Mp sensor on this lens, whereas the R8 will use a cropped centre portion of the 24Mp sensor (about 9Mp).

Click to expand...

It looks like there is a contradiction. I thought the new mount in mirrorless gave a 1:1 relationship in focal lengths.

Andy01 said:

Perhaps Nikon works differently with their (DX ?) crop system ?

Andy01 said:

and I can use the full sensor.

I hope this helps!

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Again, I am happy to be corrected, but I think that there is a big difference between a lens being APS-C only (as all Canon EF-S were) and saying that there is no crop factor.

An APS-C only lens just suggests that the lens will not work at all or not properly with a FF camera. This was certainly true for Canon DSLRs - they would not accept Canon EF-S lenses, and while they could physically mount some third party APS-C lenses, they usually would not produce the full image without visible cropping/vignetting.

To say that a APS-C lens fitted to a APS-C camera produces the correct FoV as per the stated focal length (ie. a 28mm APS-C shows a FoV of 28mm, not 42mm on Nikon) is an entirely different thing altogether.

Certainly in Canon world, if I mount my RF-S 18-150 on my APS-C R10 it does NOT produce fields of view equivalent to a 18-150mm on a FF camera - it produces FoVs equivalent to a 29-240mm lens on FF camera. So while the lens remains (and always will) a 18-150mm lens (and the exif data shows 18-150mm), the FoV it produces is never 18-150mm (either on APS-C or FF cameras).

But as I said, perhaps Nikon has done something different ?

Click to expand...

I think that ThrillaMozilla's response to your post above agrees with me.

When I mount my RF 16mm or RF 50mm on my Canon RP, it sure looks like there is no crop factor(FF to FF). If I were to mount them on a R10, there would be a crop factor.

From https://www.canon-europe.com/get-inspired/tips-and-techniques/aps-c-vs-full-frame/

"The category of RF-S lenses was introduced to provide affordable, general-purpose lenses designed for use with APS-C EOS R System cameras, so the RF-S 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM is the ideal kit lens to pair with the Canon EOS R10, for example. The RF mount on an RF-S lens is identical to the mount on all RF lenses, and RF-S lenses are compatible with all EOS R System cameras. However, full-frame EOS R System cameras, when fitted with an RF-S lens, will automatically crop the image area to match the APS-C coverage of the lens."

Inside the link it says that Canons new RF-S lenses are designed to have an image circle equal to its APS-C sensor, so no crop on APS-C bodies like the R10.

This is the same way that Nikon's mount works.

The link has a lot of good information.

MyReality said:

Andy01 said:

MyReality said:

Andy01 said:

I would disagree with this (unless, of course, Nikon works differently from Canon with their lens naming) - a 28mm lens (whether it be APS-C specific or FF specific) fitted to a APS-C camera will always produce an image FoV of 28mm x whatever the crop factor is - in Nikon's case I think that is 1.5, so 28mm x 1.5 = 42mm.

Click to expand...

The Nikon 70-300mm that I referred to is not a DX(APS-C) lens, so Nikons crop factor applies. Nikons Z 28mm is a specifically designed APS-C lens for mirrorless sensors with the new mount. It does not have a crop factor.

This is my understanding and I was actually corrected about this twice on DPR, by other posters. One poster said(referring to my Z30), "What crop factor? It's APS-C to APS-C".

MyReality said:

The actual focal length of the 28mm lens doesn't change AFAIK.

In Canon world (since this is a Canon forum) - a RF-S 18-150 will produce an effective FoV of 28.8 - 240mm whether it is fitted to a R10 (APS-C) or R8 (FF) camera. It does not magically produce a FoV of 18 - 150mm when it is fitted to Canon APS-C camera. And yes, the R10 will use the full 24Mp sensor on this lens, whereas the R8 will use a cropped centre portion of the 24Mp sensor (about 9Mp).

Click to expand...

It looks like there is a contradiction. I thought the new mount in mirrorless gave a 1:1 relationship in focal lengths.

MyReality said:

Perhaps Nikon works differently with their (DX ?) crop system ?

MyReality said:

and I can use the full sensor.

I hope this helps!

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Again, I am happy to be corrected, but I think that there is a big difference between a lens being APS-C only (as all Canon EF-S were) and saying that there is no crop factor.

An APS-C only lens just suggests that the lens will not work at all or not properly with a FF camera. This was certainly true for Canon DSLRs - they would not accept Canon EF-S lenses, and while they could physically mount some third party APS-C lenses, they usually would not produce the full image without visible cropping/vignetting.

To say that a APS-C lens fitted to a APS-C camera produces the correct FoV as per the stated focal length (ie. a 28mm APS-C shows a FoV of 28mm, not 42mm on Nikon) is an entirely different thing altogether.

Certainly in Canon world, if I mount my RF-S 18-150 on my APS-C R10 it does NOT produce fields of view equivalent to a 18-150mm on a FF camera - it produces FoVs equivalent to a 29-240mm lens on FF camera. So while the lens remains (and always will) a 18-150mm lens (and the exif data shows 18-150mm), the FoV it produces is never 18-150mm (either on APS-C or FF cameras).

But as I said, perhaps Nikon has done something different ?

Click to expand...

I think that ThrillaMozilla's response to your post above agrees with me.

Click to expand...

I don't think it does - I think we (him & I) are saying exactly the same thing.

MyReality said:

When I mount my RF 16mm or RF 50mm on my Canon RP, it sure looks like there is no crop factor(FF to FF). If I were to mount them on a R10, there would be a crop factor.

Click to expand...

I absolutely agree with that statement - because a FF lens (eg. RF16) on a FF camera is going to have the correct stated FoV (ie. 16mm - unless the R FF camera is manually put into crop mode), and the same lens on a crop camera (eg. RF16 on R10) is going to have a FoV equivalent to 16mm x 1.6 = 25.6mm.

I am confused (again) that you think that I was saying anything different to this ?

What I was saying is that the reverse is NOT true. A crop (APS-C designed lens - such as RF-S 18-150) is NOT going to have an effective FoV of 18-150mm on either a crop or FF camera - it will have a 29-240mm effective FoV on both crop and FF bodies.

Your quote below states the reason why the FF doesn't show a 18-150mm FoV, unlike when a RF lens is fitted - because only a cropped portion of the larger FF sensor is used.

MyReality said:

From https://www.canon-europe.com/get-inspired/tips-and-techniques/aps-c-vs-full-frame/

"The category of RF-S lenses was introduced to provide affordable, general-purpose lenses designed for use with APS-C EOS R System cameras, so the RF-S 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM is the ideal kit lens to pair with the Canon EOS R10, for example. The RF mount on an RF-S lens is identical to the mount on all RF lenses, and RF-S lenses are compatible with all EOS R System cameras. However, full-frame EOS R System cameras, when fitted with an RF-S lens, will automatically crop the image area to match the APS-C coverage of the lens."

Inside the link it says that Canons new RF-S lenses are designed to have an image circle equal to its APS-C sensor, so no crop on APS-C bodies like the R10.

Click to expand...

I have been using Canon ILC cameras for almost 20 years, both APS-C and FF, and both DSLR and mirrorless, and as mentioned currently own a FF R8 and APS-C R10 (with both RF and RF-S lenses - which get swapped between bodies as the need dictates), so I am quite familiar with how the lenses behave between the various camera options.

MyReality said:

This is the same way that Nikon's mount works.

Click to expand...

But that isn't what was stated above - the statement above (and pasted in below) implied that a Nikon APS-C specific 28mm showed a 28mm effective FoV on a Nikon APS-C camera (ie. no crop factor) - because it was "APS-C to APS-C".

This was your comment earlier;

"Nikons Z 28mm is a specifically designed APS-C lens for mirrorless sensors with the new mount. It does not have a crop factor.

This is my understanding and I was actually corrected about this twice on DPR, by other posters. One poster said(referring to my Z30), "What crop factor? It's APS-C to APS-C"."

Apologies if I misunderstood that to mean that a Nikon Z 28mm will provide an effective FoV of 28mm (ie. no crop factor) on a Nikon APS-C camera.

MyReality said:

The link has a lot of good information.

Click to expand...

MyReality said:

The Nikon 70-300mm that I referred to is not a DX(APS-C) lens, so Nikons crop factor applies. Nikons Z 28mm is a specifically designed APS-C lens for mirrorless sensors with the new mount. It does not have a crop factor.

Click to expand...

Let's be clear here. A lens does not have a crop factor. The camera has a crop factor, because of the reduced size of the sensor. Some lenses (e.g., DX and EF-S) have image circles that are too small for the sensor in a full frame camera. It is as simple as that.

ThrillaMozilla said:

MyReality said:

The Nikon 70-300mm that I referred to is not a DX(APS-C) lens, so Nikons crop factor applies. Nikons Z 28mm is a specifically designed APS-C lens for mirrorless sensors with the new mount. It does not have a crop factor.

Click to expand...

Let's be clear here. A lens does not have a crop factor. The camera has a crop factor, because of the reduced size of the sensor. Some lenses (e.g., DX and EF-S) have image circles that are too small for the sensor in a full frame camera. It is as simple as that.

Click to expand...

Very true. I suppose the possible "exception" might be the few people who have posted here previously about using a third party APS-C lens on a Canon FF DSLR and living with the cropping/vignetting, or working around it by using the zoom lens in it's more tele settings - I think one example that springs to mid was people using some UWA zooms (maybe Tokina 11-16mm or 11-20mm f2.8 or similar) for astro (where severe vignetting is less critical). In those (somewhat isolated) examples, the camera does not crop, but arguably the lens does result in a varying degree of cropping.

All of my references above were to a combination of lens and camera.

I think this discussion has become one of semantics - while technically a lens may not directly cause cropping, it is a fact that a 28mm lens (whether it be designed for FF or APS-C) will never display a visible field of view of 28mm when fitted to a APS-C camera, so the end result, as seen by the user is a cropped image with an effective FoV of around 42-45mm (when using a APS-C camera).

Andy01 said:

ThrillaMozilla said:

MyReality said:

The Nikon 70-300mm that I referred to is not a DX(APS-C) lens, so Nikons crop factor applies. Nikons Z 28mm is a specifically designed APS-C lens for mirrorless sensors with the new mount. It does not have a crop factor.

Click to expand...

Let's be clear here. A lens does not have a crop factor. The camera has a crop factor, because of the reduced size of the sensor. Some lenses (e.g., DX and EF-S) have image circles that are too small for the sensor in a full frame camera. It is as simple as that.

Click to expand...

Very true. I suppose the possible "exception" might be the few people who have posted here previously about using a third party APS-C lens on a Canon FF DSLR and living with the cropping/vignetting, or working around it by using the zoom lens in it's more tele settings - I think one example that springs to mid was people using some UWA zooms (maybe Tokina 11-16mm or 11-20mm f2.8 or similar) for astro (where severe vignetting is less critical). In those (somewhat isolated) examples, the camera does not crop, but arguably the lens does result in a varying degree of cropping.

All of my references above were to a combination of lens and camera.

I think this discussion has become one of semantics - while technically a lens may not directly cause cropping, it is a fact that a 28mm lens (whether it be designed for FF or APS-C) will never display a visible field of view of 28mm when fitted to a APS-C camera, so the end result, as seen by the user is a cropped image with an effective FoV of around 42-45mm (when using a APS-C camera).

Click to expand...

A 28mm lens will always be a 28mm lens whatever format you use it on, however much distortion it has and however you crop its images subsequently. But field of view is a secondary characteristic of a lens. The focal length primarily govens the magnification on the sensor of the very centre of the image. The field of view is governed by the size of the sensor and the projection of the lens (i.e. whether it's a fisheye, what sort of fisheye projection, whether it's rectangular projection, how much distortion it has to be corrected in post.) The concept of a visible field of view of 28mm is only valid if you're thinking in terms of 35mm film cameras and even then it breaks down if you use a half-frame camera. Thinking in terms of 35mm film camera focal lengths isnt really helpful if you use other formats because it adds extra steps to your calculations. But it's a hard habit to break and one that was gien currency by small format digital compact cameras marking their zoom lens focal lengths in terms of their 35mm film format equivalents rather than their real values.

sorry for my using of quotes, totally not my thing.

i could only repeat, sensor size does not matter for reach. aps c has more reach only because they in many cases have more pixel density then ff. if you have same pixel densities on mf, ff and aps c, images after crop to the bird will be exactly the same. sure it is helpful to have bigger bird in viewfinder, but it is no problem to zoom in with one button. that is why for reach i understand the image that is produced.

jjbinx said:

yaqbpl said:

hey, i have tamron 150-600 g2 ef mount. i wonder which canon R body would work well with it for wildlife/bird photography.

i crop heavily so asp-c would be better. my current fuji body has bad autofocus, i only use this with manual focus. main concern would be to get good autofocus for things like fast moving birds. cheapest option that would work well, nothing fancy needed.

Click to expand...

My choice with that lens would be to use it with a DSLR.
I have an R7 but would expect the AF to work better with my 7DII and 5DIV

Another good option(extra reach) might be a 90D

Click to expand...

I can't agree there, in general, with one exception. DSLRs are faster at acquiring gross AF quickly when you have a large entrance pupil and the subject starts out completely OOF, because DSLR AF sensors have more DOF than sensor-based dual-pixel AF does. Once the AF is already close to correct, though, then R series bodies give superior AF (unless the infamous pulsing results).

Consider, when you compare DSLR AF vs ML AF, that your experience with DSLR AF is pampered by the fact that it is so useless in so many situations, that you didn't even try to do things anymore once you realized that they were impossible. People did not add a TC as often, people did not shoot in very low light as readily, people did not have f/11 lenses, etc.

John Sheehy said:

jjbinx said:

yaqbpl said:

hey, i have tamron 150-600 g2 ef mount. i wonder which canon R body would work well with it for wildlife/bird photography.

i crop heavily so asp-c would be better. my current fuji body has bad autofocus, i only use this with manual focus. main concern would be to get good autofocus for things like fast moving birds. cheapest option that would work well, nothing fancy needed.

Click to expand...

My choice with that lens would be to use it with a DSLR.
I have an R7 but would expect the AF to work better with my 7DII and 5DIV

Another good option(extra reach) might be a 90D

Click to expand...

I can't agree there, in general, with one exception. DSLRs are faster at acquiring gross AF quickly when you have a large entrance pupil and the subject starts out completely OOF, because DSLR AF sensors have more DOF than sensor-based dual-pixel AF does. Once the AF is already close to correct, though, then R series bodies give superior AF (unless the infamous pulsing results).

Click to expand...

Confusing: AF speed or accuracy? DOF is a function of aperture, lens and distance, not AF type. Overall AF speed is one thing that DSLR's still have over mirrorless. Dual-pixel AF is very accurate.

John Sheehy said:

Consider, when you compare DSLR AF vs ML AF, that your experience with DSLR AF is pampered by the fact that it is so useless in so many situations, that you didn't even try to do things anymore once you realized that they were impossible. People did not add a TC as often, people did not shoot in very low light as readily, people did not have f/11 lenses, etc.

Click to expand...

What? I have not had any problems shooting BIF from f5.6 - f11, even with my 1995 100-300mm L. I don't know what situations you are talking about. It is some mirrorless cameras that have had problems shoot BIF and action with eye AF. Focusing on the wrong things is no a problem with my 90D.

MyReality said:

John Sheehy said:

I can't agree there, in general, with one exception. DSLRs are faster at acquiring gross AF quickly when you have a large entrance pupil and the subject starts out completely OOF, because DSLR AF sensors have more DOF than sensor-based dual-pixel AF does. Once the AF is already close to correct, though, then R series bodies give superior AF (unless the infamous pulsing results).

Click to expand...

Confusing: AF speed or accuracy? DOF is a function of aperture, lens and distance, not AF type.

Click to expand...

Actually, the focusing system is itself an optical system that has its own depth of field, and that is important if you are trying to focus on subjects that are far out of focus. Years ago Marianne Ölund showed a Nikon focusing system in great detail. As I recall, the depth of field was quite large.

MyReality said:

MyReality said:

Consider, when you compare DSLR AF vs ML AF, that your experience with DSLR AF is pampered by the fact that it is so useless in so many situations, that you didn't even try to do things anymore once you realized that they were impossible. People did not add a TC as often, people did not shoot in very low light as readily, people did not have f/11 lenses, etc.

Click to expand...

What? I have not had any problems shooting BIF from f5.6 - f11, even with my 1995 100-300mm L. I don't know what situations you are talking about. It is some mirrorless cameras that have had problems shoot BIF and action with eye AF. Focusing on the wrong things is no a problem with my 90D.

Click to expand...

MyReality said:

John Sheehy said:

jjbinx said:

yaqbpl said:

hey, i have tamron 150-600 g2 ef mount. i wonder which canon R body would work well with it for wildlife/bird photography.

i crop heavily so asp-c would be better. my current fuji body has bad autofocus, i only use this with manual focus. main concern would be to get good autofocus for things like fast moving birds. cheapest option that would work well, nothing fancy needed.

Click to expand...

My choice with that lens would be to use it with a DSLR.
I have an R7 but would expect the AF to work better with my 7DII and 5DIV

Another good option(extra reach) might be a 90D

Click to expand...

I can't agree there, in general, with one exception. DSLRs are faster at acquiring gross AF quickly when you have a large entrance pupil and the subject starts out completely OOF, because DSLR AF sensors have more DOF than sensor-based dual-pixel AF does. Once the AF is already close to correct, though, then R series bodies give superior AF (unless the infamous pulsing results).

Click to expand...

Confusing: AF speed or accuracy? DOF is a function of aperture, lens and distance, not AF type. Overall AF speed is one thing that DSLR's still have over mirrorless. Dual-pixel AF is very accurate.

MyReality said:

Consider, when you compare DSLR AF vs ML AF, that your experience with DSLR AF is pampered by the fact that it is so useless in so many situations, that you didn't even try to do things anymore once you realized that they were impossible. People did not add a TC as often, people did not shoot in very low light as readily, people did not have f/11 lenses, etc.

Click to expand...

What? I have not had any problems shooting BIF from f5.6 - f11, even with my 1995 100-300mm L. I don't know what situations you are talking about. It is some mirrorless cameras that have had problems shoot BIF and action with eye AF. Focusing on the wrong things is no a problem with my 90D.

Click to expand...

I think they meant with teleconverters etc where the aperture is F8 and some of the newer lenses being released wouldnt AF at all on a DSLR due to this issue, eg the Canon 600mm F11.

People do sometimes talk like its kodak brownies vs mirrorless though.