Sensor Size Comparison for Photography


Hi, this is JP Morgan and this is Kenneth Merril. Today on The Slanted Lens We’re gonna take a look at four different sensor sizes and see how they compare with one another Thanks to our sponsor Borrow lenses for shipping out all of these Amazing cameras and lenses us the we could try them out provide this test for you They’re a great resource for finding gear that you don’t necessarily have a home It’s a great place to check out a different sensor size or the sensor size of your choice Be able to have the equipment you need when you need it and then send it back and not have to buy it borrow lenses Are you ready to make money in video? We’re ready to teach you how there’s more demand than ever for video content and everyone You know is probably looking for someone to do it for them. We’ve got a great video basic download for you They’ll help get you start on that road and help you make money in video So go to the slanted lens comm and purchase your download today first We have a hostile out of x1d, which is a medium format sensor It’s the largest digital sensor on the market right now. Then we have the full frame camera the nascent Then we go to 70 which is an aps-c sensor Which is that crop sensor size and last of all micro four-thirds with that Panasonic. Gh4? We won’t look at these four different sensor sizes and just see how they compare with each other with regards to vent depth of field with regards to image quality grain structure how much data is really coming through versus artifacting Let’s take a look and see what they look like. So let’s get started. See how they compare So we just got back from the beach we had five cameras five cameras four cameras, well, we had a beach yesterday as well Yeah, three of us hauling stuff around the sand. Of course the waves are coming in and we got stand allows for a couple cameras They’re flying out like people walking like going wow, he’s got too many cameras. Can I take one? No, you can’t take one Okay, so we’re gonna quickly go to the focus that we just hear and just starting at three point two Which was the the smallest aperture for the Hasselblad your background falls away. Yes. It’s a pretty – super super quick I mean, it feels like less than a 2.8 on full frame Yeah, you know It feels like a very shallow depth of field very show If you look at the gh 5 and of course this a which is a little overexposed, which is unfortunate But the gh 5 is InFocus all the way down the California coast man. Yeah, it’s crazy I did not expect that to be so dramatically, but if you look at the 7d you’re good of the sony. Yeah we go The sony I feel like the difference between the 7d and the sony is probably the least between all of them You know, yes like the Hasselblad to the Sony still feels kind of dramatic the 7d But then there’s something to the 7d not as much. Yeah, you’re absolutely right So when we start to go to f4, I mean, it doesn’t change that drastically we go to five six Which is kind of optimal here to shoot there’s a 7d Again, you say the 7d is looking very similar to the Sony but again that Hasselblad at five six the background is still Considerably more out of focus than the Sony what I like about this is that you can shoot at your lenses optimal Aperture in terms of sharpness and performance and still have a really shallow depth of field. You care on the hospital on the house Absolutely. Nice. Yeah, I mean that you’re absolutely right. I mean you’re at the optimal sharpness on that lens and It’s and you have a nice falling out of focus in the background whereas it’s not the same on the On the sony of the sony of five six here and a sony just not seen as much you know, yeah You’re seeing more of the background. It’s not quite as yeah, you know, but if we jump up to say like f11 f11 on the the GH five Everything is in focus down there. I’m, it’s the focus all the way down south America, I can see chile right over there in the corner So look at this is the hospital f11 I mean we have to go all the way to 32 for the Hasselblad to finally be in focus on the rock I was Even at f-22 that large rock behind her is still a little bit. There’s 20 Bit but look at the g h5 would have 22 everything’s in focus people all the way back to f-16 which was the most we get on the The lens we had it was only sony So the question becomes here and I think what are the stop differences So like how do you match the depth of field from camera to camera? So we kind of came up with this at the panasonic. Gh4 3.2 looks very similar to the sony a7r 3 at 8.0 looks very similar to the can of seventy at five six Which looks very similar to the hostile at static f-16 so yeah You’re looking at more than a four stop difference in terms of achieving the same depth of field for the cameras. Yeah across the spectrum So what’s interesting about that is the reality is that? The Hasselblad can’t give you the depth Of focus that the GH 5 can give you right but the gh 5 can’t give you the shallow depth of field at the Hasselblad Can give you the thought that comes to my mind then is sure the hospital odd super high quality large sensor But is it it’s not as flexible as say maybe a full-frame sensor Because to my mind the full-frame sensor can achieve very deep depth of field It can also achieve very shallow depth of field if you open it up to 1.2 or something like that So how does the how does a shallow depth of field compare when it’s wide open versus the hospital that’s wide open? Let’s take a look at that Okay, so here are each of these with the as wide open as the lenses that we have so which we’re all very fast They look for the format we have first of all the panasonic h5 1.7 I mean it is achieving a shallow depth of field here that that’s a that’s a workable portrait And I think for headshots and stuff you might want to be able to go more shallow than that But that’s totally workable then that you have the 7d and that’s of course a lot shallower Larger, even though it’s pretty much the same aperture And then the step-up is a 7r3 in holy cow. Look at that 1.2 It is in backgrounds just gone So a lot of folk very elated focused very beautiful look, but the Hasselblad of the three point to it again You have more detail in the background. It’s not as not as out of my point. It’s not a shallow of a depth of field So even at three at three point to the Hasselblad is not as shallow as a sony at one point – yeah, exactly So again, well that makes sense. The Hasselblad struggles on giving you depth. Mm-hmm The GH five gives you depth but struggles giving you shallow so the a7 r3 and the 7d are kind of more in the middle and they’re giving you a little bit on both sides and It looks like the a7 r3 is really giving you more more on each other on you-jin And which really moves us to the next side and that is it The a7 r3 is a 42 megapixel camera, right? And the Hasselblad is a 50 Yeah, so edges it out a little bit it edged out a little bit But when you go to blow those up when we looked at blowing them up at 300dpi the hospital I will give you the same with 26 inches and The a7 three only gives you like 17 inches high with the Hasselblad will give you like 22 inches This is really kind of made me realize that I think a full-frame camera is the most flexible tool Yes, because you can shoot at your f-22 and you have everything in focus You can shoot a year at one point – and you have nothing in focus. So what’s interesting then is the the a7 3 It becomes a compromise in another way in that. It’s a little lower megapixel, right you’re Gonna blow it up as much but you still have that larger sensor, which is gonna give you the nice depth of field so it’s a come from it’s a it’s in between the 7d and the a7 are three is looking at the size of sensor and sensor quality Man what we could test to somebody every day I’m having a hard time as a thinking as a landscape photographer why you’d be using that large sensor for focus issues but we had it have talked to landscape person that probably say well it’s because this shit Mo’s all But we took a landscape photo we did let’s look at that All right, so here’s this was really late in the day I mean sun’s down yeah, it’s very very dark very dark So there’s there’s a good amount of depth of field on all the cameras. Obviously the Hasselblad would be the least Looking at the images. I can definitely see where the smaller pixel smaller sensor size on the jh5 stands out like it’s gritty It’s grainy and it just feels a little more Less detailed the 70s. Okay this a seven or three and the hospital have both look real I mean they both kind of look the same to me almost in terms of noise structure and how the image looks okay So let’s look at this is all shot at 1600 ISO. They’re all hurtin Some of these are really greedy that you look at the jh5 and the 7d I mean the 7d is actually grittier than the GH five to mine looks terrible. Yeah But the Hasselblad is really it’s pretty smooth for 1600 and and this is where the a7 Actually does kind of fall by. Oh, yeah, and that’s always how it is with the Sony’s they don’t perform Well when you start pushing the ISO To go back to the question to start this all just sensor size matter. Yes it does to a certain extent if you want a high-performing camera, I Can’t recommend the micro four-thirds. I don’t even know if I can recommend the See honestly when you surprise me because I’ve always thought. Meh aps-c, you know, super 35 doesn’t matter The full-frame is definitely the sweet spot. Mm-hmm. I don’t see a huge improvement Based on the few things we shot with the medium format, but that’s just me. You know, I agree with you It’s really not enough to make it worth it to me. Yeah, and your lenses are more money Everything’s more my either don’t just step up with a camera you step up with a whole system Again, that full-frame sensor seems to be a sweet spot Gives you great depth of field control be able to get things out of focus You know get things in focus gives you a really decent image size on the a7 r3, you know That full-frame be able to blow that up. So there you have it does sensor size matter Well, maybe not quite in the way that you might have. Thought. So keep those cameras rolling and keep on clicking If you liked our lesson you today we’d love it If you’d follow us here on YouTube And like us follow us do all those kinds of things to join the slam lens community and be sure to leave very angry comments In this YouTube video and tell us all the things we did wrong. We did a lot of things wrong So there’ll be long comments. I’m sure there’ll be lots of things. You’ll be able to say what were you guys thinking? But pick up some tests There are some exciting cameras that are coming out maybe some cameras that we’ve missed in the past so pictures some tests Maybe we’ll take them into consideration and using the next couple months. Absolutely So make sure you follow your own slant lens that really helps us out and leave a comment. We love that So does size matter when it comes to sensors well Maybe not quite in the way. You might have thought so keep those cameras rolling and keep on clicking

100 Comments

  1. KTM Alx October 18, 2018 at 8:51 pm

    Useless experiment without knowing what lenses were used

  2. Michael Mirecki October 18, 2018 at 8:52 pm

    The X1-D isn't exactly a proper Medium Format, it's a bit of a cop out.

    Panasonic GH-5 – 17.5x13mm
    7D Mkii – 22.4x15mm
    Sony – 35.9x24mm
    X1-D – 43.8×32.9mm
    H6D – 53x40mm

    Admittedly the cost ramp is fairly large of course.

  3. Arkw0w October 18, 2018 at 8:55 pm

    I don't know if it's me but some photos are not even in focus or that wide aperture lenses are crappy stuff…even you talking and editing the photos are not in focus LoL

  4. The Slanted Lens October 18, 2018 at 9:02 pm

    Sorry for the typo in the video. We actually were using the Canon 7D Mark II not the older Canon 7D model! We forgot to mention our lenses, thank you for asking.
    Hasselblad- Hasselblad XCD 90mm f/3.2
    Canon 7D Mark II- Tamron 35mm 1.8
    GH5- Panasonic 25mm 1.7
    A7r3 Canon 50mm 1.2 with a metabones adapter

  5. Martin Turner October 18, 2018 at 9:11 pm

    GUYS! Use Adobe Audition​, iZotrope, or Accunous software to get RID of the sea noise! Please! It was DEAFENING! Huh, what was that ???? Also, if you are going to use a Canon "7D" then please use a "7D Mark II"; I am quite confident its sensor would be better than the older "7D".

  6. Alan Vandever October 18, 2018 at 9:39 pm

    Wow! I usually love your videos but this was a complete waste of time. I'm a Nikon man. I'm not ticked because you didn't use one but I'm not that familiar with the other camera so without explaining what sensors each one had and the difference between them none of this meant anything to me. Also, it would have been nice to see the difference between sensors with a blow up print. I'd love to see the difference in grain pattern for a large fine-art print, for instance.

  7. justin de lucia October 18, 2018 at 9:44 pm

    Lance, what happened to him

  8. Mike Lentsch October 18, 2018 at 10:00 pm

    "Sonys don't perform well when you push the ISO" – Huh??

  9. Carl Raetzsch October 18, 2018 at 10:11 pm

    You guys did EVERYTHING wrong!! Just kidding!… For those interested, it is worth noting that the smaller sensor did not have more depth of field actually because of the sensor size, but because the crop factor forced you to move farther from the subject to get the same composition. Depth of field is the same if you don't move or change aperture/focal length, but of course, you'd crop a lot of your subject away.

  10. Jeff Hurst October 18, 2018 at 10:12 pm

    I think you should have tested a Nikon (and or Fuji) APS-C.. Everyone knows Canon suffers at higher ISO especially on APS-C compared to the others – by at least a stop (or more).

  11. Rikard Landberg October 18, 2018 at 10:50 pm

    I use small sensors with wide angle lenses, because bokeh is really boring.

  12. LaceyFilm October 18, 2018 at 11:03 pm

    If you want to shoot portraits on a micro 4/3 lens you wouldn't be using a 25mm. This is a bit of misleading test.

  13. Adam Harness October 18, 2018 at 11:56 pm

    lol if you can't get professional level photos out of the gh5 or 7d you need to Re think your career path. Also, the xt3 is amazing

  14. John J October 19, 2018 at 1:08 am

    f1.2 v f3.2!? Not very comparable.

  15. BadKarma 714 October 19, 2018 at 1:35 am

    Someone got sun Brun lol

  16. Wilson Newman October 19, 2018 at 1:38 am

    1. Lens collection; biggest bang for your (substantial) bucks in getting versatility
    2. Sensor Size
    3. Camera Body

    Maybe switch 2 and 3. But #1 is easily the most important.

    There are just SO MANY good camera bodies out there today. You could walk into a camera store blindfolded and randomly bump into one.

  17. Justin Fox October 19, 2018 at 1:42 am

    For starters, the X1D is not the largest digital sensor you can get out there, the sensors Phase One uses are bigger than what you find in both the X1D and Fuji GFX line. Second, it seems you used the 90mm on the hasselblad which is 71mm in full frame equivalence but on everything else you used a 50mm equivalent lens, thats going to effect the results for the hasselblad in terms of DOF so you should have gone with their 65mm f2.8 as it is a 50mm equivalent lens.

  18. Minsan Sauers October 19, 2018 at 2:49 am

    I would be curious to see a dollar for dollar comparison, i.e. an older medium format sensor vs. a similarly priced but newer full frame, etc. I shoot a Mamiya 645 film camera and I'm tempted by the older Mamiya/PhaseOne digitals, but I'm concerned the image quality may be no better if not worse than my Canon 5D MkIII.

  19. Brian Fischer October 19, 2018 at 3:11 am

    Once again, the right hammer for the right job prevails! My primary camera is the Pentax 645z, and I love it, but I would never use it for day to day shooting, I have a micro 4/3 for that.

  20. Big B October 19, 2018 at 3:23 am

    I'm confused on why when you're supposed to be comparing sesnor size, everything else on each rig was different too? Focal length, aperture, camera brand, lens brand, lens quality/cost. Surely to get a pure experiment (or as pure as conceivably possible) you'd want to keep as many of the other factors the same as possible? Awesome, you just compared a bunch of different lenses, camera bodies and sensors. What do we learn from that? Ummm… nothing? Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm no pro, just confused by your 'Sensor Size Comparison' experiment.

  21. machia0705 October 19, 2018 at 3:32 am

    In general , the larger the sensor area , like film , the better .

  22. A.G. De Mesa October 19, 2018 at 3:40 am

    I've been Sony the past decade because of the technology and the flexibility it gives me as they point out. Once they hit actual medium format digital (Actual 6×6 sensor size), maybe that would be better than the Hasselblad or fuji G-format. But I do love to have a gh5 for compact run and gun video ? To each his own and happy that there are a lot of choices in tee market!

  23. rpgroome October 19, 2018 at 4:47 am

    The Hasselblad XQD is 44x33mm, there are 54×40.5mm sensors available for Hasselblad H, Phase One and digital backs for things like the Contax 645 and Hasselblad V. So, not the largest sensor on the market.

  24. Sitha Puth October 19, 2018 at 4:56 am

    fuji get a faster lense for Medium format… therefor… Medium format is best

  25. Sitha Puth October 19, 2018 at 4:57 am

    Bad comparison.. you are NOT using the fastest lense for each camera.

  26. adamaj October 19, 2018 at 5:54 am

    This comparison is meaningless because you guys made idiotic gear choices.

  27. real342 - Thomas Santoso Westberg October 19, 2018 at 6:29 am

    Nice video! But the audio at the beach… ??

    For a future sensor size discussion, auto focus should also be a factor. With mirrorless, the difference between focusing at f1.4 FF and aps-c is huge in low light!

    Also, an idea for a video that I would like to make, but don't have the resources for, is a best combo comparison. The A6500/Sigma 30mm f1.4 is a good start. I would love to find similar performance in the FF world, still haven't!

  28. pete draper October 19, 2018 at 8:12 am

    A few months ago I changed from a D500 APS- C system and Olympus EM1 mark II M43 system to a single system based on a Sony A7III and A7II full frame, as I required better low light capability. I was always happy with the depth of field produced by my APS-C and M43 cameras (I have owned a few of each), because I am not a fan of really shallow depth of field. Lenses greater than f2.8 hold no interest for me. I phototgraph wildlife almost exclusively and a greater depth of field is often an advantage.

  29. kubestudio October 19, 2018 at 9:35 am

    Thanks for the videos, been following you for years and you been a referent for my own youtube channel, i think you neglected a few things that matter a lot and simplified a bit too much this video ( i guess to reach an audience that doesnt knows much about medium format ) Basically using non equivalent lenses can change a lot the results in terms of DOF, You got right the equivalence on Depths, there are 4 stops between a 4/3 and the X1D ( i use both ) and 2 Stops between 4/3 and 35mm and APS-C falls in between. So basically 2 stops between X1d and 35mm is acurate. The point you missing is Tridimensionality, the benefit of medium format is not about how much area you get in focus but what happens after the focused area is finished. The transition from focus to unfocus, that's where the magic happens. 4/3 have next to 0 on that matter, if you take a very close up of something you will see that it takes long distance to get whats behind out of focus, this improves towards the 35mm but it makes a huge jump on the medium format ( specially giant jump if you work with full medium format sensors ). One thing that makes 4/3 really great is that you need less light to achieve same DOF, so let's say i want the DOF i get with the sony at 5,6 i will have to put my 4/3 ( olympus in my case ) at just 2'8. Now if you add flashes in the mix, and i needed 2000w power to achieve this photo with the sony, i can do the same with 500w on the olympus. Basically means i can work at lower power settings, and that can mean a lot more pops per battery or a much faster refresh time on my flashes, or saving a lot of money on flash Ws. i agree that 35mm is the most "versatile" in terms of DOF, but i think the difference with 4/3 is much less than people thinks. Thanks for the videos 🙂

  30. Family of Tech October 19, 2018 at 12:13 pm

    Im.confused by your comment at the end where you say: sensor size might not matter the way you thought. But throughout the video you are saying how cameras fell apart in some shots. Would love to understand what you meant by that? Thanks

  31. Guy Rabinovich October 19, 2018 at 1:03 pm

    guys. sensor size does not have a direct influence on DOF. it's just science. actual;ly MFT sensor produces slightly shallower! DOF than FF. there are many articles about this it has to do with the circle of confusion which contains more pixels in the case of MFT. I can send you a link to a good explanation if you wish. but at any rate 25mm f/1.4 on MFT produces the same DOF as 25mm f/1.4 on FF !!! or actually a bit shallower 🙂 when you compare FOV 25 MFT == 50 FF you need to doublew the aperture for the correct DOF so 25mm f/1.4 MFT –> 50mm f/2.8 FF (DOF wise).

  32. Quetzalcoalt October 19, 2018 at 2:32 pm

    That's why i have a 6D I

  33. Edward Millership October 19, 2018 at 2:32 pm

    So put the sweet Canon f/1.2 on the SONY, 7DMKII would have done much better with it. Also the Hasselblad does much better due to it being the only one with a negative crop factor.

  34. Scott Williams Photography October 19, 2018 at 3:39 pm

    Great video. Very informative 🙂

  35. M. Lee October 19, 2018 at 4:03 pm

    Your channel does such great videos. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE consider uploading in 4K. I know you don't think it makes a difference with YouTube compression but it really does show more detail.

  36. Vultite October 19, 2018 at 4:04 pm

    Lol, "Sony doesn't perform well when you push ISO". But you went with the A7RIII instead of the A7III… questionable camera choices across the board.

  37. nightninja13 October 19, 2018 at 4:38 pm

    The lenses give you depth of field… Sensor has very little to do with that. You used a telephoto lens on hasselblad of course you get more depth of field with that compared to a wide angle lense. Come on this is not even a real comparison.

  38. FoodTechLife October 19, 2018 at 5:33 pm

    Would have been nice if you could have used similarly priced lenses. I don’t think it was fair to use a $148 lens on the GH5.

  39. Niven A. Nolte October 19, 2018 at 5:46 pm

    Thank you.

  40. Philippe Orlando October 19, 2018 at 5:46 pm

    Shallow depth of field is a silly thing.

  41. Mark Harris October 19, 2018 at 6:54 pm

    My digital cameras are the 7DII and 5DIII, which as a purely stills photographer who needs the build suit me nicely. You kept referring to the "7D" but I couldn’t work out whether you were talking about the original or the mark II. (I’ve just seen your comment re what model now, thank you)

    I mainly use mine for wildlife but when the light is low the full frame 5DIII does have the advantage. I do subscribe to the theory, that for wildlife, within reason a noisy sharp image is better than a noise free unsharp image, but 2000 ISO on the 7DII is my max especially with a longer lens.

    I think light gathering ability is also very important for landscape and wildlife, where the crop sensor needs an ISO of 2000 the full frame might only need 1000. Thus it’s a double win, lower ISO from a camera that handles higher ISO better. So it’s not only ISO performance but at which point you need to raise it.

    With medium format, I think we are definitely still at a point where film has some distinct advantages as well as the usual disadvantages. Amongst the advantages are cost and size of sensor (negative). In common use there are cameras that give much bigger negs, 67 is very much a norm. As for cost, how much is the X1D landscape kit again?

    I always like how you set out your tests and experiments, you never claim they are scientifically accurate, but you conduct them as photographers and videographers. As always a brilliant video, thanks for the effort and expense you went to.

  42. e.c. havard October 19, 2018 at 8:16 pm

    I'd love to see your next sensor size comparison lineup be between the Fuji Film GFX 50R for medium format, Canon 5D Mark IV for full frame, Nikon D500 for APS-C, and the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II for 4/3's. These are all relative new cameras and I believe NO ONE has had this great idea of yours!! I really enjoyed how those different camera sensor size reviled what were some of the best reasons to use them for and a little insight into the cameras particulars of themselves!! Chao!!

  43. Nae Dolor October 19, 2018 at 8:28 pm

    Guys, this is pointless. Just pick up whatever camera you have, create beautiful art and be happy. Life is too short for arguing about meaninglessness.

  44. Ondrej Janovec October 19, 2018 at 8:30 pm

    Good to know, thanks.

  45. Metaldetection tube world wide October 19, 2018 at 8:47 pm

    Oeps 7D landscape …the sea flows empty ???

  46. John Armstrong Photography October 19, 2018 at 8:55 pm

    If someone knows what they doing, they can make any of those cameras perform well. No one shoots for equivalence, they shoot whats in front of them with whatever they have in hand. They then need to make to best possible creative decisions to create the best possible photos. If the photos turn out great, nothing else matters.

  47. Torbjörn Samuelsson October 19, 2018 at 9:05 pm

    You should have just the same focal lenght on all cameras

  48. IRG - Ricardo Galvão October 19, 2018 at 10:03 pm

    we'll see difference when we make a huge print…thats all

  49. oakie October 19, 2018 at 11:13 pm

    you purposely crippled the APS-C camera by using one from 2014 versus 2 cameras from 2017 and a Sony from 2018 just to support your biased conclusion: 35mm is best. this, despite each sensor size being available in a camera released less than 2 years ago.

    i guess using a Nikon D300 would've looked TOO biased? and why did you choose the DSLR 7D when all the others are mirrorless? you surely could've rented a Sony a6500, Fujifilm X-T3 or X-E3. or maybe at least something newer, like the Nikon D500 or D7500 or even a Canon 80D or Pentax K-P. you also could've chosen a faster lens for the X1D as ƒ/3.5 is not their fastest aperture available, despite using an ƒ/1.2 on the A7III. if you weren't aware of that, you also could've chosen the Fujifilm GFX50s, a system that offers lenses at ƒ/2.8.

    BTW, the X1D's sensor is not the largest you can get on the market right now. Phase One and Hasselblad offer true medium format digital sensors, which are larger than that used in the X1D and Fujifilm GFX series, and are available as we speak. not to mention, Leaf, Sinar and DHW make digital backs with the larger medium format sensor.

    the bias was obvious when you couldn't knock the 7D for DOF compared to the A7III per given aperture (besides, giving it a lens with a smaller, ƒ/1.8 max aperture than your 35mm camera, using a ƒ/1.2 on the 35mm and slower on all else, completely invalidates your wide open DOF results, subjectively and objectively) so you resorted to knocking its high ISO performance. the 7D is known to be one of the poorest at high ISO and dynamic range for APS-C cameras when compared to something made within the past 2 years, yet you gave no disclaimer about the age of the camera having an effect on that, implying its performance is strictly a function of the sensor size and not its outdated design.

    at the start you stated you rented these, so there's no credible reason why you couldn't get modern bodies across the board with corresponding fast aperture lenses.

    integrity. you lack it. if you want to hold the line that anything other than 35mm sucks, so be it, but don't piss on your viewers and tell them it's raining, like you've done here.

  50. ic3xiii October 20, 2018 at 12:45 am

    i wish you checked the lens and filters for smudges 🙁

  51. rhapsodist October 20, 2018 at 1:26 am

    try a PhaseOne XF with the larger 53.7×40.4mm medium format sensor next time for a real difference next to the A7Riii

  52. beavertown2006 October 20, 2018 at 4:08 am

    The Hassell has better skin tone than the Sony

  53. Jeffrey Tong October 20, 2018 at 4:39 am

    In my own testing, I found the Fujifilm APS-C sensors performed significantly better than the latest Canon APS-C sensors. The Fujifilm is actually much closer to Canon full-frame in terms of ISO performance. The Fujifilm noise was also more pleasing and almost film-like. I currently use an A7 III though (replaced my Canon M50).

  54. Jack McKechnie October 20, 2018 at 7:28 am

    If you use focal reducers adapters on m4/3rds or APS-C…changes the game.

  55. Ashley Stubbings October 20, 2018 at 9:46 am

    Who is this video aimed at? Obviously not just the enthusiast photographer! I mean, a Hasselblad, for goodness sake! lol

  56. GE KO October 20, 2018 at 10:24 am

    That comparison is misleading, sorry. Today everybody knows how to compare different sensor sizes and that sensor size dont matter for DOF!

  57. Eivind Røhne October 20, 2018 at 12:15 pm

    So the Hasselblad X1D has «the largest digital sensor on the market right now»….?! You guys better start doing research and read some specs,. The X1D is actually the smallest medium format sensor (32.9×43.8mm).

  58. Phanumat Duangthai October 20, 2018 at 12:49 pm

    The details and colors of Hasselblad are gorgeous and outstanding. No wonder why it's so expensive.

  59. El Guapo October 20, 2018 at 1:59 pm

    Gorgeous model

  60. Tomek Kosiada October 20, 2018 at 2:18 pm

    Thank you for that comparison, for me was interesting. But…
    To bad that you chose 7D as a model of aps-c. Much better choose would be nikon D500 or fuji xt2. Maybe another time 🙂
    Thank you

  61. ATT MEE October 20, 2018 at 2:33 pm

    This is the type of videos that misrepresent micro four thirds as a whole, not much explanation here

  62. ChiliMcFly1 October 20, 2018 at 3:35 pm

    Are they all using the same metering mode ?

  63. Rids Nepal October 20, 2018 at 4:04 pm

    To compare apples with apples you HAVE to take into consideration the sensor size and the crop factor and multiply it to the aperture….otherwise you have a "fruit salad" rather than a fair comparison.

  64. Jacob Roberts October 20, 2018 at 4:33 pm

    Thank you, guys. This is interesting for those of us who are deciding what equipment to buy.

  65. Ira Crummey October 20, 2018 at 6:47 pm

    With so many good APS-C cameras out there, you chose to use a veritable dinosaur in the outdated 7D Mkii. Invalidates that aspect of the test.

  66. Michael Romano October 20, 2018 at 9:13 pm

    Great video guys. Very interesting comparison.

  67. Cactus Tweeter October 20, 2018 at 10:50 pm

    You guys should have invested in some sunscreen.

  68. SVA1 October 21, 2018 at 1:36 am

    I miss the old TSL days – the videos are now just a long stream of adverts vs early on when it was just a clumsy mention of a sponsor. UGH. I know you need to get paid, but there are SO many ads they are irritating. Sorry, but the video would have been more enjoyable if had been a passionate pursuit of facts vs an excuse to splash advertisements. 🙁

  69. kyokuten October 21, 2018 at 2:54 pm

    That was a slanted comparison, wasn't it?

  70. Josef Weisleitner October 21, 2018 at 9:55 pm

    Thank you for this comparison which makes sense for someone who already has an idea of the different systems.
    Though, it was pretty unfair towards the (already relatively limited) GH5.
    You used a 150€ lens and compared it with lenses almost 10 times more expensive.
    For a portrait with shallow depth of field you would use a longer, and if affordable, faster lens (a 42.5 f0.95 would still be cheaper than the canon lens you used).
    And the landscape shot would never require f7 in low light (as you showed, 2 stops brighter would still grant a larger depth of field than ff and mf). At ISO400 everything would have looked better.

    If you'd find the time, it would be GREAT if you'd try another test and challenge yourself to get the best out of every system.
    Of course medium format and fullframe would win the portrait-contest, but it would be very interesting how close you could get with apc and mft.

    Thanks for many very helpful videos!

  71. Dennis Ebersole October 22, 2018 at 3:16 am

    I'm embarrassed for you guys. Hope you got a free trip to Cali.

  72. Jano Haluška October 22, 2018 at 11:12 am

    35mm on Canon APS-C is 56mm EQ
    also 90mm on Hasselbald is 71mm EQ
    => which are different than the others.

    In real world usage you to have step back for the same picture
    => which will lead to less "background blur" in real-world scenario, than you presented in the comparison.

    For better comparisom you should use 30mm lens with Canon APS-C and 65mm on Hasselblad.

  73. kristwi October 22, 2018 at 11:19 am

    Jesus the worst comparison ever. Different Sensor Size DOF tested at the same aperture ???????? I had more braincells at the age of 5.

  74. Anton Trapp October 22, 2018 at 12:12 pm

    LOL 2 comparisons: DOF for portrait and low light. The 2 things you don't want to shoot with a m43 (most of the time).Make another video and show how bad the other systems are with landscape when there is enough light and a macro shot. Conclusion after that: the HasselBlad is the worst, full frame is bad too, buy a m43. If you don't understand what the advantages of a system are: don't make such videos 😉

  75. Vianditya October 22, 2018 at 2:10 pm

    I can't believe this kind of video coming from you and the conclusion is so stupid! can't recommend M43 or even APS-C? are you kidding me? There's many pro photographer using both system and can blow your mind with the results. This video is both misleading and just a clickbait. Unsubs!

  76. krzysiu.net October 22, 2018 at 2:16 pm

    APS-C are the best, because… I have one? 🙁

  77. Brad Fennell October 22, 2018 at 4:05 pm

    I think you used a poor choice for the aps/c camera. A d7500 or d500 (even better) would show more. Or on the Canon side a 80d or even a 77d. Plus you now have the newer Fuji aps/c mirrorless. Maybe an update comparing some of these

  78. Sylvain Guieu October 22, 2018 at 7:53 pm

    Guys, it would have been so much better, clearer, if you had talk about system size indeed of sensor size. The d.o.f difference you see is mostly because the lens you are using have a different lens pupil size (because of difference focal length to conserve f.o.v).
    Concerning the noise, this is the same thing smaller "system" collect less light for the same picture (smaller pupil), therefore lower SNR per image.

  79. Ricky McC October 23, 2018 at 8:21 am

    Good idea to test. I too had thought that aps-c sensor size was possibly a sweet spot. A lot depends on what one values – ultra hi definition, croppability, shallow dof and subject separation, size, weight and cost, not to mention portability and convenience of operation, let alone availability of glass? Take your pick and then see if it meets expectations! So you were always set to fail in some eyes and thus open to brickbats.

    Anyway my take is that a hi-res, biggish sensor is probably always going to prove difficult to beat. If one can afford the kit and carry the heft then we can each go as far as we see fit.

    You didn't upset me, as a recent convert to a Sony A7Riii with fast prime glass (I just love the Sony/Zeiss 55mm f1. 8 – compact and very sharp with reasonable subject separation). It feels to me as if I made a pretty sweet choice. Yet I'm aware we all seek reassurance post investment (post cognitive dissonance), suffer from confirmation bias and so are more likely to respond favourably to supporting affirmation. Or visa versa. Bait for the various 'tribal fanboys' perhaps?

    Sorry I didn't leave a bitter, twisted angry comment, as requested – I leave that to others better versed in harsh criticism and profanity.

  80. MindTones October 23, 2018 at 8:38 am

    A few things you might want to consider in your next comparisons:
    Adjust the apertures according to the sensor size and get the best MFT currently available, which is in my opinion the Oly OMD EM1 MKii.

    I went through quite a LOT of different brands/sensor sizes and finally ended up with the EM1 Mkii for Landscape/Macro/Portrait. If some customers order LARGE prints, I simply shoot in HighRes Mode which gives my friggin 80 Megapixels RAW.

    It is pretty easy to spot wannabe pros when they complain about DOF on mft.

  81. Marc P. October 23, 2018 at 8:54 am

    You failed completely with this Review – do you Guys know why? All of your Cameras are relative new, but for the APS-C compartment, you have choosen the 7D from 2009 (Oh my gosh!) with it's very old 18 MP APS-C Sensor – you should have used the Fujifilm X-T3! No offense. And the Fujifilm GFX-50s is way cheaper, better (the Hassy X1D EVF is some kinda joke – Guys!) than the X1D, furthermore, the new GFX-50R is the real competition to the X1D, and worlds cheaper! As someone here said before, you Guys made idiotic Gear choices.

  82. Marco Rodriguez October 24, 2018 at 3:14 am

    In my humble opinion, a very misleading comparison with a very poor technical analysis and setup. Too over-simplified. You did not even consider that different photographers (amateur or pro) have different needs, styles or approaches when selecting a camera and sensor size. I'm afraid some people could make a bad use of their limited cash to buy the wrong camera based on this comparison.

  83. Momentary Lapses October 24, 2018 at 5:56 am

    geez. Anything about lens compression maybe?

  84. ldstirling October 24, 2018 at 1:48 pm

    I think this comparison would have been better if you chose to use cameras with as similar a pixel pitch as possible. The 42MP A7RIII full frame sensor has a much smaller pixel pitch than the 50MP Hasselblad because the medium format sensor is so much larger (4.51 microns vs. 5.3 microns). Additionally, the 20MP 7DII has less than half the megapixels of the A7RIII but the sensor size is not half that of the full-frame (4.1 micron pixel pitch). Finally, the GH5 with micro 4/3 sensor and 20MP has a pixel pitch of 3.34 microns, the smallest of the bunch. I think a better comparison would have been the X1D (5.3), the Canon 5DIV (5.36), Nikon D500 (4.2), and Olympus OM-D E-M10III (3.74). I think these are a much better close approximation of pixel density and comparison of the impact of sensor size on image characteristics.

  85. Guy Rabinovich October 24, 2018 at 2:32 pm

    Here is one good one https://fstoppers.com/education/smaller-sensor-size-shallower-your-depth-field-110547

  86. Joseph Delgadillo October 24, 2018 at 5:36 pm

    Rather than just showing depth of field, I would have loved to seen an emphasis on comparing equivalent field of views and the differences in lens compression. They are all about a 50mm FOV but how they compress the background and facial features are different. Still I love seeing this type on content!

  87. Siew Kim Ng October 25, 2018 at 12:14 am

    Take the focal length & aperture value and multiply by it's crop factor, you'll get the depth of field conversion in full frame terms (using similar framing):

    Medium Format (X1D): 63mm @ f7.1 * 0.79 ~ 50mm @ f/5.6
    Full frame: 50mm @ f/5.6 * 1 ~ 50mm @ f/5.6
    APS-C: 33mm @ f/3.5 * 1.5 ~ 50mm @ f/5.3
    MFT: 25mm @ f/2.8 * 2 ~ 50mm @ f/5.6

  88. Curtis Jarvis October 25, 2018 at 12:46 am

    You should have also used a cell phone

  89. JP dJ October 26, 2018 at 4:40 pm

    The idea is great, the shots illustrate the principle nicely. However. Sensor size matters, with equal megapixels, as it gives larger individual pixels that can measure light more easily. But that measurement is also determined by the camera motherboard, electronics, processor, firmware. The video illustrates this when the APS-C does worse than micro-4/3rds.
    Sensor size does not dictate depth of field (DoF). Focal length dictates DoF, with aperture. Transitively, sensor size implies DoF because a larger size sensor needs a longer focal length to get the same image angle as the lens on the smaller sensor. Your physics teacher would give you a fail for talking sensor size DoF though.
    Comparing the Hassy 90mm with the Canon 50 is a tiny bit unfair. The Hassy has a 0.8 crop factor so its 90mm compares to a theoretical Canon 62.5 (which has less DoF than the 50)

  90. Dan Tong October 31, 2018 at 1:21 am

    Thanks for the comparison. It's a lot of work so it is much appreciated.
    1 I wish you would have taken the time to adjust the exposure in the first set of tests – Panasonic was overexposed making the comparison more difficult
    2 It was really good to have the building on first set to make depth of field easier to compare
    3 I did not find anything surprising (except the landscape noise comparison of GH5 and two other cameras)
    Too many people forget to mention, when desiring to blur the background for a portrait, that for smaller sensor sizes, you can easily get more blur by going to telephoto, especially simple with a good zoom lens such as with the 70mm-200mm equiv /F2.8 for the GH5 for example
    4 While I use the GH5 for video, I much prefer the full sensor size of my Canon 5D II for stills – so I'm in agreement with your opinions about full sensor size cameras usefulness
    5 Finally, as I already said, your tests confirmed much of what I already understood about the effect of sensor size on various aspects of the image.
    Once again THANKS VERY MUCH

  91. Pedro Courelas November 5, 2018 at 4:27 pm

    I agree that fullframe is the sweet spot but your work isn't fair for MFT.

    If you want a deep DOF indoor per example you can shoot a 17mm 1.2 (34mm equiv.) at 2.8 with the more efficient IBIS benefit.

    MFT is today in ISO performance like a APS-C and in deep DOF is fantastic.

    For another view, if you use a Oly 45 1.2 you can achieve a beautiful shallow DOF and a perfect focus.

    Try this kits:

    MFT
    17mm 1.2
    25mm 1.2
    45mm 1.2

    Fullframe
    35mm 1.4
    50mm 1.4
    85mm 1.4

    Now you compare all things, DoF, shallow and deep, ISO, rate AF, size, price, etc.

  92. ACID SNOW November 10, 2018 at 5:13 pm

    what an insightful video! people put so much value on gear today!
    thanks for sharing this great content with us 
    and i really really enjoyed watching this!

  93. Sergeant Crow December 13, 2018 at 2:02 pm

    This why we have to buy Medium, Full, APSC and 4/3 ! : )

  94. maunglodaya December 28, 2018 at 9:53 pm

    Dof is got nothing to do with camera or sensor size, it is all about lens. Lens design that got to do with field of view, aperture, element formula but mostly it is about the actual size between the element from front to back and the entrance pupil. Same lens fov and aperture for the same purpose let say 35mm camera, might have dof differences and different dof curve between focus distance.
    Of course the most important is the distance between the object on focus and the lens itself.

    The bigger the size of lens element diameter in general, the bigger the image created, it got to do with the purpose for what format of lens it is for. Meanwhile a sensor just capturing the image projected by a lens, the differences is how big the sensor capture the image, almost whole, just half or quarter . Using the same lens, for the same framing, bigger sensor will need to get closer while smaller sensor need to go further, so the dof will be different, but again it is because the distance of object is different.

    Noise happened when not enough data send by pixel sensor cell. Each sell define what kind of colour represented by a pixel. A sensor cell catch a light that transform into electric current as data on rgb mixture. Kind like solar power charging the cell. The more the light capture, the more current it send, the more accurate data of colour until it is too much and become too bright start to clipping. Or no data at all as black. This not enough data on some cell or not enough current from the cell make the data corrupt, so when it boosted in the engine with cranking the iso up, you start having noise. Apart from the light capture, the current send is up to 2 things, the size of the cell and technology of the cell itself. So if you know the basic how a camera and lens works, it is not hard to know when you can push the iso and knowing your noise limit in certain setting and condition, regardless what camera you use.

  95. Ezra Koper January 8, 2019 at 6:15 am

    Very stupid and mislrading video.

    Anyone who knows somthing about his gear will take a lens with apature that matches his needs. If I need shallow depth of field on crop sensor I will use a lens that has apature smaller my the crop factor. If I need to capture high speed movement in low light then I will take full frame.

    I was hoping for somthing more intelligent from you guys!!!!!

  96. Kevin Queen March 10, 2019 at 3:43 am

    Try this with flash and see

  97. Kent Sutton April 28, 2019 at 2:21 am

    As much as you tried to control these tests, the real world is much more complex. On the low light (F7.0, ISO 1600) photos, why wouldn't a skilled photographer shoot that at F7.0 on m43? You can open up the aperture, use the DOF to your advantage and possibly get 2+ stops back on the ISO. Bottom line is all those cameras are capable of taken great images in skilled hands.

  98. Sergi Medina June 2, 2019 at 2:59 pm

    I see lots of hazing, tho. The GH5 is just impressive!

  99. Makta972 August 10, 2019 at 2:59 pm

    Probably the shittiest video on YouTube

  100. AMHTXC29 September 11, 2019 at 8:40 am

    This is a very interesting topic! The conclusions are right. Of course is not just the sensor itself as if it was alone in the void, is the combination of sensor and the lens. Check this test also: https://www.borrowlenses.com/blog/the-bokeh-effect-how-sensor-size-affects-background-blur/.
    basically, a FF sensor+lens is collecting more "blurried out-of-focus" photons than a smaller sensor for the exactly same image than a smaller sensor, at the same apperture.

    Also, pixel size must be taken into consideration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lte9pa3RtUk.
    FF sensor should also be better at low light because, regardless of the pixle size, they collect more light for a given image, as the area of teh sensor is larger. But that´s another story.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *