So you can use eye af on the a6500 with the sigma? I have an A6000 with a sigma 16mm, but the eye af won’t work. Am I doing something wrong?

@@subie0787 did you assign Eye AF to a button?

Jason Vong yes I assigned it to the AEL button. It works just fine with my Sony 18-105, but not the sigma for some reason

@@subie0787 a6000 doesn't support continuous EyeAF, if that's the matter.

Yu Yip i use single shot af with ael button as eye af when photographing people. Guessing it doesn’t work with the sigma

see ya around, David! Happy new year !

thank you Mark!

thanks mason! 😀

welcome to THE VONG!

It depends on the lens. Lower quality lenses perform poorly on apsc since you are cropping a poor picture to begin with. Good quality glass like the gm series will be an excellent option if you can afford them. My Tamron 28-75 is sharper on my a6500 than any of my apsc zooms

FF lenses would normally be better on crop sensors because the smaller sensor is only capable of using the good central parts of the FF lens image circle.

@@davidteer80 Agreed but putting a full frame lens (poor or great quality) on a full frame body will always give you sharper/better results than putting on that SAME lens on an APS-C body (unless you use a speedbooster).

@@caldera878 A misconception. Putting a full frame lens (poor or great quality) on a full frame body will always give you sharper/better results than putting on that SAME lens on an APS-C body (unless you use a speedbooster). Tony Northrup explains it better in the video Jason referenced but here's a quick explaination. Any given lens is able to resolve a certain amount of megapixels. Every lens has micro-imperfections in the way light transitions to the sensor (due to refraction, front/rear surface smoothness, etc.), therefore, even Otus lenses can never reach/resolve 100% sharpness. The higher the lens quality, however, the closer it gets to 100%. When using a smaller sensor, a smaller section (the center) of the lens is used. As a result, any imperfections is exaggerated. Think of aiming a laser at a hotel window a mile away. Any 1mm movement your hand moves makes the laser at the hotel move by several meters or more. Make the window smaller & those errors will amplify. Also notice the laser dot is about the same size a few feet away but it gets noticeably larger a mile away. Likewise, any micro-imperfections will be amplified/exacerbated when using a smaller part of the lens because you are essentially cropping into the imperfections making them larger.

@@ikoyDaPnoy nonsense. Also that Tony Northrup video was nonsense. And Jason's explanation here is also.. wait for it.. nonsense. Putting a full frame lens on a crop body is absolutely NOT like a digital zoom. At all. On any level. What I really think is that the misconception about full frame lenses on crop bodies stems from the difference in pixel pitch for older FF sensors, versus that of the crop sensors. In the not too distant past, typical full frame sensors were topping out in the 20-30 MP range, while at the same time, crop sensors were topping out around 24 MP. Meaning, crop sensors were actually showing MORE detail per unit area. The problem is that, up until quite recently, our lenses were resolving like shit. All the crop sensors were doing, was exposing how poorly our lenses were resolving, and our full frame sensors just weren't good enough to do that, so we thought they looked better. In a world in which today we have full frame lenses that out-resolve even our highest MP full frame sensors, this is no longer the case. So now, if you were to throw a top level FF lens onto a high MP FF camera (D850, A7RIII, Z7, etc.), and put that same lens onto a standard 20-24 MP crop sensor camera, you'd likely get VERY similar (read- almost identical) results (at least at the center of the FF sensor, where the full crop sensor image would lie.. obviously there's be fall-off further out towards the edges of the FF image). I'm really shocked that this FF/Crop misconception even still exists, with so many amazing crop sensor options out there now.. and so many high megapixel FF options that REALLY mirror crop sensors in their performance issues (since they share similar pixel density).

😆😆😆

hope you didn't mind the wait!

Thank you!

@@JasonVong damn funny, good sense of humour.... finally you come down to something which is affordable.... Thanks you so much...

Happy New Year!!

This video only compares center sharpness. No info about corners, bokeh, vignetting, distortion, af speed ...

happy new year Alan!

Thanks man!

Happy New Year!!

Happy New Year Nick!!

Yep that sums it up!

They have a 16mm and a 30 already so probably not Gona happen. Id sooner love to see an affordable APS c telephoto lens. Like a 85 105 or 135 1.4 for less than 1000.

Dude i just got A6400 and hesitating between Sony 50mm 1.8 OSS and Sigma 56mm so bad. What lens did you get?

Considering that myself

Happy New Year!!

A high quality aps-c lens has to deliver higher resolution than any ff lens. That's why it will never be cheap or small. Fujis aps-c 100-400 is actually bigger than Sonys ff version.