>>3225470>Stupid question but all older lenses are "full frame" right? Or was there some crop format equivalent back then too?
Not ALL, but the vast majority are. There were older crop formats, but they mostly don’t have interchangeable lenses.
Exceptions I can think of off the top of my head:
1. Pentax Auto 110, which shoots 110 film (about the same size as a four thirds sensor). Interestingly, the lenses still do cover APS-C.
2. IX-Nikkor. Back before digital, there were cameras that used Advanced Photo System (APS) film, which had a few advantages over 35mm but no one gave a shit because the negatives were smaller. This is also where we get the term “APS-C” for crop sensor cameras—crop sensors are about the size of an APS negative in “Classic” (-C) 3:2 aspect ratio. Canon and Nikon both made SLRs that used their normal mounts and APS film, and Nikon’s also used a special line of lenses that could be used in APS cameras but would fuck up a standard 35mm Nikon body because the rear element was too far back. Interestingly (well, interesting if you’re a gearfag camera nerd like me), when digital came along, Nikon and Canon switched strategies, with Canon making short-back-focus EF-S lenses for their crop bodies and Nikon making its DX lenses to standard F specs so they were safe to mount on full frame (with vignetting). Anyway, they made four shitty IX-Nikkor lenses to go with their APS SLRs. You wouldn’t really want to use them anyway.
3. Olympus Pen F series, pre-digital. It shot half-frame on 35mm film and had its own line of lenses.
4. Any 35mm motion picture lenses, since standard 35mm movies are “half frame”. Although technically, since 35mm movies came first, 35mm stills are double-frame. I know of the Arri PL mount, but I’m not a motion pictures guy so I don’t know any others off the top of my head.