04-07-2012, 02:58 PM
[quote name='you2' timestamp='1333809584' post='17361']
The trick is when folks start throwing in worlds like dof, perspective, effective sensitivity and similar that the issue becomes more muddy. While a .95 lens on 4/3 allows for a faster shutter speed than a 1.4 lens on 35mm; does the larger sensor perform better with less light ? Does the larger lens allow for shallower dof (if that is your objective); Does ...
-
Anyways I believe that this is why these conversations are a rat hole. The argument usually drifts from one comparison to another rather than the direct light/shutter speed ratio and because of this drift it becomes somewhat frustrating to some people.
[/quote]
The bold part is incorrect. A 0.95 lens on 4/3rds does not allow for faster shutter speed. This would only be true if camera sensors were only used on their native sensitivity, and we could not have any control over signal amplification. We however CAN control signal amplification, and camera sensors are NOT uses at their "native sensitivity". We, in essence, are not talking about film. We are talking about sensors which have a different amount of amplification applied to the signal, AND a variable component to that amplification which we call ISO settings.
Since we can change the amplification of the signal, it is nonsense to say that said f-value allows for faster shutter speeds. Set the amplification for both cameras to a similar level, and you get comparable exposure times for both a 17mm f0.95on 4/3rds and a 35mm f2 on 135 format.
The argument does not drift, the argument has to be complete. If one does not get the whole story, one might reach wrong conclusions.
The trick is when folks start throwing in worlds like dof, perspective, effective sensitivity and similar that the issue becomes more muddy. While a .95 lens on 4/3 allows for a faster shutter speed than a 1.4 lens on 35mm; does the larger sensor perform better with less light ? Does the larger lens allow for shallower dof (if that is your objective); Does ...
-
Anyways I believe that this is why these conversations are a rat hole. The argument usually drifts from one comparison to another rather than the direct light/shutter speed ratio and because of this drift it becomes somewhat frustrating to some people.
[/quote]
The bold part is incorrect. A 0.95 lens on 4/3rds does not allow for faster shutter speed. This would only be true if camera sensors were only used on their native sensitivity, and we could not have any control over signal amplification. We however CAN control signal amplification, and camera sensors are NOT uses at their "native sensitivity". We, in essence, are not talking about film. We are talking about sensors which have a different amount of amplification applied to the signal, AND a variable component to that amplification which we call ISO settings.
Since we can change the amplification of the signal, it is nonsense to say that said f-value allows for faster shutter speeds. Set the amplification for both cameras to a similar level, and you get comparable exposure times for both a 17mm f0.95on 4/3rds and a 35mm f2 on 135 format.
The argument does not drift, the argument has to be complete. If one does not get the whole story, one might reach wrong conclusions.