Watch the toilet language dude.
That chart is full-frame equivalent.
Your μ4/3 12-50 is f/7-f/12.6 equivalent. That's the methodology that both dpreview used in that chart and that these guys use in their review: http://www.opticallimits.com/m43/827-olympus1250f3563ez
<p style="margin-left:40px;">Specifications
<p style="margin-left:40px;">Equiv. focal length 24-100 mm (full format equivalent)
<p style="margin-left:40px;">Equiv. aperture f/7-f/12.6 (full format equivalent, in terms of depth-of-field)
Basic MATH "claims" that:
<p style="margin-left:40px;">f/7 is a smaller number than f/4.8
<p style="margin-left:40px;">f/12.6 is a smaller number than f/8
Therefore an equivalent basis math "claims" the RX100 III lens has superior equivalent aperture opening (i.e. faster gathering of light) than this particular μ4/3 zoom.
That chart is full-frame equivalent.
Your μ4/3 12-50 is f/7-f/12.6 equivalent. That's the methodology that both dpreview used in that chart and that these guys use in their review: http://www.opticallimits.com/m43/827-olympus1250f3563ez
<p style="margin-left:40px;">Specifications
<p style="margin-left:40px;">Equiv. focal length 24-100 mm (full format equivalent)
<p style="margin-left:40px;">Equiv. aperture f/7-f/12.6 (full format equivalent, in terms of depth-of-field)
Basic MATH "claims" that:
<p style="margin-left:40px;">f/7 is a smaller number than f/4.8
<p style="margin-left:40px;">f/12.6 is a smaller number than f/8
Therefore an equivalent basis math "claims" the RX100 III lens has superior equivalent aperture opening (i.e. faster gathering of light) than this particular μ4/3 zoom.
Quote:You can speak utter crap but that does not make it true. One of the slower u4/3 kit zoom is the 12-50 which is f3.5-6.3 for 24-100 range. Nearly all kit lenses I am famiiliar with for u4/3/aspc are faster than f8 at the long end (in addition to having a much larger sensor). No clue how you can claim this is 'slower' than 4.8-8.0 but I'm sure there is some methodology to your claim. What is valid is that for a 'slow' lens you do get compactness but that doesn't make it any faster. Your graph below is also not relevant as it is not comparing this camera 'effective' speed to APS or u4/3. Rather it is comparison with cameras with similar or much smaller sensors (what pisses me off is that you make this claim; provide a graph that 'seems' to support your claim but it is totally irrelevant.
-
I grant you that this camera is very compact; and a selection of people will find it 'good enough' in some situations (just look at the number of people using 'cell phone' camera but that does not make this a miracle beast with regards to light gathering or sensor ability in low light (low here is relative and with an f8 lens low doesn't have to be 'very' low to be an issue). Conversely this camera should be noticeable improvement on cell phones and given its size the cellphone crowd might find it quite useful.