06-26-2011, 10:08 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-26-2011, 10:12 AM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1309081980' post='9562']
Depth-of-field is just one aspect though. MFT allows 4 times faster shutter speeds at comparable depth-of-fields (2 times vs APS-C). At comparable megapixels you've a higher pixel density so you need faster shutter speeds anyway but you still have an advantage of about 1 f-stop. This can also be a decisive point.
Anyway, the discussion is sort of pointless. Mirrorless systems are about size and depth-of-field potential is not a priority here. Oly will release a 45mm f/1.8 soon - that's equivalent to a 90mm f/3.6 which sounds reasonably good for me for shallow depth-of-field situations.
[/quote]
About the speed of the shutter... that is kind of incorrect. The light captured by the 4/3rds sensor will be 1/4th of what the FF sensor receives. To equalize that, the amplification of the received signal is higher, just to reach the same "ISO value" (making ISO values really rather meaningless, in digital photography... it is not about sensitivity anymore).
So.. while 4/3rds does the extra amplification before the ISO settings already, set the FF camera to do the same amplification via the ISO setting itself. So, ISO 100 on 4/3rds, then ISO 400 on FF. Equivalent field of view, equal aperture/equivalent f-value, equal exposure time, equivalent ISO setting.
Of course it is right, DOF is not a priority there (with EVILs). But a factor anyway, if one does comparisons as above. The DOF freedom is the reason for the FF or APS-C DSLRs.
And yes, a 90mm f3/5 is reasonable. Comparable to the Tamron 60mm f2, Nikon 60mm f2.8, Canon 60mm f2.8, kind of.
Depth-of-field is just one aspect though. MFT allows 4 times faster shutter speeds at comparable depth-of-fields (2 times vs APS-C). At comparable megapixels you've a higher pixel density so you need faster shutter speeds anyway but you still have an advantage of about 1 f-stop. This can also be a decisive point.
Anyway, the discussion is sort of pointless. Mirrorless systems are about size and depth-of-field potential is not a priority here. Oly will release a 45mm f/1.8 soon - that's equivalent to a 90mm f/3.6 which sounds reasonably good for me for shallow depth-of-field situations.
[/quote]
About the speed of the shutter... that is kind of incorrect. The light captured by the 4/3rds sensor will be 1/4th of what the FF sensor receives. To equalize that, the amplification of the received signal is higher, just to reach the same "ISO value" (making ISO values really rather meaningless, in digital photography... it is not about sensitivity anymore).
So.. while 4/3rds does the extra amplification before the ISO settings already, set the FF camera to do the same amplification via the ISO setting itself. So, ISO 100 on 4/3rds, then ISO 400 on FF. Equivalent field of view, equal aperture/equivalent f-value, equal exposure time, equivalent ISO setting.
Of course it is right, DOF is not a priority there (with EVILs). But a factor anyway, if one does comparisons as above. The DOF freedom is the reason for the FF or APS-C DSLRs.
And yes, a 90mm f3/5 is reasonable. Comparable to the Tamron 60mm f2, Nikon 60mm f2.8, Canon 60mm f2.8, kind of.