stillshunter
Super Moderator Emeritus
- Location
- Down Under
- Name
- Mark
Fair call Armando, but I put the 'pop' entirely down to the PL25 (and PL45) - they both work just as well on the GF1 as they did on the EP3.I gave my due to the EP3!
Fair call Armando, but I put the 'pop' entirely down to the PL25 (and PL45) - they both work just as well on the GF1 as they did on the EP3.I gave my due to the EP3!
I have no real logical explanation why I use both m4/3 and APS-C.
I go from cameras with sensors that range from small to m4/3 to APS-C to full frame. I probably choose which one to pick up most often based on guilt of not having used a particular camera in a while!!!
With the advent of smaller cameras sporting APS-C sensors like the NEX, GXR and most recently the X100, I'm getting more and more enamored with what I perceive to be superior image quality in terms of dynamic range and sometimes noise control at high ISO.
For whatever reasons, to my eyes anyway, the APS-C cameras seem to give me images with the "it" that I find lacking on m4/3. Out of all the m4/3 cameras that I've owned/used (EP2/3, EPM1, GF1/2/3, G3, GH2), the EP3's JPG photos was the closest to giving me the same "it" feel from images that I get on the X100 and the K-5. I returned the EP3 because of the rattlesnaking when using the PL25. In any event, the "it" or "pop" or "look" or whatever is it that we can call "it" is purely subjective.
In my ideal world, there would be a full frame camera roughly the same size as the X100 with interchangeable and auto focus lenses no larger than M lenses, but with the auto focusing abilities of the Nikon 1. And all of that for $399. Not too much to ask for right?
+1
Thanks - saved me a bunch of typing.
more into sensor sizes ... i promissed myself not to speak more on this .. but lets break it for a lesser sin .. :tongue:
a prime lens (of one focal length, obviously ) will give you same DOF, sharpness, CA etc no matter what sensor size you put it on, at a given apperture. Actually vig and ca will be lower on small sensor bodies as it will be a crop at the middle, where the effect of such things is less.
actually the only difference will be the crop factor .. nothing more ... ok ...
e.g. my nikon 50mm f/1.4 lens at f/1.4 will give the same CoC or Dof no matter I mount it on FF, APS-C or with an adaptor on Pen E-P1. Its tested and proven! The crop factor however will keep it 50mm on ff, make it 75mm (FF equivalent FOV not focal length) and 100mm (equivalent fov on m4/3)...
But shooting with no regard for framing is impractical in real world usage. If you want shallower DOF you're going to be better off choosing a larger sensor. If you want more DOF then choose a smaller one.
Gordon
Both my DOF charts dispute this "fact". At 1m a 50mm lens at 1.4 on a 35mm camera has a DOF of 31.9mm. At 1m a 50mm lens at 1.4 on a 4/3 sensor has a DOF of 16mm.
Should it be the other way around?
Both my DOF charts dispute this "fact". At 1m a 50mm lens at 1.4 on a 35mm camera has a DOF of 31.9mm. At 1m a 50mm lens at 1.4 on a 4/3 sensor has a DOF of 16mm. Almost exactly half, which coincides with both the difference in sensor diagonal and the difference in the CoC of the different sensors (0.015 for 4/3 and 0.03 for 35mm). Even the "equivalent" 25mm lens at 1m and f1.4 has a DOF of 65.5mm. The achieve a similar framing for a 4/3 camera vs a 35mm camera requires either a wider lens or a longer shooting distance. Both of these increase DOF. Shooting a fixed focal length at a fixed aperture and a fixed distance to the subject, with no regard for framing (because you will crop the subject) will actually lead to a shallower DOF because the 4/3 image will need more enlargement to reach the same print size.
But shooting with no regard for framing is impractical in real world usage. If you want shallower DOF you're going to be better off choosing a larger sensor. If you want more DOF then choose a smaller one.
Gordon
I shoot my kids a lot and sports is a part of that. The MFT I chose does not do that well (are there any that do? I ask this innocently and without irony)
But I like asking for proof, especially when the words "tested and proven" are used. I did read your post, carefully. And in my reply I gave the DOF for both 4/3 and 35mm sized sensors using the same 50mm lens, aperture and distance, changing only the sensor size. Here is a web based one (I just googled it)? It's not the ones I use regularly.
Online Depth of Field Calculator
Put in the numbers and see if you're right. See if you can get the same lens, aperture and distance to give you the same DOF measurements on different sensor sizes.
Gordon
Put in the numbers and see if you're right. See if you can get the same lens, aperture and distance to give you the same DOF measurements on different sensor sizes.
Gordon