Why do m4/3 shooters feel threated so by "Equivalence" ???

Started Jun 7, 2012 | Discussions thread
jezza__1
Junior MemberPosts: 45
Like?
Re: You've completely missed the point.
In reply to Louis_Dobson, Jun 7, 2012

Louis_Dobson wrote:

Nobody minds that the 75 f1.8 is "equivalent" to a 150mm lens.

Where they get all wound up is when you point out that it is "equivalent" to a 150mm f3.6 lens. Which in light gathering terms it is.

This is because they want to kid themselves they are getting a 150 f1.8 on the cheap rather than an expensive 150mm f3.6 (of doubtless superlative quality).

Basically, MFT offers the same quality as FF in good light, but the quality deteriorates faster as the light falls. Both of these (obvious) facts are contentious to some people.

I understand the wish to educate but it must get old bashing ones' head against a brick wall after a while. The people that dont understand probably never will, and chances are they will be misinterpreted no matter how clearly explained. This is exampled by nearly every equivalence thread banging the 150 post limit in record time. I have read threads where two people are saying the same thing differently, yet still arguing between each other. It's ridiculous.

I cant wait until sensor quality is that good that any advantage a larger sensor size offers in regard to low light shooting is all but acedemic. It's getting closer. I think reasonably clean and detailed photos at 6400-12800 is that point. Then DOF will be the only pi--ing contest left and the equivalence threads can halve in number.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
Heh!New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow