Depth of Field Difference (m43 v DX) - An Example

Started Jan 11, 2013 | Discussions thread
DeepBlue2
Regular MemberPosts: 187Gear list
Like?
Re: Depth of Field Difference (m43 v DX) - An Example
In reply to Matz03, Jan 11, 2013

So what was your point exactly, to demonstrate that at f2.8 you can't achieve sufficient seperation with m4/3 but at f1.8 it's close enough to DX so not worth mentioning?

I'm just asking because someone not familiar with m4/3 would simply get the impression you can't blur the backround with the smalle sensor m4/3 system.

As someone stated above, the old rules go out the window with m4/3.

The point was to illustrate that there is a difference.  I'm not making a value judgment about whether the difference is a positive or a negative.

Although, I haven't provided it here, the shot I took at f/2.0 on the OM-D is very close to the f/2.8 D200 shot.  If I think it's necessary for the case study, I may add it in, but right now it doesn't seem necessary for my purposes.  The rule of thumb that there is a 1-stop difference between m43 and DX seems to be pretty accurate from my test shots.

-- hide signature --

Mike
Tampa, FL

 DeepBlue2's gear list:DeepBlue2's gear list
Nikon D70 Nikon D200 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Meh.New
Heh!New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow