Rethinking 4/3 Depth Of Field

Started Apr 11, 2013 | Discussions thread
KenBalbari
Regular MemberPosts: 275Gear list
Like?
Re: Rethinking 4/3 Depth Of Field
In reply to al_in_philly, Apr 11, 2013

al_in_philly wrote:

Of course, I could shoot FF at 2.8, but then I'd also be shooting at an ISO of 12800 for the same shutter speed.  Even as good as FF images are, the OM-D at 1/4 the ISO will always look better.

Is this true though?  At the moment, it appears to be true with the OM-D, but that's only because of the efficiency of that Sony sensor.  In the past, on other 4/3 and m4/3 models it has been otherwise, there has been more than a 2 stop ISO difference in some cases.  Even now though, is there much difference in these samples?

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews_data/oly_em5/boxshot/p1010017.jpg

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews_data/canon_eos6d/boxshot/img_0048.jpg

If the sensors were equally efficient, then there would pretty much be no case where m4/3 had an inherent advantage other than size, convenience, and cost.

On the other hand, I think we are also getting to where there are fewer and fewer situations in which full frame has any practical advantage that would be worth the difference in cost.

 KenBalbari's gear list:KenBalbari's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F30 Zoom Olympus E-330 Olympus PEN E-PL2
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow