Mirrorless- Continuing to Under Perform

Started Apr 11, 2013 | Discussions thread
Biggs23
Biggs23 MOD
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,536Gear list
Like?
Re: Why should MFT lenses be cheaper than FF lenses? Smaller, yes...
In reply to Bart Hickman, Apr 12, 2013

Bart Hickman wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

Bart Hickman wrote:

In a lot of cases, MFT lenses are cheaper than FF equivalents, so I disagree about the price issue.  Eg., MFT systems have some nice 300mm zooms that are a hell of a lot less expensive than the 600mm zooms available for FF.

Not to argue because I have no experience with m43, but what m43 300mm f/4 lens is available that will accurately AF and provide quality equal to the 600mm lenses available for FF?

It's a fair point.  You're right, there's no truly equivalent.  Only the FOV is equivalent.  But for about $600, I can get a 300mm zoom that's F/5.6 in mFT.  That's equivalent to 600mm F/11.2 in FF which sounds ridiculous because such a lens probably would look ridiculous (it'd look like a long piece of pipe.) The point is 600mm F/11.2 equivalent is reasonable on a smaller sensor so this less expensive option is available in the market thanks to the smaller sensor system.

But there actually are a variety of reflex lenses available for FF systems that would actually be 500mm, 600mm, or longer with f/stops larger than f/11. Those lenses are available relatively cheaply as well. There is even the Nikkor 600mm f/5.6 IF-ED which is available for $1600-1900 pretty regularly. There are also things like the Bigma (50-500mm) as well. Lots of options exist that are pretty close in price range.

So while I agree that truly equivalent performance is not cheaper on MFT (it doesn't even exist), I'm just arguing that MFT (smaller sensors in general) enables a less expensive option and smaller that will seem equivalent in most circumstances for most people.

True, and a valid argument.

APS-C DSLR's are crippled by the fact that they share a mount with FF.  So if one wants 600mm equivalent on APS-C, they must buy a 400mm FF lens which is massive and expensive and the stabilization must be over-designed to allow for use with APS-C.  Ironically, FF pixel density is getting so high that FF camera users (at least on Nikon) can just use APS-C DSLR telephoto lenses and crop.  So that's something else that's working in favor of FF if you don't mind the bulky camera body.

Agreed.

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
YeahNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow