Is FF really better than m43? and why?

Started Jun 9, 2013 | Discussions thread
Donald Chin
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,327Gear list
Like?
Re: Is FF really better than m43? and why?
In reply to A2T2, Jun 10, 2013

A2T2 wrote:

MAubrey wrote:

A2T2 wrote:

FF in low light its a nightmare, unless you specifically want 1 eye in focus you have to ramp the aperture and hence the iso, FF is actually the opposite of what you want in low light.

Bump the ISO up by two stops and close your aperture by two stops and then its taken care of. A D600 has two stops better ISO than the E-M5...and if you downsize the images to the 16MP of the E-M5, then its even better. The one eye in focus issue is only a problem if you're shooting the eight year old 5Dc.

OMD has 2-4 stops better stabilisation, iso 1600 OMD vs iso 6400 FF, plus 2 stops dof better, I think you'll need iso12800 in low light mostly? to match this hand-held you'd be at iso25600 lol.

-- hide signature --

--Mike

Nothing special about Olympus IS, any modern DC can do the job, here's an example of a superzoom @ 1200mm (EQV) handheld, 1/20s ISO 1250.

and here is another example of an FF DC shot @ ISO 2000 which show the difference of IQ.

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