Swapping EM1 for A7

Started 11 months ago | Discussions thread
Jonas Palm
Regular MemberPosts: 416
Like?
Re: just not true
In reply to Harold66, 11 months ago

Harold66 wrote:

With the E-M1 evolving into larger and more expensive, and the A7 to the smaller and somewhat less expensive for FF, suddenly the formats meet in the middle with the same sizes and cost.

Simply put , it is NOT true. You can find a lens or a body that is almost the same size and weight than another body with a smaller sensor BUT any SERIOUS discussion is about the size of the system and chiefly the size AND weight of the elements in the system that one is using

the m4/3rds lens at identical apertures AND performance will always be ( or make it95% of them if you will) smaller than their aps counterparts.. and even so of the cameras with a 35mm sensor ( what people here call full-frame)

Haven't we been through this a million times already? With an FF sensor, you can have a lens two stops slower, and still have the same DOF control offered by a m43 lens. And the higher light gathering ability of the FF sensor makes noise levels and dynamic range equivalent even with a two stops smaller aperture.

Look at the actual lenses. The 35mm f2.8 Zeiss offers 2/3s of a stop more DOF control than the 17mm f1.8 of Olympus. And it weighs 120g, exactly the same as the Olympus. Or we can look at the Zeiss f4 zoom that offers one stop better DOF control than the new olympus 12-40, is almost exactly the same size and weighs 426g vs 382g of the Olympus. Oh, and it's weather sealed and in contrast to the 12-40, doesn't extend when zooming.

In short, I don't agree with your assessment, precisely because I regard the system as a whole.

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