Why not a 12-35 F1.8 - F2.8?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
MAubrey
Senior MemberPosts: 1,503Gear list
Like?
Re: Why not a 12-35 F1.8 - F2.8?
In reply to JeanPierre Martel, 5 months ago

JeanPierre Martel wrote:

Anders W wrote:

superstar905 wrote:

You are probably right. Can you explain in simple terms, or perhaps point me to a resource?

The fact that a 12-35/1.8-2.8 for MFT is equivalent to a 24-70/3.5-5.6 on FF with regard to total light on the sensor, DoF, and diffraction

In other words, it will be the same photo except for the depth of field, bigger with a m4/3 lens. For FF users, that's an handicap: for me that's a huge advantage, especially in close-up photography.

...except depth of field and noise. Noise is dictated by total light, not density of light.

Beyond that, it isn't really a handicap. The vast majority of shooting conditions there's sufficient light to use a smaller aperture. What's a handicap is being force to stop down a μ43 lens when f/1.4 is the DOF you want but you can't use it because the mid-day sun is too bright...conditions where f/2.8 on FF would have been perfectly fine. Now...if μ43 actually started providing good low ISO, that'd be solved, but we're stuck with ISO200 and fake ISO100.

-- hide signature --

--Mike

 MAubrey's gear list:MAubrey's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Sony Alpha 7 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Voigtlander 58mm F1.4 Nokton SL II Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 Nokton +7 more
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