SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? Replies wanted!!

Started Apr 26, 2013 | Discussions
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,434
Like?
Re: SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? Replies wanted!!
In reply to dinoSnake, Apr 27, 2013

dinoSnake wrote:

DigiMatt wrote:

dinoSnake wrote:

News flash: EVERYONE who bought into their systems KNOWS that their chosen format - CX, FT, mFT, APS-C and yes, even FF - will simply not give the same results as the next format size up.  It was a WILLFUL decision: a cost vs benefit ratio in terms of advantages versus disadvantages for exact and every camera format.

LOL, this so wrong its comical. I have a NEWSFLASH for you: The overwhelming majority of photographers DO NOT understand that their chosen format is an image quality compromise. There are hoards of m4/3, APS-C, and FF users here on DPReview who will go to the grave not understanding equivalence and the impact of sensor size on image quality. It's like Galileo Galilei  defending Nicolaus Copernicus ideas on heliocentrism to the Catholic church. It's not going over well.

So, is this true?  Using FT / mFT users as a test, do you understand "the impact of sensor size on image quality"?  What was your knowledge of this topic at the time you made your purchase decision of the cameras you are now using?  How did your purchase decision go in regards to this?

Please post your replies and thoughts on this topic, I could use feedback urgently.

Thank you!

They don't, they say they don't care. But when a 0.5x speed-booster comes to the marketplace in large numbers, they will immediately understand the equivalence and be happy to pay for it, when they see how a cheap compact FF 135mm f/2.8 lens will be transformed into 68mm f/1.4 lens with 120 l/mm resolution for a fraction of the price of 75mm/1.8 Olympus. I wish to hear what all today's don't-care-rers will say when they line up buying FF lenses on ebay.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
n3eg
Contributing MemberPosts: 574Gear list
Like?
Re: SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? Replies wanted!!
In reply to dinoSnake, Apr 27, 2013

I know what four thirds is, because I used it back in 1981 when it was called 110 film.  I also used it in the 1980s when it was called a 1" vidicon.  For me, it's more familiar than 35 mm.

-- hide signature --

It ain't easy being me, but someone's gotta do it.

 n3eg's gear list:n3eg's gear list
Kodak EasyShare Z990 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
GeorgianBay1939
Senior MemberPosts: 2,172Gear list
Like?
Re: SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? Replies wanted!!
In reply to agentul, Apr 27, 2013

agentul wrote:

sir, that arrow thing is awesome. bravo!

LOL!       You mean this one?

Instruction:  Line up the two yellow arrows.

Fortunately none of my Nikon friends have seen this yet, otherwise I'll probably be accused of using a "bridge camera" ---- again!

Unfortunately, after reading THIS, I think that the OP is having us on. 

Cheers,

t

 GeorgianBay1939's gear list:GeorgianBay1939's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm F2.8 ASPH OIS +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,434
Like?
No you don't understand
In reply to Msnap, Apr 27, 2013

Msnap wrote:

I understand that for technologically identical sensors, larger sizes give larger pixels which gives better pictures. But the sensors in different formats aren't technologically identical. Some mFT sensors will be better than some FF sensors and vice versa.

Seems like an overrated topic given how simple things really are.

Let me suggest you didn't understand equivalency at all. It really has nothing to with the sensor technology, only with its size. It's all about the optics and quantum properties of light. It's the lens aperture that collects the light, it's the sensor and electronics that converts the photons to electrons. Equivalence is about lenses, QE is about sensors. Lenses are equivalent, not the sensors. Trying to confuse the two creates all sorts of nonsense, e.g. try to calculate the equivalence between m4/3 EPL1 and OMD.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,434
Like?
Re: SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? yes
In reply to Chas2, Apr 27, 2013

Chas2 wrote:

why on earth not?

are you suggesting people do not understand what they are buying?

Absolutely. Look at the answers in this thread, absolute majority has no idea.

I suppose that is possible, but usually not me, and definitely not when it comes to luxury items such as cameras!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
talico
Contributing MemberPosts: 591Gear list
Like?
Re: SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? Replies wanted!!
In reply to forpetessake, Apr 27, 2013

I'm not so sure the converter is going to make gold out of glass.  Faster yes,  but there has got to be a downside.  More CA, more distortion... If you could make cheap glass great, why make expensive glass?

Tom
My photos http://www.alicoatephotography.com

 talico's gear list:talico's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Guy Parsons
Forum ProPosts: 18,561Gear list
Like?
Re: OT, backups ..... Jeff......
In reply to Jeff Tokayer, Apr 27, 2013

Jeff Tokayer wrote:

I only have 2 1TB drives. I can imagine the pain of backing up 3 3TB drives.

Heh heh, eventually I will have 4 x 3TB or maybe more.... that should last for a year or two.

I decided to make the NAS my main drive, so I don't have to go trough backups again. Using Raid 1, gives me one safe backup.

Using WiFi mostly in the house so the NAS is too slow to use as a working drive, so I treat it purely as a monster backup device or a file swap device between computers (not all necessarily turned on at any one time) instead of using Dropbox which would slurp up monthly quota.

Each computer has a USB drive attached for a local backup every 30 mins and when the NAS is on (often is off) then the "final" backups happen at again 30 minute intervals. I use SyncBack set to backup at that 30 min interval to whatever device is on or plugged in.

Long winded process these days, I take RAW+jpeg and download all that to my notebook, then Silkypix the RAWs and pass the jpegs (via NAS mostly) to Lyn where she culls and adds in her photos to a monster day dated folder set for the cameras, then adds some naming to the dated folders to make things easier to find, then that all gets backed up to now it must be to 6 or so places. When we leave the house we usually take one of the USB drives that has everything on it (about 750 gig for the house in total files capacity and growing).

She has thousands of hours of research in her family tree stuff so that must be safe, more so than all our images.

The NAS of course is the ultimate store so for extended time away we would move that little box to somewhere safe.

Yes, about WiFi speed, I never used to worry much but prompted by you I did dig out the cable from behind the TV and the what was maybe another 7 or so hours estimated for WiFi backup dropped to 1.5 hours for cable. So I won't rip out the cabling just yet from the house.

Regards...... Guy

 Guy Parsons's gear list:Guy Parsons's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm F4-5.6 ASPH Mega OIS Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Casio Exilim EX-ZR1000 +16 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,434
Like?
beliefs vs physics
In reply to Husaberg Grok, Apr 27, 2013

Husaberg Grok wrote:

These circular discussions have occurred since film. As the film quality improved, the reasons for the larger formats became less compelling.

Digital is following a similar path. In ten years I wouldn't be overly surprised to see results from tiny sensors approaching the results of current dslr offerings.

Do you think QE will ever increase above 100%

In reality 2x crop ideal sensor will not be able to achieve the performance level of todays non-ideal FF sensor. In the nearest future, the low light performance of the sensor will be the function of its size only. It's like collecting the rain, once you perfected the system, it's the area of the collector that determines the output.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,434
Like?
Re: Yes and no (or is it no and yes?)
In reply to RealPancho, Apr 27, 2013

RealPancho wrote:

It was fine until this line.

Admittedly, I wound up spending a pretty fair amount on the kit I've assembled, but the equivalent in "full frame" would have cost even more.

And that where you are wrong. The equivalent lenses for small format are actually a lot more expensive. How much does the 25mm f/1.4 cost? Now compare it with an excellent tiny Nikon 50mm f/1.8, sold at $125 new. What is equivalence in practice? -- Add a speedboster to it and you'll end up with 25mm f/0.9 equivalent lens. Such is the huge advantage of FF. The only actual deterrent for FF to become once again the most common format is the price of the sensors (estimated at $300-500 now), but the prices will inevitably go down, the processing power of on-board processors will go up.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ultimitsu
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,486
Like?
Re: SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? Replies wanted!!
In reply to Kewee, Apr 27, 2013

Kewee wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

It's a shame that you can't understand that f/2.8 on mFT puts the same amount of light on the sensor as f/5.6 on FF for a given shutter speed, which, in turn, results in the same noise for equally efficient sensors.

I'm assuming you believe f/2.8 allows twice as much light to pass through the lens as f/5.6,

Why would you assume that?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,434
Like?
examples vs examples
In reply to SirSeth, Apr 27, 2013

SirSeth wrote:

$2999 - $1299 = $1700  Approx. difference in cost between 5DIII and OM-D with a kit lens just as an example. I think most people just get this.

$699 - 1299 = -$600 Approx. difference in cost between NEX 6 and OM-D with a kit lens just as an example. I think most people just get this.

950g - 425g = 525g  And the OM-D isn't the lightest or smallest mirrorless camera. I also think most people get the size difference.

345g - 425g = -80g And the NEX 6 isn't the lightest or the smallest mirrorless camera. I also think most people get the size difference.

The difference in IQ is harder to quantify,

The difference in IQ is easy to quantify, one just need to look at the DXO measurements.

but the bottom line is that the OM-D is so much better than the 5DIII at being cheaper, lighter, and smaller while still providing fantastic IQ for 95% of shooting situations, that it's hard to disparage.

but the bottom line is that the NEX 6 is so much better than the OM-D at being cheaper, lighter, and smaller while still providing fantastic IQ for 95% of shooting situations, that it's hard to disparage.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,434
Like?
Re: SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? Replies wanted!!
In reply to talico, Apr 27, 2013

talico wrote:

I'm not so sure the converter is going to make gold out of glass.  Faster yes,  but there has got to be a downside.  More CA, more distortion... If you could make cheap glass great, why make expensive glass?

Tom
My photos http://www.alicoatephotography.com

So far a 0.7x focal reducer worked very well on APS-C, bringing it very close to the level of FF in speed and resolution, there are many sample photos posted. The problems were mostly with fast telephoto lenses with large output pupil. The 0.5x focal reducer for m4/3 is more difficult to do and that's probably why there isn't one for sale now, but that may change in the nearest future.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
alcelc
Contributing MemberPosts: 528Gear list
Like?
Re: SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? Replies wanted!!
In reply to goshigoo, Apr 27, 2013

goshigoo wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

JosephScha wrote:

yes, I do know. I used to actually join in equivalence discussion but gave up when told that despite equal light intensity at the sensor f stops were not equivalent on m43 because total light was less... so wrong.

It's a shame that you can't understand that f/2.8 on mFT puts the same amount of light on the sensor as f/5.6 on FF for a given shutter speed, which, in turn, results in the same noise for equally efficient sensors.

I used to have a pany FZ7 with a 1/2.5" sensor that had pretty poor dynamic range and egregious noise at is 200.

That's because so little light fell on the sensor compared to larger sensor systems for a given exposure.

I was looking for a similar size and weight camera with better image quality and m43 fit my needs. I did not want a ff DSLR. I didn't want a 645 camera or a hasselblad with a phase one back. If I was really going for best IQ I don't know if even that is it. I was aiming for improved IQ, ability to shoot raw, and still have a small light camera.. at a cost I could justify to myself. Arguments that a Canon 1DS has better IQ I will concede, and it does not trouble me.

Makes perfect sense.

I think with the introduction of speed booster; it helps people understanding the concept of "f/2.8 on mFT puts the same amount of light on the sensor as f/5.6 on FF for a given shutter speed, which, in turn, results in the same noise for equally efficient sensors."
As using a speed booster converts a FF 24-70 f/2.8 lens into a 12-35 f/1.4 @ m43 lens
so you can see the light gathering capability (and Dof) of both lenses are the same

and there will be no size advantage to use a native m43 mount 12-35 f/1.4 as it will be as big as the FF version of 24-70 f/2.8, if panasoinc decided to make one
I think Canon should release more small sized lenses like the 40 f/2.8 - e.g. 24-70 f/5.6, 24 f/4, 85 f/4.....etc.

I am sure these lenses, when paired with the smallest DSLR EOS Rebel SL1, is a better response to mirrorless comparing to EOS M

Yes, but indeed still using a 2009 EOS 7D sensor? It must be a very good response to the fast improving M43 technology.

 alcelc's gear list:alcelc's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LC5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ30 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ultimitsu
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,486
Like?
Re: SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? Replies wanted!!
In reply to JosephScha, Apr 27, 2013

JosephScha wrote:

Buddy, you are the very type of people digimatt was referring to -  you have no clue.

What I don't get is why you and many others care about total light instead of light per unit area.

See? You have no clue.

FF cameras have larger sensor sights, I claim THAT is why they have better dynamic range: because they get more light per sensor element.

Which of the following camera has more DR?

36mp D800 or 16mp D4?

16mp D7000 or 12mp D300s?

24mp D600 or 12mp D3s?

16mp OMD or 12mp GF3?

But what REALLY bothers me about saying f/2.8 on mFT is "equivalent" to f/5.6 on FF is that is misleads too many people who somehow think this talks about exposure.

It is about exposure, and it is not misleading.

I think the more important point is that at the same ISO,

It appears that you do not understand what ISO is all about.

and the same shutter speed, f/2.8 on mFT gives the same exposure as f/2.8 on any other sized sensor.

It appears you do not understand what exposure is all about either.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ultimitsu
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,486
Like?
Re: Yes and no (or is it no and yes?)
In reply to RealPancho, Apr 27, 2013

RealPancho wrote:

When we were in Yosemite NP last summer, I noticed an army of vacationers carrying these gargantuan Canon and Nikon monstrosities around. I thought, "good god, is there some benefit here that I'm unaware of? Those things are HUGE!"

what you saw were most likely APS-C SLRs. they are bigger than OMD but nowhere near your exaggeration and the generally cost less than OMD too.

As for advantage you are not aware of, based on your post I think the answer is every single one.

So no, I didn't know specifics, but I did know that there were higher MP counts and better cameras in the world (Hasselblad, anyone?),

More MP is often rated pretty low in the "why upgrade to FF" rationale list for most people. That is also why hasselblad and Leica S2 and 645D remain a very small niche market despite there are so many rich people who can easily afford 100K on a hobby in this world.

but I knew after a few days with my E-M5 that the cost in dollars, size, and weight were not worth even considering.

Of course since you have no idea what the difference is.

Admittedly, I wound up spending a pretty fair amount on the kit I've assembled, but the equivalent in "full frame" would have cost even more.

I bet all it takes to match every lens you have in full frame world is a 24-85 (&400 with D600) and a 70-300 ($ 600 ).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NRV
NRV
Junior MemberPosts: 45Gear list
Like?
Re: SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? Replies wanted!!
In reply to dinoSnake, Apr 27, 2013

dead horse, meet sticks.

 NRV's gear list:NRV's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony DT 50mm F1.8 SAM
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JoeNapa
Junior MemberPosts: 47Gear list
Like?
Re: SURVEY - Do FT / mFT users know the difference from "full frame"? Replies wanted!!
In reply to dinoSnake, Apr 27, 2013

I had no idea there were any trade offs. I thought my EM-5 was a perfect camera. Count me with the ignoramuses.

 JoeNapa's gear list:JoeNapa's gear list
Ricoh GR Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 25mm F1.8
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Great Bustard
Forum ProPosts: 23,182
Like?
By the way...
In reply to Jon Stock, Apr 27, 2013

Jon Stock wrote:

It was beaten to death before Joemama was banned the first time.

The only reason to post in the daily equivalence threads is to push them toward 150 sooner.

Name one famous professional photographer from any time period who specialized in really shallow DOF.

The endless pictures posted of a closeup of a meaningless object (for example - a rusty nail in a plank of wood) with really shallow of field is as gimmicky as neon colored HDR.

-- hide signature --

Jon

http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/index.htm#quick

  • Equivalence says nothing about shallow DOF being superior to deep DOF, as this is entirely subjective.
  • Equivalence makes no claims whatsoever about which system is superior to another system, especially given that there are so many aspects about systems that Equivalence does not address.

Seems like you missed those parts of the "discussions".

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bluephotons
Senior MemberPosts: 2,601Gear list
Like?
Re: Spitfire
In reply to talico, Apr 27, 2013

Oh, now you are bringing back memories, my brother used to own a Triumph convertible , whit the removable top in the shape of and egg, we had a lot of problems with the alternators until we found out that the ground was the positive and vice verse, after that it worked like a charm and all the ladies loved the little car and wanted to go for a ride, well I was still just a kid, but I guess my brother got to enjoy that aspect of the ladies appeal for this car 

-- hide signature --

Bluephotons
Ah, but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now. Bob Dylan

 Bluephotons's gear list:Bluephotons's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
talico
Contributing MemberPosts: 591Gear list
Like?
Re: Spitfire
In reply to Bluephotons, Apr 27, 2013

Yes, most of the time I got to ride in the back seat.  Talk about impressing the ladies.

Tom

 talico's gear list:talico's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM Canon EF 135mm f/2.0L USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads