MFT Users: Do you miss the shallower depth-of-field of bigger sensor cameras?

Started Feb 8, 2014 | Discussions
JBurnett
Contributing MemberPosts: 762Gear list
Like?
Yes, occasionally. More often grateful for greater DOF.
In reply to Superzoom2, Feb 8, 2014

Miss shallower DOF of larger sensor: very occasionally

Grateful for greater DOF of M4/3: more often (landscapes, macro)

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MrScorpio
Senior MemberPosts: 1,364Gear list
Like?
Yes and No
In reply to Superzoom2, Feb 8, 2014

Sometimes yes, but sometimes it is good to have the good light gathering with a large Aperture without having to have the very shallow DoF.

It all depends on the situation and what you want to achieve...

-- hide signature --
 MrScorpio's gear list:MrScorpio's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Canon EOS 6D Nikon Df Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ulric
Senior MemberPosts: 2,680Gear list
Like?
Re: MFT Users: Do you miss the shallower depth-of-field of bigger sensor cameras?
In reply to Superzoom2, Feb 8, 2014

Superzoom2 wrote:

I know you can buy fast MFT lenses for more aperture control, but I'm probably going to just stick with a cheap 14-42 for various reasons.

Whatever those reasons are: skip the cheap kit zoom if you care about background blur.

 Ulric's gear list:Ulric's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Steve_
Senior MemberPosts: 2,215Gear list
Like?
not really
In reply to Superzoom2, Feb 8, 2014

I found the DOF vs FOV relationship for the APS-C geometry a better compromise overall than full-frame, where I was constantly struggling to create enough DOF. I don't much notice the difference between APS-C and 4/3s sensor sizes. I thought I might lack for DOF control when using my 12-35/2.8, but it hasn't been an issue.

I know you can buy fast MFT lenses for more aperture control, but I'm probably going to just stick with a cheap 14-42 for various reasons.

Just don't try a 12-35 or 12-40. Priorities might change.

 Steve_'s gear list:Steve_'s gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm 1:1.8 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
William Prip
Regular MemberPosts: 288
Like?
Shallow DOF harder to achieve w/ M43
In reply to Superzoom2, Feb 9, 2014

Superzoom2 wrote:

I'm thinking of buying my first ever MFT camera, an Olympus OM-D E-M10 with 14-42 EZ lens.

I've had lots of compacts and DSLR's, mostly Canon. Once in a while, you have these beautiful blurry background pics when the lens and aperture combination are right. I am a former pro photog, and understand fully camera optics and depth-of-field physics.

I just want to know if you sometimes miss the easily attainable shallow depth-of-field that you usually get with an APS-C or bigger sensor camera.

I know you can buy fast MFT lenses for more aperture control, but I'm probably going to just stick with a cheap 14-42 for various reasons.

Thanks!

In a word, YES! I do miss using a large sensor body.

The first three are just fun pics of my son begging to eat a Kit Kat.  Shot with the Canon 5D with the Canon 135 2.0:

The next batch was shot at the NY Fashion Week with my Canon 1D Mark IV with either the 135 2.0 or the 24-70 2.8:

The final batch were short at the same venue with my Oly OMD-EM5 with the 75 1.8:

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dheorl
Senior MemberPosts: 2,979Gear list
Like?
Re: Shallow DOF harder to achieve w/ M43
In reply to William Prip, Feb 9, 2014

William Prip wrote:

Superzoom2 wrote:

I'm thinking of buying my first ever MFT camera, an Olympus OM-D E-M10 with 14-42 EZ lens.

I've had lots of compacts and DSLR's, mostly Canon. Once in a while, you have these beautiful blurry background pics when the lens and aperture combination are right. I am a former pro photog, and understand fully camera optics and depth-of-field physics.

I just want to know if you sometimes miss the easily attainable shallow depth-of-field that you usually get with an APS-C or bigger sensor camera.

I know you can buy fast MFT lenses for more aperture control, but I'm probably going to just stick with a cheap 14-42 for various reasons.

Thanks!

In a word, YES! I do miss using a large sensor body.

The first three are just fun pics of my son begging to eat a Kit Kat. Shot with the Canon 5D with the Canon 135 2.0:

The next batch was shot at the NY Fashion Week with my Canon 1D Mark IV with either the 135 2.0 or the 24-70 2.8:

The final batch were short at the same venue with my Oly OMD-EM5 with the 75 1.8:

I'm confused. You say you miss the shallow DoF of larger sensors but then show two at the end with fairly comparable background blur.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nrwhitman
Regular MemberPosts: 387Gear list
Like?
FF Users: Do you miss the greater depth-of-field of MFT sensor cameras?
In reply to Superzoom2, Feb 9, 2014

So, wonder if this question ever shows up on a FF forum.

 nrwhitman's gear list:nrwhitman's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus PEN E-PM1 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
benarden
Contributing MemberPosts: 570Gear list
Like?
Re: No
In reply to Superzoom2, Feb 9, 2014

- Not a bit.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ryanshoots
Regular MemberPosts: 401
Like?
I would guess
In reply to Superzoom2, Feb 9, 2014

Those that did miss it are back in a larger sensor format.  The fact that there are no lenses in m4/3 with the moniker "cream machine" is telling.  On the other hand the 4/3 format excels at many other things.

How much shooting do you do now where a shallow dof is what you want?  What lenses were you using.  Then we can tell you what lens in m4/3 might work for you.  The kit lens offers no shallow DOF.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jhinkey
Senior MemberPosts: 2,651Gear list
Like?
Re: MFT Users: Do you miss the shallower depth-of-field of bigger sensor cameras?
In reply to Superzoom2, Feb 9, 2014

If I need shallow DOF and creamy background that my 75/1.8 can't make, then I simply reach for my D800 . . . otherwise I enjoy the very good IQ and compact size/low weight of my m43 kit.

Same thing for high ISO shooting - I reach for the D800 . . .

 jhinkey's gear list:jhinkey's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS3 Nikon D800 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dave Lively
Senior MemberPosts: 1,496
Like?
Re: FF Users: Do you miss the greater depth-of-field of MFT sensor cameras?
In reply to nrwhitman, Feb 9, 2014

Deep DOF is limited by diffraction, not sensor size.  If you stop down until diffraction becomes unbearable FF users can get just as much DOF as m43 users.  The FF cameras will be stopped down 2 stops more and using 4 times the ISO but their better high ISO performance makes up most of the difference.

I am using a m43 camera because it is smaller, lighter and much less expensive than FF but still provides good image quality and adequate DOF control for my purposes.  But when it comes to DOF control m43 is at a distinct disadvantage when I want shallow and has no advantage when I want a lot.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Nippero
Contributing MemberPosts: 663Gear list
Like?
Re: Shallow DOF harder to achieve w/ M43
In reply to Dheorl, Feb 9, 2014

Dheorl wrote:

William Prip wrote:

Superzoom2 wrote:

I'm thinking of buying my first ever MFT camera, an Olympus OM-D E-M10 with 14-42 EZ lens.

I've had lots of compacts and DSLR's, mostly Canon. Once in a while, you have these beautiful blurry background pics when the lens and aperture combination are right. I am a former pro photog, and understand fully camera optics and depth-of-field physics.

I just want to know if you sometimes miss the easily attainable shallow depth-of-field that you usually get with an APS-C or bigger sensor camera.

I know you can buy fast MFT lenses for more aperture control, but I'm probably going to just stick with a cheap 14-42 for various reasons.

Thanks!

In a word, YES! I do miss using a large sensor body.

The first three are just fun pics of my son begging to eat a Kit Kat. Shot with the Canon 5D with the Canon 135 2.0:

The next batch was shot at the NY Fashion Week with my Canon 1D Mark IV with either the 135 2.0 or the 24-70 2.8:

The final batch were short at the same venue with my Oly OMD-EM5 with the 75 1.8:

I'm confused. You say you miss the shallow DoF of larger sensors but then show two at the end with fairly comparable background blur.

The key here is flexibility.

He was only able to achieve such similar shallow DoF with his EM5 when using a 75/1.8. That's equivalent to 150mm.

On the other hand, the 1D was able to obtain shallow DoF with a much wider (as in more varied) FL range.

 Nippero's gear list:Nippero's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Nippero
Contributing MemberPosts: 663Gear list
Like?
It goes both ways.
In reply to Superzoom2, Feb 9, 2014

No camera system is perfect, for me the DoF argument goes both ways.

I LOVE my Canon 5D with the Sigma 50mm f/1.4. Amazingly smooth, creamy and artifact free bokeh. Almost effortless to achieve.

Sure, you can achieve similar shallow DoF using these 4/3 and APS-C sensors, but that same flexibility isn't there.

On the other hand, sometimes I miss the deeper DoF of m43s, because there will be the times that I want to use the aperture wide open without getting paper-thin DoF.

 Nippero's gear list:Nippero's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dwstv
Junior MemberPosts: 37
Like?
Re: MFT Users: Do you miss the shallower depth-of-field of bigger sensor cameras?
In reply to Superzoom2, Feb 9, 2014

NO! Full frame is too shallow.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jacques Cornell
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,822Gear list
Like?
Re: It goes both ways.
In reply to Nippero, Feb 9, 2014

Yeah, for event work, I appreciate the ability to shoot at wide apertures and still have enough DoF to keep more than one person in focus.

-- hide signature --

jacquescornell.com

 Jacques Cornell's gear list:Jacques Cornell's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G6 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8 +27 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Superzoom2
Regular MemberPosts: 136
Like?
Re: It goes both ways.
In reply to Jacques Cornell, Feb 9, 2014

Wow, thank you for all the thoughtful and personal responses.  I suspect I will eventually buy some fast primes, but I am trying to convince myself that I will not end up spending too much on switching to a MFT system in the long run.  Cost is a concern.  Flexibility is a concern.  I mostly want the OM-D E-M10 as a smaller travel camera, rather than taking my T3i with 17-55 or 18-200.

Someone stated that to achieve an equivalent degree of background blur, MFT has to be opened up a stop compared to APS-C.  Is that true, or is it less than one stop?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sergey_Green
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,812Gear list
Like?
So provided you understand how this works ..
In reply to mpresley, Feb 9, 2014

mpresley wrote:

Well no, I guess I don't since a shallow DOF and nice creamy backgrounds are pretty easily obtained with M43 gear, just not with the lens you mention... I used to shoot with the Nikon D700 using a 85/1.4, 135/2, and the 70-200/2.8 - it's simply a matter of understanding how it works, with the right lens.

Which equivalent to the listed above lenses would you have on mFT?

-- hide signature --

- sergey

 Sergey_Green's gear list:Sergey_Green's gear list
Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sergey_Green
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,812Gear list
Like?
Very pretty image ..
In reply to DanCar, Feb 9, 2014

DanCar wrote:

I get shallower depth of field than my friends who shoot with bigger cameras and big zoom lenses, although I'm just shooting with primes.

Well done.

-- hide signature --

- sergey

 Sergey_Green's gear list:Sergey_Green's gear list
Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
NCV
NCV
Senior MemberPosts: 1,751Gear list
Like?
Re: MFT Users: Do you miss the shallower depth-of-field of bigger sensor cameras?
In reply to Superzoom2, Feb 9, 2014

Superzoom2 wrote:

I'm thinking of buying my first ever MFT camera, an Olympus OM-D E-M10 with 14-42 EZ lens.

I've had lots of compacts and DSLR's, mostly Canon.  Once in a while, you have these beautiful blurry background pics when the lens and aperture combination are right.  I am a former pro photog, and understand fully camera optics and depth-of-field physics.

I just want to know if you sometimes miss the easily attainable shallow depth-of-field that you usually get with an APS-C or bigger sensor camera.

I know you can buy fast MFT lenses for more aperture control, but I'm probably going to just stick with a cheap 14-42 for various reasons.

Thanks!

No

 NCV's gear list:NCV's gear list
Nikon D300 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sergey_Green
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,812Gear list
Like?
And the amount of time spent ..
In reply to s_grins, Feb 9, 2014

s_grins wrote:

I like deeper DOF

You can add some shallow DOF later, during PP. It is easy

Can you show us some examples, do they look realistic and good?

-- hide signature --

- sergey

 Sergey_Green's gear list:Sergey_Green's gear list
Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads