4/3 has no focal length advantage-correct him if he is wrong

Started Nov 15, 2008 | Discussions thread
genotypewriter Veteran Member • Posts: 4,846
LOL focal length doesn't become 2x because of 4/3 [nt]

Rriley wrote:

mxsi wrote:

Rriley wrote:

genotypewriter wrote:

Actually your or my opinion can't change the fact that four thirds
pro lenses are overly heavy for what they should be, slow focusing
and they don't deliver the promised goods of fourthirds land. I'm
speaking from experience here...

your experience is worth jack when it is patently wrong
you quote dof equivalence with abandon, yet for some rather odd
reason you feel it necessary to refuse to see that the FL of 4/3rds
lenses are 2x

Or the focal length at which an optical system appears to be
working. Not quite the same Riley. Or did you mean 2x crop factor? If

in the case of a lens on 4/3rds, its 2x FL as in FLx2=EFL

the classic connotation is that a crop, is the use of a film or
otherwise 35mm lens on a sensor that is a crop of the FF size 36x24.
But it has become the accepted mathematical language of digital
photography for the purposes of calculation referencing aspects such
as DoF and EFL. I dont have an issue with that

yes then we know exactly what you are talking about.

for you personally
its looking like that would be a first

either you have no idea or you are a loser plain and simple
go away

But the fact remains and your "go away" line does not change jack
either. Simple indeed.

nobody needs a supercilious idiot claiming experience he clearly
doesnt have.
b/se if he did have that experience, and he did know what he was
talking about then he would just be here to make trouble and argue
knowing he was wrong

i dont need that, we dont need that, ymmv, and probably does...

-- hide signature --

Riley

no one notices the contrast of white on white

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
vor
vor
BJL
BJL
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow