f/1.8 on m4/3, ASP-C, FF; are they the same?

Started Nov 1, 2010 | Discussions thread
Kuivaamo Senior Member • Posts: 2,248
Re: You can definitely take night photos

Adventsam wrote:

I agree, and so do most but FF madness will always prevail and comparison with FF will always be pointless because you know what, FF is the only option, not! If this was the case for light how come that ISO 1600 on a GH2 in video mode will have exactly the same light gathering capability as a 5dmk2? using the analogy that both are downsampled to 2mpix full HD surely the sensitivity will be x stops better than a GH2, its not! the only thing that is different as well we all know is the observed dof and focal length, which is 1.8 x shallower and 1.8 longer on the equivalent f stop c/w with FF. IQ btw will be better on the GH2, sharper, less aliaing and moire, how so?

Don't confuse video with stills.

In terms of dynamic range and noise for a print of given size, ISO 100 on m4/3 is roughly equal to ISO 400 on FF (give or take some fractions of a stop). There's nothing controversial about this, and measurements as well as real world results bear this out.

Also don't confuse noise performance at image level and pixel size. For a given sized print, it's the overall sensor size that matters, not the size of the individual pixels. Even DPR, who for years were the proponents of "small pixels = noisier images" myth, have come to their senses lately and recognised that it's not the pixel size that matters, if you're interested in the final image and not 100 % crops.

For what it's worth, I use both FF and m4/3, and I understand and appreciate the limitations, pros, and cons of each.

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