I finally 'get' equivalence

Started May 22, 2012 | Discussions thread
Fygaren Regular Member • Posts: 238
Re: This doesn't look right

texinwien wrote:

Fygaren wrote:

But you compare different FOV. What Im saying is that a 24mm will gather 4x more light than a 48mm because of 4x larger FOV area. Now if you put a 4/3 sensor behind the 24mm it will gather only 1/4 of the light witch equals the amount a 48mm would gather on FF.

So when comparing two images with the same framing, they will have gathered the exact same amount of light, one has just consetrated the light on a smaller surface.

Tom

Agreed - maybe I missed that detail in your original post.

So the 'problem' on the wide open aperture side of things that 4/3 has is that FF will always get 4x as much light at an objective's wide-open aperture. Meaning, when you hit the theoretical limit of how wide your aperture can be, the FF will still gather 4 times as much light as the 4/3.

Taking the same 24mm f/2.0 prime and comparing it on an FF and 4/3 camera, the 4/3 will get 1/4 as much light as the FF (and it will also have a different FOV).

Yes, the FF would gather 4x the light because the FOV is 4x bigger, whitch is a totally different photo. But when we talk about equivalence it should always be with the same FOV??

Tom

 Fygaren's gear list:Fygaren's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Samyang 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye MFT Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 +3 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
tko
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow