Food for thought - FF vs M4/3's cost

Started Mar 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
Dr_Jon Veteran Member • Posts: 4,919
Re: Food for thought - FF vs M4/3's cost

I think I have to respectfully disagree re PhotoZone. When he says Lens Tests aren't comparable across systems that's because of the effect of the camera on the test results. Since I actually want to compare camera+lens combinations (that's how I take pictures the no-camera approach is tough) it's fine to compare directly provided (!) the tests are broadly similar date-wise so no big change in raw converter technology could add to the fun plus on cameras that are representative of the ones I'm interested in comparing.

Working on an answer about the numbers from Roger, whose blog I really like, as Imatest MTF50 numbers have some quirks. I'm not sure which numbers are lens-only and which include a camera, as I only care about the latter case.

Oh, and my 40/2.8 at 2.8 on my 5DmkII is sharper than my 12-35 on my GH3 by an instantly recognisable amount. My 12-35 is effectively identical in sharpness to another one I tested side-by-side on my GH3 in a shop (well, visually anyway, I was just checking mine wasn't a dud, not looking for the perfect copy, not my thing).

 Dr_Jon's gear list:Dr_Jon's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix Real 3D W3 Sony RX100 V Canon EOS 5DS R Panasonic GH5 Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM +27 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow