Any mft's shooters thinking of jumping ship for FF nex

Started Jul 22, 2013 | Discussions thread
captura Forum Pro • Posts: 24,826
Re: Only if the lenses were as small as in m4/3

EEmu wrote:

dougjgreen1 wrote:

Which of course they won't be - it's physically impossible.

Nonsense! Roughly speaking, size of lenses just depends on the optical properties (and flange distance to a degree). When you account for the fact that the true FF equivalent of a m43 is not just twice the focal length but also 2 stops slower, things start to look a lot closer. It's just that no FF lens maker is going to put out 24-84mm f/7.1-11 (equiv of m43 kit). But if you compare Canon's 40mm f/2.8 pancake to Panasonic's 20mm f/1.7 you'll see they're about the same size and Canon's is only slightly heavier while being a half stop faster.

Generally, the FF lenses don't come slow enough to make a direct comparison to m43, but if you extrapolate, you can see this is accurate:

Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM: 89 x 113mm, 805g ($2300)
Canon 24-70mm f/4L IS USM: 83 x 93mm, 600g ($1500)
Pana 24-70mm f/5.6 OIS: 67 x 74mm, 305g ($1300)

Canon 24mm f/2.8 IS USM: 68 x 56mm, 280g ($850)
Olympus 24mm f/4: 56 x 43mm, 130g ($800)

Canon 50mm f/1.8 II: 68 x 41mm, 130g ($125)
Voigtländer 50mm f/1.9: 58 x 70mm, 410g ($1200)
PanLeica 50mm f/2.8: 63 x 54mm, 200g ($549)

I converted the m43 lenses to FF equivalents in the above. When comparing, note different feature sets... For example, Canon's 24mm has IS while the Oly '24mm' doesn't. I wanted to include a telephoto example, but couldn't find anything useful. (No non-macro 150 to compare to 75, m43 tele-zooms are all 2 stops slower than FF equivs. Pan's 150mm f/2.8 will be interesting.)

Ultimately m43 lenses aren't significantly lighter, smaller or cheaper* compared to equivalent FF lenses. If Sony is willing to make slow lenses** for their FF system to reduce size, it really could be something. (Though marketing such slow lenses would be tough!) Imagine the potential of a system that would let you have small slower lenses (i.e. m43 equivs) for a travel system and large fast lenses for more 'studio' situations. I, for one, will be interested to see what happens.

* While m43 may seems to be overpriced, keep in mind that when it comes to design the true aperture is more the issue than the light-gathering equivalent. Thus Voigtländer's f/0.95 is a remarkable design, worthy of that price tag but because of the larger sensors size, Canon's 50mm f/1.8 can have a simpler design while gathering more light and thus appear to be a much better value.

** A big if!

Obviously the Canon 40mm STM EF canon pancake lens is the same size as the Pana 20/1.7 because it is a relatively slow f2.8 whereas the Pana is f1.7. If the Canon was built as an f1.7, it would be much larger. ( I should add that the 40mm lens is an exceptional item for it's low price.)

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Sony Alpha a7 Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow