Amazing lens, incredible sharpness

Great Bustard wrote:

Moti wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

Moti wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

Perhaps you read where I asked, "Aside from DOF and noise, why would anyone care about the aperture?" Well?

My first concern is exposure in relation to aparture. Yours may be different . This is exactly what I meant earlier by "academic" because it is disconnected from the reality of needs and preference.

What is the difference in exposure between f/1.8 1/200 on mFT and f/3.5 1/200 on FF and why does it matter?

Sorry for using a term that you are allergic to.

What term is that? "Exposure"? Well, I did a whole write-up on exposure, and even put it in the title:

http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/index.htm#exposure

Doesn't sound like I'm too "allergic" to it.

I'll rephrase. My concern is shutter speed. That is why your question is also academic.

I've highlighted the shutter speed in bold above so that you can see it more easily. I'll even repost it, and the question I posed to you:

What is the difference in exposure between f/1.8 1/200 on mFT and f/3.5 1/200 on FF and why does it matter?

Well?

Sorry I'm not into academic game, you can answer it yourself. But let me explain my point in a simpler way so you may understand it more easily which may help you to connect to reality.

My need for speed is important to reduse motion blur. So if for a certain ISO and scene illumination, my shutter speed on a FF at f/3.5 is 1/200, for exactly the same sceene illumination and ISO setting, f/1.8 on an MFT body, will give me a shutter speed of 1/400.

Now I hope you do understand the difference between 1/200 and 1/400 and the way it effects motion blur. If not, I'll be happy to make you a drawing.

Moti