Swapping EM1 for A7

Started Oct 17, 2013 | Discussions thread
Donny out of Element here Contributing Member • Posts: 996
Re: Needlessly bloated??

daddyo wrote:

If you really think the new Sony cameras are the equivalent in size to the E-M1, then you haven't thought the system through very carefully, as the Sony lenses across the board will be heavier, larger, and more expensive than m4/3 equivalent lenses.

A7/r with 35mm f2,8 Zeiss prime is same size as O-MD with 17mm f1.8. Not all lenses for FF are big. As for expensive or not: compare m43 lens Oly 17mm f1.8 for $500 and FF 35mm f2.8 ZEISS prime for $800 - do you think $300 difference is justified for a premium luxury lens from ZEISS that covers FF sensor 4 times the size of m43 sensor?

Now simple math: for OMD to achieve same shallow DOF as 35mm f2.8 FF can do - it needs to have 17mm f1.4! lens not f1.8, so in terms of DOF FF 2.8 beats m43 f1.8. Now in terms of exposure f1.8 is more bright lens, BUT A7/r will easily outperform OMD f1.8 due to better signal to noise ratio on high ISO usage. For A7/r even Auto mode includes ISO6400 as working ISO, but in RAW you can easily use ISO12800. I am not even going to argue that DR (dynamic range) of A7/r is much better than any m43 camera. As well as color reproduction. Why Sony went with f2.8 instead of f2 or f1.4? To keep size small and to have a lens that is very sharp from edge to edge. When price is almost same and size is almost same - one needs to be really m43 fan to chose m43 instead of A7/r. Just my 0.02 cents.

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