Olympus 12-40 easily beats the Canon 17-55 at f/2.8 (but not when stopped down).

Started Nov 3, 2013 | Discussions thread
LTZ470
LTZ470 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,926
Re: If you have experience

ultimitsu wrote:

Anders W wrote:

ultimitsu wrote:

DonSC wrote:

with FF and 43 lenses then you know that you always need to stop down the FF lenses but generally don't need to do that on 43. I guess if you don't then you don't.

Exactly the otherway around.

Nikon 50 F1.8G and 85 F1.8G are very sharp wide opening, when used with a 24mp FF sensor. you can say it is bleeding sharp by m43 standard.

You mean just as bleeding sharp as the following figures suggest (line pairs per image height at MTF-50, center/average, based on unsharpened output from RAW files)?

Nikkor 50/1.4G on D3X (24 MP)

1.4 560/500

2.0 690/620

2.8 830/750

4.0 900/830

Panasonic 20/1.7 on E-M5 (16 MP)

1.7 870/835

2.8 1050/875

4.0 1075/880

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/05/wide-angle-micro-43-imatest-results

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/01/the-great-50mm-shootout

I cannot say what lens rental did, but it appears that they use different methodology to everyone else. They seem to measure the resolving power of the lens rather than resolving power of lens with a sensor. I say this because if you look at their data, it appears many good m43 lenses out resolve many good FF lenses across their test. We know that simply isnt possible. If you read the comments on lensrental, someone specifically asked why do m43 lens show more resolution than FF lenses, Roger responded that his figures are not comparable across format but did not explain why.

DXO and Photozone's result are much more consistent with each other and user experience. they tend to show that the resolution obtained from FF sensor is higher, by virtue of larger sensor being more forgiving on the glass for the same FOV.

For example, it is general consensus that 25/1.4 is pretty close to 20/1.7 (even lensrental confirms this) . I do not doubt that if you put the same sensor behind 25/1.4 and 50/1.4G - i.e. for the same image circle, 25/1.4 outperforms 50/1.4. But when you put a sensor 4 times larger behind 50/1.4 you should get image with significant more resolution.

Photozone's test easily confirm this, showing significantly more resolution obtained by 24mp FF with 50 f1.4 (3262, 2980, 2861) than 16mp m43 with 25/1.4 (2844, 2280, 1660), at F4 the difference is even more significant. if you look at DXO, D600 + 50/1.4 vs EM5 + 24 /1.4, D600 produces image with 16mp effective resolution while EM5 produces 11mp (both at F1.4).

Furthermore, 50 /1.4G is not a particularly sharp lens wide open, my original comment was made to 50 /1.8G, but I know the very reason you avoided comparing F1.8G is because every comparison you can find with 1.8G would confirm my position. the only test which, could be misconstrued as not supporting my position - lensrental - does not have 1.8G test data.

On the other hand m43 with 25 / 0.95 and 42.5/ 0.95 are very soft wideopen by FF standard.

Did that catch your tongue?

Digital lenses just seem to be of higher quality. It's a half thing. For the same quality the digital lenses are half the size, half the weight, and half the cost. LOL

Exactly the otherway around again.

M43 lenses of the same image quality - which has to mean equivalent aperture - are often heavier, larger and significantly more expensive than FF lenses. again, compare m43 25 / 0.95 vs Nikon 50 F1.8G.

So which FF Nikkors would you recommend as equivalent to the lenses I am currently using?

Samyang 7.5/3.5 FE

Samyang 8mm FE, same price, 12mm FOV in DX mode.

Oly 12/2

Pany 20/1.7

Oly 45/1.8

Pany 14-45/3.5-5.6

24-85VR for all above and save yourself a lot of money.

Or you can be pursue IQ and DOF light years beyond m43's reach by buying a 24-70 and 85 F1.8.

Pany 7-14/4

exact equivalent doesnt exist because no one would buy a 14-28 F8 lens. Tokina 16-28 is very close in overall FOV but 3 stops faster, all for less money. Then there is 14-24 or Samyang 14 F2.8 if you must have 14mm FOV.

Both very soft at f/2.8...

Oly 40-150/4-5.6

Oly 75/1.8

80-200 F2.8, but that is an overkill.

compare to Panny 35-100 photozone.de

Pany 100-300/4-5.6

Prove it…lets see your shots...

Oh yeah, the "FL control" argument. Lets put it this way. If you actually shoot anything fast moving with long lens, a Canon 70D + 400 F5.6 or 100-400L is much more powerful in practice than any m43 body with any m43 telephoto lens.

Lol…compared to what, I have owned the Canon 7d and 100-400..HUGE and CUMBERSOME, and not that great…at $2500+ and a 400 f/5.6 for $1340…a m43 100-300 is much much cheaper...

Most folks buy m43 for size and convenience…and the IQ is very comparable to 7D...

Nikon does not excel in telephoto generally, their "bang for buck" telephoto lense are very limited. If you just want more reach for less money, buy a Canon SX50. If you argue that you must have 16mp behind a 300mm lens and the sensor must be no smaller than m43, my advice is stick to m43.

FZ200 with a TC is actually better than the SX50...

-- hide signature --

--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

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