V1/V2 vs OM-D E-M10 (take 2)

Started Apr 6, 2014 | Discussions thread
dougjgreen1 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,543
Re: Not to mention all those great fast M4/3 prime lenses

IVN wrote:

dougjgreen1 wrote:

IVN wrote:

dougjgreen1 wrote:

BarnET wrote:

dougjgreen1 wrote:

Nikon 1 has 3 primes, which can be described as:

1) an inexpensive 10mm f2.8 pancake wide angle - basically comparable to the Panasonic 14mm f2.5

The Pana is faster and the sensor is nearly double the surface area.

I agree - so? The Nikon lens is also less expensive

Let's agree to this: the Nikon is less expensive, but also worse in terms of light gathering power, and more than a stop worse in terms of DOF control and high ISO (because mFT sensors have a 1 stop advantage here).

I agree that neither one of these lenses is of any use for DOF control, and the lens has nothing to do with the relative sensitivity of the sensor.

And you can use the the lens without the sensor? Fact is, on the mFT sensor Nocti is a faster lens then 32/1.2 on the 1" sensor. It really doesn't matter how you put it: f/1.2 on mFT is not the same as f/1.2 on 1". And that was your whole point. You were saying that 32mm f/1.2 and Nocti were comparable lenses, because they both have f/1.2, weren't you?

Frankly most folks would be using a lens like these in situations where MORE DOF is being sought, not less. So that would give the edge to the Nikon.

How so? You can stop down the Nocti by one more stop, use a one more stop higher ISO and essentially get the same DOF and IQ of the N1 system. So where is the advantage? There is non.

Once you stop down to f8 or more, you're in the land of diffraction, with either of these systems.

The advantages for Nikon 1 are, much smaller, much lighter, and $700 left in your bank account.

And if you don't care about that size advantage, you should be using something bigger than Micro 4/3 in any case.  Your claims that the Nocticron suddenly makes m4/3 cameras superior to APS-C cameras in this regard are, quite simply, erroneous.   And I am a Micro 4/3 user.

And regarding the assumption that people would prefer more DOF: you are simply wrong!

While one can stop down the lens to get more DOF, you can't open the aperture any more, than what the lens provides. When shooting close portraits with faces filling the frame, you can stop the Nocti down to achieve sufficient DOF. But when shooting head and shoulder or entire body portraiture, you can't get the same shallow DOF with the 32mm that you could with the Nocti.

0 advantage for the 32mm.

3) The 32mm f1.2 - very fast portrait length lens, - comparable to the Leica Nocticron 42.5mm f1.2

LMAO, never heard of light gathering, O.I.S.

Both lenses are f1.2.

Even so, the 16MP mFT sensor has an advantage of around 1 stop, so in practice the Nocti is a faster lens than the 32mm.

No, in practice, the SENSOR is faster. Not the lens.

The lens can't be used w/o the sensor. And in this case the mFT is simply larger, providing for the possibility of shallower DOF with the Nocit, than one could achieve with the 32mm and N1 camera.

And since the sensor has a 1 stop high ISO advantage, one can also shoot in 2x lower light with same aperture, and double ISO, while essentially getting the same IQ as the N1 setup. Even more with static subjects, where the mFT setup can profit from stabilization, which the N1 setup does not have.

Again, the mFT setup has an advantage, while the N1 setup does not.

In the sense that in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

I was not referring to depth of field, I WAS referring to light gathering - which is the same for any f1.2 lens.

How convenient that you weren't referring to DOF. DOF happens to be a very important factor for portrait lenses.

I agree, but since I find that the 45mm f1.8 to be more than sufficient in this regard (also the Sigma 60mm f2.8, which is what I actually use), therefore so is the 32mm f1.2.

Yes, but it costs much, much more.

The Nocticron is overkill for this purpose. An frankly, it's priced at a level where as far as I'm concerned, it might as well not exist. If I actually found extremely shallow DOF to be an issue for a specific portrait requirement, I'd buy a cheap APS-C DSLR and an 85mm f1.8 lens, together (or perhaps the manual focus Samyang 85mm f1.4) for half the price of the Nocticron, rather than mis-use a small sensor camera with a ridiculously priced lens for that specific purpose, when a dedicated solution with APS-C could be had for ~ $800 or so.

Objection! The 85/1.8 Nikkor is not that good on APSC sensors. It suffers from pretty strong CAs and bokeh fringing. While it is cheaper, it is not on the same level of IQ as the Nocti, nor does it cover the same FL on an APSC body.

But regardless, if shallow DOF is really needed, one could use the Voigt 42.5/0.95, which would offer a more neutral FL for portraits and even better DOF control than 85/1.8 on APSC.

That's simply untrue - The New Nikkor 85mm f1.8 AF-S is quite good.  Or you could use the 50mm f1.4 AF-S which is an effective 75mm on APS-C.  In any case, if you really need very shallow DOF, Micro 4/3 is almost as wrong a system for you as Nikon 1 is.

Or better yet, don't put money in the bank, buy full frame if this is actually the specific requirement you have.

While offering better DOF control, this solution would cost more than buying a lens for mFT, if you already have a mFT camera. And as we all know, money doesn't grow on trees.

Don't mis-use a small sensor camera for a particular application that it's so ill-suited for that a freakishly expensive and ridiculously over-sized lens is the only way to make it deliver suitable results. But the proper camera for the purpose instead - and save some money in the process.

So you want to tell people what equipment to buy and how to use it?

Not sure that OIS is reason to justify a $700 higher price for the Noct. Maybe they sell the lenses by the ounce.

Or maybe the Nocti allows the mFT user to go one stop above the ISO a N1 users could use with the 32mm, while having equal IQ. It also has a stabilizer, which no N1 prime has. It has better DOF control and an aperture ring, which some people value.

But really, one should compare the Oly 45/1.8 to the Nikon 32/1.2, because they are essentially identical in all regards, except price. (think first, before you start the f/1.8 vs f/1.2 argument)

Again, if you want to keep on arguing this, how does the Nocticron stack up to any well chosen $800 APS-C body and 85mm f1.8 lens?

Pretty good. It costs more, but it also has stabilization and, judging buy the reviews, better IQ.

It's also bigger, and again, has MORE DOF than the 85mm lens on APS-C.  For double the price.

It's an inferior choice, at double the price.

It's a better but more expensive choice.

No, it'a an ALMOST as good but twice as expensive choice.

Horses for courses, and if the specific application is extreme narrow DOF portraiture, NO small sensor camera plus lens is the optimal choice, not Nikon 1,

N1 surely not.

not Micro 4/3.

This is where you are wrong.

But the better APS-C solution for this particular need, and put $500-700 in the bank instead.

I'll call you on this statement: what APSC camera and lens combination can match the DOF of a mFT body and Voigt 42.5/0.95 at lower price?

D5200  and 85mm f1.8 AF-S.   I already said so.  BTW, a MUCH lower price.

 dougjgreen1's gear list:dougjgreen1's gear list
Olympus Stylus XZ-10 Nikon 1 V2 Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-PL7 +16 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow