Reading mode: Light Dark

Are the new M43 cameras too heavy, or is there an optimal weight?

Go to last post
Jan Chelminski said:
SteveY80 said:
Jan Chelminski said:
"*I assume that's what you mean, otherwise you're effectively saying that the iPhone's f/1.8 lens is no different to an f/1.8 lens for a medium format camera. That would just be silly."

Yes, it would be silly, because it would imply an inability to understand the implications of an elementary photographic concept, RELATIVE APERTURE, something even a precocious child photographer could grasp.
Click to expand...
The relative aperture doesn't tell you anything about the difference in results you can expect between the iPhone and medium format. Equivalence does.
Click to expand...
This grows tiresome.
Click to expand...
Your asinine trolling certain does.
 
panther fan said:
jeffharris said:
Sergey_Green said:
jeffharris said:
panther fan said:
If you care about low ISO and shutter speed, than you understand the concept, that FF offers better ISO performance and therefore can handle the lower F-Stop.
Click to expand...
Sure, I understand the concept…

Do you understand this one…
Click to expand...
Indeed, just imagine how big would the 12-35 be if it was f1.4, and optically superb by every comparison. Would it be of the same size you think?
Click to expand...
Sure, at f1.4 the 12-35mm would be bigger. But at f1.4, they'd BOTH be a LOT BIGGER.

But, these are both f2.8 lenses.
Click to expand...
Your trolling is so obvious. Don’t you care that you create real harm by denying equivalency?
Click to expand...
Trolling? That's a good one. How the heck is that trolling? Who's denying equivalency?

Certainly, a bigger sensor than a M4/3 sensor will give you shallower depth of field. That's obvious. Everyone here will certainly agree.

Two lenses with f2.8 apertures designed for different sized sensors will still have f2.8 apertures. A M4/3 lens with an f2.8 aperture doesn't magically become an f5.6 aperture. Nor does a 135 format lens with an f2.8 aperture become an f1.4 aperture. To say otherwise is ludicrous and self-deception bordering on delusion.
 
Last edited:
jeffharris said:
panther fan said:
jeffharris said:
Sergey_Green said:
jeffharris said:
panther fan said:
If you care about low ISO and shutter speed, than you understand the concept, that FF offers better ISO performance and therefore can handle the lower F-Stop.
Click to expand...
Sure, I understand the concept…

Do you understand this one…
Click to expand...
Indeed, just imagine how big would the 12-35 be if it was f1.4, and optically superb by every comparison. Would it be of the same size you think?
Click to expand...
Sure, at f1.4 the 12-35mm would be bigger. But at f1.4, they'd BOTH be a LOT BIGGER.

But, these are both f2.8 lenses.
Click to expand...
Your trolling is so obvious. Don’t you care that you create real harm by denying equivalency?
Click to expand...
Trolling? That's a good one. How the heck is that trolling? Who's denying equivalency?

Certainly, a bigger sensor than a M4/3 sensor will give you shallower depth of field. That's obvious. Everyone here will certainly agree.

Two lenses with f2.8 apertures designed for different sized sensors will still have f2.8 apertures. A M4/3 lens with an f2.8 aperture doesn't magically become an f5.6 aperture. Nor does a 135 format lens with an f2.8 aperture become an f1.4 aperture. To say otherwise is ludicrous and self-deception bordering on delusion.
Click to expand...
You know that nobody here is saying that one f-stop magically transforms into another. This kind of disingenuous comment is exactly why you get accused of trolling in these threads.
 
SteveY80 said:
jeffharris said:
panther fan said:
jeffharris said:
Sergey_Green said:
jeffharris said:
panther fan said:
If you care about low ISO and shutter speed, than you understand the concept, that FF offers better ISO performance and therefore can handle the lower F-Stop.
Click to expand...
Sure, I understand the concept…

Do you understand this one…
Click to expand...
Indeed, just imagine how big would the 12-35 be if it was f1.4, and optically superb by every comparison. Would it be of the same size you think?
Click to expand...
Sure, at f1.4 the 12-35mm would be bigger. But at f1.4, they'd BOTH be a LOT BIGGER.

But, these are both f2.8 lenses.
Click to expand...
Your trolling is so obvious. Don’t you care that you create real harm by denying equivalency?
Click to expand...
Trolling? That's a good one. How the heck is that trolling? Who's denying equivalency?

Certainly, a bigger sensor than a M4/3 sensor will give you shallower depth of field. That's obvious. Everyone here will certainly agree.

Two lenses with f2.8 apertures designed for different sized sensors will still have f2.8 apertures. A M4/3 lens with an f2.8 aperture doesn't magically become an f5.6 aperture. Nor does a 135 format lens with an f2.8 aperture become an f1.4 aperture. To say otherwise is ludicrous and self-deception bordering on delusion.
Click to expand...
You know that nobody here is saying that one f-stop magically transforms into another. This kind of disingenuous comment is exactly why you get accused of trolling in these threads.
Click to expand...
I agree. The trolling by equivalence deniers is getting through the roof and is poisoning this forum.
 
NCV said:
panther fan said:
jeffharris said:
Sergey_Green said:
jeffharris said:
panther fan said:
If you care about low ISO and shutter speed, than you understand the concept, that FF offers better ISO performance and therefore can handle the lower F-Stop.
Click to expand...
Sure, I understand the concept…

Do you understand this one…
Click to expand...
Indeed, just imagine how big would the 12-35 be if it was f1.4, and optically superb by every comparison. Would it be of the same size you think?
Click to expand...
Sure, at f1.4 the 12-35mm would be bigger. But at f1.4, they'd BOTH be a LOT BIGGER.

But, these are both f2.8 lenses.
Click to expand...
Your trolling is so obvious. Don’t you care that you create real harm by denying equivalency?
Click to expand...
Harm by denying equivalency? You must be joking.

"Equivancy" is just a stupid little fake science game the FF trollers play.
Click to expand...
There is nothing "fake" about equivalence. The only thing "fake" is your belief that it is solely a tool for full frame trolls. I am almost done switching to a m4/3 system specifically because I understand equivalence.
Member said:
--
http://nigelvoak.blogspot.it/
Click to expand...
 
jeffharris said:
Sergey_Green said:
jeffharris said:
panther fan said:
If you care about low ISO and shutter speed, than you understand the concept, that FF offers better ISO performance and therefore can handle the lower F-Stop.
Click to expand...
Sure, I understand the concept…

Do you understand this one…
Click to expand...
Indeed, just imagine how big would the 12-35 be if it was f1.4, and optically superb by every comparison. Would it be of the same size you think?
Click to expand...
Sure, at f1.4 the 12-35mm would be bigger. But at f1.4, they'd BOTH be a LOT BIGGER.

But, these are both f2.8 lenses.
jeffharris said:
jeffharris said:
1beefbb0327f4f4d9b13c17b31fff27a.jpg
Click to expand...
--
- sergey
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Well I have both and I know fore sure that the Nikon has a 77mm filter thread and the Panasonic has a 58 mm

Furthermore I know that the area of a circle is propotional to r^2

And that there are flat earthers that don’t believe this
 
Jan Chelminski said:
This grows tiresome.

Oxford Dictionary, equivalence:

"The condition of being equal or equivalent in value, worth, function, etc."

Therefore, the concept of 'Equivalence', only has value from a perspective of bias, and is disqualified, except for its (intended) use, as an epithet.
Click to expand...
M4/3 Dictionary, equivalence:

"Two people yelling at each other in a dark, dreary alley."

Who here besides me actually stops reading a post or sometimes even an entire thread when the word "equivalence" is encountered?
 
SteveY80 said:
jeffharris said:
panther fan said:
jeffharris said:
Sergey_Green said:
jeffharris said:
panther fan said:
If you care about low ISO and shutter speed, than you understand the concept, that FF offers better ISO performance and therefore can handle the lower F-Stop.
Click to expand...
Sure, I understand the concept…

Do you understand this one…
Click to expand...
Indeed, just imagine how big would the 12-35 be if it was f1.4, and optically superb by every comparison. Would it be of the same size you think?
Click to expand...
Sure, at f1.4 the 12-35mm would be bigger. But at f1.4, they'd BOTH be a LOT BIGGER.

But, these are both f2.8 lenses.
Click to expand...
Your trolling is so obvious. Don’t you care that you create real harm by denying equivalency?
Click to expand...
Trolling? That's a good one. How the heck is that trolling? Who's denying equivalency?

Certainly, a bigger sensor than a M4/3 sensor will give you shallower depth of field. That's obvious. Everyone here will certainly agree.

Two lenses with f2.8 apertures designed for different sized sensors will still have f2.8 apertures. A M4/3 lens with an f2.8 aperture doesn't magically become an f5.6 aperture. Nor does a 135 format lens with an f2.8 aperture become an f1.4 aperture. To say otherwise is ludicrous and self-deception bordering on delusion.
Click to expand...
You know that nobody here is saying that one f-stop magically transforms into another. This kind of disingenuous comment is exactly why you get accused of trolling in these threads.
Click to expand...
Jeff? Jeff Harris is "trolling in these threads"?!?

Of course, you know ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yxa
nnowak said:
NCV said:
panther fan said:
jeffharris said:
Sergey_Green said:
jeffharris said:
panther fan said:
If you care about low ISO and shutter speed, than you understand the concept, that FF offers better ISO performance and therefore can handle the lower F-Stop.
Click to expand...
Sure, I understand the concept…

Do you understand this one…
Click to expand...
Indeed, just imagine how big would the 12-35 be if it was f1.4, and optically superb by every comparison. Would it be of the same size you think?
Click to expand...
Sure, at f1.4 the 12-35mm would be bigger. But at f1.4, they'd BOTH be a LOT BIGGER.

But, these are both f2.8 lenses.
Click to expand...
Your trolling is so obvious. Don’t you care that you create real harm by denying equivalency?
Click to expand...
Harm by denying equivalency? You must be joking.

"Equivancy" is just a stupid little fake science game the FF trollers play.
Click to expand...
There is nothing "fake" about equivalence. The only thing "fake" is your belief that it is solely a tool for full frame trolls. I am almost done switching to a m4/3 system specifically because I understand equivalence.
Click to expand...
Very interesting. With that frame of reference, how has equivalence helped you to choose M4/3?
 
kolyy said:
SteveY80 said:
jeffharris said:
panther fan said:
jeffharris said:
Sergey_Green said:
jeffharris said:
panther fan said:
If you care about low ISO and shutter speed, than you understand the concept, that FF offers better ISO performance and therefore can handle the lower F-Stop.
Click to expand...
Sure, I understand the concept…

Do you understand this one…
Click to expand...
Indeed, just imagine how big would the 12-35 be if it was f1.4, and optically superb by every comparison. Would it be of the same size you think?
Click to expand...
Sure, at f1.4 the 12-35mm would be bigger. But at f1.4, they'd BOTH be a LOT BIGGER.

But, these are both f2.8 lenses.
Click to expand...
Your trolling is so obvious. Don’t you care that you create real harm by denying equivalency?
Click to expand...
Trolling? That's a good one. How the heck is that trolling? Who's denying equivalency?

Certainly, a bigger sensor than a M4/3 sensor will give you shallower depth of field. That's obvious. Everyone here will certainly agree.

Two lenses with f2.8 apertures designed for different sized sensors will still have f2.8 apertures. A M4/3 lens with an f2.8 aperture doesn't magically become an f5.6 aperture. Nor does a 135 format lens with an f2.8 aperture become an f1.4 aperture. To say otherwise is ludicrous and self-deception bordering on delusion.
Click to expand...
You know that nobody here is saying that one f-stop magically transforms into another. This kind of disingenuous comment is exactly why you get accused of trolling in these threads.
Click to expand...
I agree. The trolling by equivalence deniers is getting through the roof and is poisoning this forum.
Click to expand...
Yeah! I mean, who do they think they are, pretending to be interested in camera weight.

... and boom! EQUIVALENCE!

Best check who was doing what, and when, before hanging a red T on someone.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Thomas Kachadurian
M43 reality check at Kenmore Camera
Replies
14
Views
2K
C Sean
C
Asherax
M43's and Manual Lenses
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
Tom Caldwell
T
Adrian Harris
Are modern cameras too good for...
2 3 4
Replies
74
Views
1K
Sam Bennett
Sam Bennett
wizofoz
Looking for begginers help
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
wizofoz
wizofoz
N
Can not decide between fuji or m43
Replies
7
Views
503
Mountaingrapher
M

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top