Canon's release of 600/800mm f11 lenses PROVES you don't need Cannons!

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
OP MHshooter Contributing Member • Posts: 622
Re: What are you going to do ...

Mark Ransom wrote:

MHshooter wrote:

Mark Ransom wrote:

Sranang Boi wrote:

jwilliams wrote:

Simon97 wrote:

If I were a Canon FF or even APSC user (I was an APSC user once), I would never consider such a slow long lens. For wildlife, shooting under the sun doesn't result in the most flattering images, I like shooting in overcast days to avoid the contrasty shadows. For sports, the shutter speed would be too slow. This would make these lenses pointless to me. Why they didn't go with f/8 is beyond me. Still slow, but with the DO optics, they still can be reasonably small.

What are you going to do in the m43 world then? There isn't a m43 400 faster than f5.6 which is exactly the same as f11 on FF. You want faster than that lens then you can get it in FF, but not in m43 as nothing exists. These are reasonably priced, reasonably sized lenses. They give FF shooters an alternative to the bigger, faster, heavier and more expensive super teles which are readily available if desired.

f5.6 in m43 is not the same as f11 in FF. Any light meter or exposure meter will tell you that. So stop posting lies.

Change your light meter to have a 2 stop higher ISO for the FF, then tell me what it thinks the difference is.

Except that's not changing what he said. No one would intentionally underexpose 2 stops and raise it, instead of just exposing properly to begin with, if they can avoid it. So yes, you can shift ISO 2 stops higher and approximate the output of the m4/3rds, but it's still not the same.

Then what's different about it? I'm not being facetious, I'm asking an honest question. I'm not telling anybody to underexpose anything, I'm telling you that FF has 2 extra stops of ISO that can be used to compensate for a smaller aperture. The light meter is trying to balance aperture, shutter speed, and ISO and if you change one the other two will adjust to give you the same result.

The light meter in both cameras will give the same ISO, S/S and aperture.  The light meter knows nothing about noise control which is primarily the difference we are concerned with.  So all things being equal, you could shoot at two stops lower ISO with the FF, then compensate for the inevitable underexposure by raising the image 2 stops in post-processing and you would have roughly the same image from both cameras, but if you don't compensate by raising the FF images 2 stops in post, it will be underexposed.

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