In today’s mirrorless environment how do you justify ignoring equivalence?

Started 1 month ago | Questions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
nickels25 Regular Member • Posts: 227
In today’s mirrorless environment how do you justify ignoring equivalence?
7

Hello,

Before anyone jumps down my throat for asking this question, I absolutely love the m4/3 system and have a lot of gear to validate that. I’ve also been invested with Nikon FF in the past and understand the pros/cons of each systems with sensor sizes, etc. I’m hoping to not start an equivalence war, but more simply explore this topic more. I believe equivalence has become much more relevant as FF mirrorless advances to get similar cost, weight, and size to their systems. Discussing this question in a civil manner may also help me NOT justify moving my investment in photography gear to another FF mirrorless brand. I want to stay with Olympus until the absolute end....However, I’m more loyal to my images and trying to get the best image possible in any given moment with the camera in my hand. (Unfortunately, I cant afford two systems, so that’s not even an option for me - I wouldn’t be asking this question if I could).:

Can someone help me understand the concept that I’ve read in many different m4/3’s threads that the equivalence of the aperture value doesn’t matter with the smaller sensor size of m4/3 cameras? (For example, “f2.8 is f2.8”).

Assuming it’s a given that you are speaking about getting the best image quality in that moment of pressing the shutter (with whatever camera you have), and realizing that equivalent FF mirrorless setups are beginning to cost and weigh very close to top-line m4/3 systems, I believe the equivalency of the aperture value does matter as people invest in systems.

Simply basing taking an image on shutter, aperture, and ISO settings: If I find myself in a situation where I want to photograph an image but can’t open up the lens wider (due to limitations of the lens) or can’t raise the ISO higher (for fear of noise effecting the image), to get the shot I imagine; hasn’t my camera and investment in the gear failed me (for that specific image), when another system could have provided me that opportunity to capture what I wanted/envisioned?

I switched from DSLR FF simply for the fact in being able to carry all my gear with me and not be weighed down with my Nikon and F mount lenses. However, again, as FF systems get closer to m4/3 pro systems in regard to size, weight, and cost for the body/lenses (which will get me the same/similar apertures and focal lengths), I don’t know how simply saying “f2.8 is f2.8” is justified anymore.

Can anybody provide insight into what I’m missing with this concept? ...be nice....Again, I personally feel this is a legit question when we are just considering the aperture, ISO, and shutter speeds of taking an image (which are the primary foundations of any image taking device and the most crucial measurements in creating the image you imagine).

 nickels25's gear list:nickels25's gear list
Nikon Coolpix AW100 Apple iPhone 7 Plus
ANSWER:
This question has not been answered yet.
Olympus E-M1
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Dan
Dan
NCV
NCV
sbu
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow