Is my thinking about equivalence right?

Started 3 months ago | Questions thread
OP Muster Mark Contributing Member • Posts: 588
Re: No, not really ...

jwilliams wrote:

Sure. I think the point I was trying to make that you didn't pick up on is that they don't really make premium, small (dim) lenses for FF systems. To match the IQ aspects of a premium m43 lens you need to also be looking at premium lenses. The stuff that is equivalent in terms of max aperture also seems to have other flaws. That's really all I was saying. Truly equivalent lenses (and by that I mean not just aperture size but all the other aspects of the lens too) don't really exist. And it seems to me that you generally get what you pay for on any system. Of course individually one might not value the optical aspects that one maker chooses to compromise to save money etc. so person to person there are better value options or worse options.

I'd argue against the part I highlighted. The f2.5 Sony lenses are exactly the type of FF lenses that combine high IQ and reasonable size while still giving you an equivalent aperture (or better) of the fastest, largest, and most expensive lenses in m43. Sigma's new f2 lens line is similar. Tamron also has f2.8 primes for FF mirrorless. FF mirrorless does not have to mean only large heavy lenses and as time passes we'll get more modest sized lens options.

I'm not sure what you seem to think is missing in lenses like those I mentioned?

Just one example I looked up, lets look at 35mm (or similar) equiv lenses. The Sigma 35 f2 is 11.5 ounces and is definitely a premium build high performing lens. The Oly 17 1.2 (FF 34 2.4) is 13.7 ounces. The Sigma is also significantly less expensive ($639 vs $1299). Similarly Sony's 40 2.5 ($598, apparently they don't make a 35 in that line) is 6.1 ounces. I've read nothing but glowing reviews for both of those lenses. The Oly is also very good but its bigger, no faster and way more expensive.

This is the value proposition that m43 users face now that FF mirrorless is becoming widespread.

Also realize that FF mirrorless is relatively new for Canon, Nikon and even Panasonic. Initially they are concentrating more on higher performing lenses but they do have a few smaller lenses in production. Time will round out the lens lineups. It's early days in FF mirrorless except for Sony and not surprisingly that's where most of the smaller FF lenses are available (for now).

Yes, I would say the lenses you mention are getting close. The sony 50 2.5 has busy bokeh compared to the olympus and worse corner sharpness/vignetting (comparing both wide open). I'm not saying that's a huge deal or that it should matter to most people, but just that again we see the bigger more expensive optic (the m43 one) performing better, even if only marginally (though that is subjective). This lead me to my conclusion of there being no free lunch either way.

I agree though, the lenses you mention make for a compelling lower cost set up.

-- hide signature --


 Muster Mark's gear list:Muster Mark's gear list
Olympus E-3 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow