Full Frame vs Micro 4:3

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
BrentSchumer
BrentSchumer Senior Member • Posts: 4,154
Re: Wrong Settings in Comparison

saltydogstudios wrote:

If you really want to compare apples to apples you have to remember that depth of field changes on each sensor - assuming you want to keep an equivalent field of view etc.

At the end of the day, FF allows you to "trade" DoF for light, which is generally a very useful ability. You may not want to make that trade-off 100% of the time, but in many types of photography it's better to lose a bit of DoF than to make everything noisy. I guess you could also see it as exchanging "excess" DoF for light. E.g. F2.8 is generally a bit narrow for portraits, so getting F1.4 and extra light is a huge bonus.  You can argue that it's not a universal benefit, but not having the option for this trade-off isn't' a feature.

A way better argument for M43 in low light is the crazy stabilization for static subjects that (1) has to keep fewer MP stable and (2) outperforms many FF vendors. For example, your M43 kit of choice might beat out my FF body in low light, due to your insane IBIS (assuming the subject is not in motion).

 BrentSchumer's gear list:BrentSchumer's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Sony a7R III Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Venus Laowa 100mm F2.8 Macro Tamron 20mm F2.8 Di III OSD +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
MOD Smaug01
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow