Reading mode: Light Dark

My real world experiences with mft and FF

Go to last post
Great Bustard said:
EZGritz said:
Deep DOF does have an advantage when you don't have to stop down as much.
Click to expand...
It does not. It's like saying a car with gears 4-6 has an advantage over a car with gears 1-6.
Great Bustard said:
If you soot your M43 body at f/4 and you have to use f/8 on your FF body that equalizes light gathering.
Click to expand...
*Only* if the exposure time needs to be the same, which is often not the case.
Great Bustard said:
That's what Tomas says and he's right. And it does make it easier for your AF system.
Click to expand...
He is not. Show me how an EM1.3 has better AF than a Canon R5, for example, or how an OM1 has better AF than a Z9 (not an older DSLR, like you did with the OM1 vs Canon 5D3, as I've discussed more than once). Until then, cheers!

By the way, I have to reiterate once again that I am not telling you what is better for you. However, there are facts and there are fictions, and I simply want the facts the front and center. Your preferences, however, are entirely up to you.
Click to expand...
It’s true MFT can run at lower F stops and get good depth of field, but the AF comparison is overblown here.



After shooting with my new A7RV all week, I’d bet just about anything that it’ll AF MUCH faster/better at F11 than my OM5 at F4 in the same light.
 
JKdad said:
Great Bustard said:
EZGritz said:
Deep DOF does have an advantage when you don't have to stop down as much.
Click to expand...
It does not. It's like saying a car with gears 4-6 has an advantage over a car with gears 1-6.
JKdad said:
If you soot your M43 body at f/4 and you have to use f/8 on your FF body that equalizes light gathering.
Click to expand...
*Only* if the exposure time needs to be the same, which is often not the case.
JKdad said:
That's what Tomas says and he's right. And it does make it easier for your AF system.
Click to expand...
He is not. Show me how an EM1.3 has better AF than a Canon R5, for example, or how an OM1 has better AF than a Z9 (not an older DSLR, like you did with the OM1 vs Canon 5D3, as I've discussed more than once). Until then, cheers!

By the way, I have to reiterate once again that I am not telling you what is better for you. However, there are facts and there are fictions, and I simply want the facts the front and center. Your preferences, however, are entirely up to you.
Click to expand...
It’s true MFT can run at lower F stops and get good depth of field, but the AF comparison is overblown here.

After shooting with my new A7RV all week, I’d bet just about anything that it’ll AF MUCH faster/better at F11 than my OM5 at F4 in the same light.
Click to expand...
My OM1 AFs in lower light than my A7Riv. The PDAF sensor array is different. Would you not think that lower illumination per sensor area would make AF more challenging? The OM1 does it differently, so has different constraints.

You could always test your hypothesis by using the A7Rv and OM5 at equivalent angle of view and DoF settings.

Andrew
 
ahaslett said:
JKdad said:
Great Bustard said:
EZGritz said:
Deep DOF does have an advantage when you don't have to stop down as much.
Click to expand...
It does not. It's like saying a car with gears 4-6 has an advantage over a car with gears 1-6.
ahaslett said:
If you soot your M43 body at f/4 and you have to use f/8 on your FF body that equalizes light gathering.
Click to expand...
*Only* if the exposure time needs to be the same, which is often not the case.
ahaslett said:
That's what Tomas says and he's right. And it does make it easier for your AF system.
Click to expand...
He is not. Show me how an EM1.3 has better AF than a Canon R5, for example, or how an OM1 has better AF than a Z9 (not an older DSLR, like you did with the OM1 vs Canon 5D3, as I've discussed more than once). Until then, cheers!

By the way, I have to reiterate once again that I am not telling you what is better for you. However, there are facts and there are fictions, and I simply want the facts the front and center. Your preferences, however, are entirely up to you.
Click to expand...
It’s true MFT can run at lower F stops and get good depth of field, but the AF comparison is overblown here.

After shooting with my new A7RV all week, I’d bet just about anything that it’ll AF MUCH faster/better at F11 than my OM5 at F4 in the same light.
Click to expand...
My OM1 AFs in lower light than my A7Riv. The PDAF sensor array is different. Would you not think that lower illumination per sensor area would make AF more challenging? The OM1 does it differently, so has different constraints.

You could always test your hypothesis by using the A7Rv and OM5 at equivalent angle of view and DoF settings.

Andrew
Click to expand...
 
JKdad said:
ahaslett said:
JKdad said:
Great Bustard said:
EZGritz said:
Deep DOF does have an advantage when you don't have to stop down as much.
Click to expand...
It does not. It's like saying a car with gears 4-6 has an advantage over a car with gears 1-6.
JKdad said:
If you soot your M43 body at f/4 and you have to use f/8 on your FF body that equalizes light gathering.
Click to expand...
*Only* if the exposure time needs to be the same, which is often not the case.
JKdad said:
That's what Tomas says and he's right. And it does make it easier for your AF system.
Click to expand...
He is not. Show me how an EM1.3 has better AF than a Canon R5, for example, or how an OM1 has better AF than a Z9 (not an older DSLR, like you did with the OM1 vs Canon 5D3, as I've discussed more than once). Until then, cheers!

By the way, I have to reiterate once again that I am not telling you what is better for you. However, there are facts and there are fictions, and I simply want the facts the front and center. Your preferences, however, are entirely up to you.
Click to expand...
It’s true MFT can run at lower F stops and get good depth of field, but the AF comparison is overblown here.

After shooting with my new A7RV all week, I’d bet just about anything that it’ll AF MUCH faster/better at F11 than my OM5 at F4 in the same light.
Click to expand...
My OM1 AFs in lower light than my A7Riv. The PDAF sensor array is different. Would you not think that lower illumination per sensor area would make AF more challenging? The OM1 does it differently, so has different constraints.

You could always test your hypothesis by using the A7Rv and OM5 at equivalent angle of view and DoF settings.

Andrew
Click to expand...
OM1 is a whole different thing and seems like a great camera.

I doubt I’ll test, but since my OM5 doesn’t really AF great at any aperture, I’m fairly confident I’m right.
Click to expand...
There should always be a nagging doubt until you have tested it?

Andrew
 
ahaslett said:
  1. ahaslett wrote:
JKdad said:
ahaslett said:
JKdad said:
Great Bustard said:
EZGritz said:
Deep DOF does have an advantage when you don't have to stop down as much.
Click to expand...
It does not. It's like saying a car with gears 4-6 has an advantage over a car with gears 1-6.
ahaslett said:
If you soot your M43 body at f/4 and you have to use f/8 on your FF body that equalizes light gathering.
Click to expand...
*Only* if the exposure time needs to be the same, which is often not the case.
ahaslett said:
That's what Tomas says and he's right. And it does make it easier for your AF system.
Click to expand...
He is not. Show me how an EM1.3 has better AF than a Canon R5, for example, or how an OM1 has better AF than a Z9 (not an older DSLR, like you did with the OM1 vs Canon 5D3, as I've discussed more than once). Until then, cheers!

By the way, I have to reiterate once again that I am not telling you what is better for you. However, there are facts and there are fictions, and I simply want the facts the front and center. Your preferences, however, are entirely up to you.
Click to expand...
It’s true MFT can run at lower F stops and get good depth of field, but the AF comparison is overblown here.

After shooting with my new A7RV all week, I’d bet just about anything that it’ll AF MUCH faster/better at F11 than my OM5 at F4 in the same light.
Click to expand...
My OM1 AFs in lower light than my A7Riv. The PDAF sensor array is different. Would you not think that lower illumination per sensor area would make AF more challenging? The OM1 does it differently, so has different constraints.

You could always test your hypothesis by using the A7Rv and OM5 at equivalent angle of view and DoF settings.

Andrew
Click to expand...
OM1 is a whole different thing and seems like a great camera.

I doubt I’ll test, but since my OM5 doesn’t really AF great at any aperture, I’m fairly confident I’m right.
Click to expand...
There should always be a nagging doubt until you have tested it?

Andrew
Click to expand...
Usually, unless it’s fairly obvious. My RV is in a different galaxy when it comes to AF against my OM5.

I still love that little camera though
 
Last edited:
My neighbor's Z6 would not focus in this light with his f/2.8 24-70 zoom mounted. My camera focused nearly instantly. It's a silly discussion because the room was so dark neither of us would ever take a photo in a room this dark except for this test. We wouldn't be able to see what we were photographing or what we wanted to focus the camera on. The Nikon kit was still a stop faster even though the lens is a stop slower, but it refused to focus. The EM5.3 can take a photo in the dark. With reasonably good detail and IQ at ISO5000 and standard camera NR and no third party or WS NR software in post.

Nobody needs to take a photo in the dark but this does debunk the myth that M43 is NG in low light and FF is better. With only one stop of delta it might not prove anything about DoF and AF systems in low light.

This photo would be decent if the room was well-lit. If I flipped on the light switch would it be better? Not much. I could lower the shutter speed to push the ISO to 200 without turning on a light. Sitting in a chair at 25mm I can shoot a 10-second shutter. What for?

For practical purposes, where I might take a lowlight photo, not a test, the Nikon is great for low light and my friend could have mounted an /1.2 prime if he had one. I'm not sure this is a fair fight. But he would have the DoF of a shoelace so in the light where do you focus? Where do you want to focus? Can the camera figure that out? If you want the shoes and socks in focus in this light you need a deeper DoF that is easier to achieve in low light with the smaller sensor. Thomas Eisel might be on to something.

It does show that a test can be made to make a system fail that most photographers would expect to win. I did not expect this result and neither did my friend. We just wanted to see what would happen. He knew his Z6 has trouble focusing in low light. He did not expect the EM5.3 could do this, but it did this easily and repeatably. It fast focused where I wanted it, light boosted in the EVF and I think CDAF only on contrast alone. Nothing was moving for PDAF to grab onto.

cd27fadbc21d4ecbb3164f0e38aa4866.jpg

--
Author of "The Pelican Squadron" - Harvey Gene Sherman
https://www.amazon.com/Pelican-Squadron-Tale-Internet-Bubble-ebook/dp/B08FCY6V7Y
 
Last edited:
There is a wild card that can be used on M4/3 bodies. The Pentax DA 70/2.4 Limited lens. Pretty sharp and it is compact if you leave the built in hood unattached. Arguably it competes with the great Olympus 75/1.8 for size even when an adapter is involved.

The DA lenses are aps-c image circle and are electronic with no aperture ring.

Therefore there is no aperture control other than the twist ring manual connection of PK(A) adapters. I would hardly classify it as a direct competitor to the 75/1.8 but it is not a bad lens on a yardstick of standards.

It does have the advantage that it can also be focal reduced to put the full aps-c image circle on the 4/3 sensor. Giving it an alternative specification of 49/1.8.
 
EZGritz said:
My neighbor's Z6 would not focus in this light with his f/2.8 24-70 zoom mounted. My camera focused nearly instantly.

cd27fadbc21d4ecbb3164f0e38aa4866.jpg
Click to expand...
I just took a ["properly exposed"] test shot with my Canon EOS R at f/1.4 1/60 ISO 25600 -- instant focus. Honestly, as a personal favor, if you'd post that in a Nikon forum and PM me a link, I'd be interested to see what they have to say. I'm rather surprised that the Z6 would have such a problem focusing on that when my R would nail it instantly, and even do so in significantly worse light.
EZGritz said:
It's a silly discussion because the room was so dark neither of us would ever take a photo in a room this dark except for this test.
Click to expand...
It's silly because you think that one test is because is due to mFT having an AF advantage because it has a deeper DOF for the same f-number. You, and all who claim such, are 100% wrong.
 
Last edited:
Definatly good enough for most cell phone users. Most don't use a dedicated camera. Their standards aren't very high but on small displays they look great because you can't see anything. I don't take for or share photos with friends who only look at them on cell phones. Waste of my time and effort. Some of them complained the files are too big and they don't want to wait for them to download. Others say they look at them for half a second and delete them. I'll share cell phone photos with them but rarely because I rarely take them. To me, they aren't worth viewing so they aren't worth taking. They are just snaps. I want good photos or no photos.
 
You can grab the photo and post it yourself. You don't need me to do that, and I don't need to post it to the Canon forum. You do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jeroen1969
Personal Deep investigation in the MFT vs FF everlasting debate
6 7 8
Replies
150
Views
202
cba_melbourne
cba_melbourne
Rene Gr
Picking up my GX85 MFT again
Replies
4
Views
5
Keit ll
K
D
M43 vs Full Frame real world
6 7 8
Replies
149
Views
150
HicHic
HicHic
faunagraphy
  • Question Question
Rent FF prime + body to use alongside M43?
2
Replies
27
Views
315
James Stirling
James Stirling
manso
Pulled the Trigger on S5II - Goodbye MFT? (Maybe Not 😅)
Replies
6
Views
1K
memo90061
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