OMD E-M1 vs Sony A-7, What's the Difference?

Started Oct 23, 2013 | Discussions
Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 40,751
I think you need to learn a little about photography.

Michael Kaufman wrote:

larsbc wrote:

Michael Kaufman wrote:

The idea is that in bright sunlight, you sometimes have to open your lens wider in order to get a correct exposure with your camera's maximum shutter speed. Sometimes doing this makes you DOF too narrow for whatever it is you are trying to take a picture of.

In this situation, a smaller sensor is an advantage because of its larger DOF at a given aperture.

You can add also a ND filter to fix this in the larger sensor, but you don't have to with the smaller sensor.

I think you might have things backwards. Adding an ND filter will require you to open your aperture wider, thereby narrowing your DoF.

Think of the case where you want to take a shot at F4 to have sufficient DOF for your composition. Its so bright that you need a 1/8000 shutter speed. Your camera only goes to 1/2000, so you shoot a F2 and 1/2000 instead and have a narrower DOF then you want.

Um, no.  You would shoot f/8, not f/2.  As explained, you are getting things exactly backwards.

You could add a 2 stop ND filter and go back to F4 and 1/2000, or if you had a smaller sensor, you could shoot at F2 and have sufficient DOF.

I think that's right.

It is not.

IMO the increased DoF argument applies more for low light scenarios.

It also works in low light. Sometimes its an advantage to be able to get more DOF at a wider F-stop.

The full-framers' retort, though, is that they can shoot at higher ISOs which means they can still use smaller apertures to get the same DoF as the m43 camera shooting wide open.

It's not a "retort", but what a competent photographer would do.

I wasn't arguing one way or the other, I was just explaining why someone might be happy with more DOF.

Please spend a little time understanding your error.

Ulric Veteran Member • Posts: 4,532
Re: It really depends which lens you compare with.

Clayton1985 wrote:

Ulric wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

Comparing the standard zoom the difference isn't that big. Ditto for the F1.4 vs F1.8 prime.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#482.336,487.393,ha,t

Oops, you managed to - by accident, I'm sure - pick the wrong comparison again. Here, let me help you with a compact M43 alternative:

http://camerasize.com/compact/#487.393,387.397,ha,t

It seems like something is still not quite right but I think I have it fixed now.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#387.397,487.360,ha,t

Only one final tweak, if you don't mind...

http://camerasize.com/compact/#387.397,487.360,375.360,ha,t

After all,the APS-C NEX-6 is both smaller and cheaper and will realize the full potential of the APS-C lens.

 Ulric's gear list:Ulric's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus PEN-F Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ +13 more
Ulric Veteran Member • Posts: 4,532
Re: Lenses look about the same to me...

blue_skies wrote:

Ulric wrote:

blue_skies wrote:

The A7r has 36Mp as well as CIZ. 36Mp allows for a 2x zoom, and CIZ would double this again.

CIZ is digital zoom, right? So the original 36 MP resolution becomes ~2 MP.

No, CIZ is a 'pattern enhancer'. It extrapolates the image information by using heuristics, and it can work surprisingly well. Some times it fails, but often it does work almost as good as high-end up-samplling software programs do - those do not extrapolate, but 'add' new data.

Using CIZ does not lower the resolution, but it can lower the IQ.

That sounds exactly like a description of digital zoom, for example the "digital teleconverter" in Olympus cameras.

 Ulric's gear list:Ulric's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus PEN-F Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ +13 more
nzmacro
nzmacro Forum Pro • Posts: 15,135
I could make either work for sure

captura wrote:

M43 vs FF full-frame. Same size and weight.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#482,487

1. The sensor is 4x bigger.

2. Depth of field is radically different.

3.

Yeah I could make both work mate, my legacy lenses don't really care what's behind them. I'm sort of lucky that way, in that I can just simply swap bodies and formats.

I look at it as another string in the bow. I can now easily go full frame, APS-C or m4/3 with mirrorless. Does it get any better

The EM1 is IMO a superb camera for what I need and so is the NEX, add in a FF option and I'm in heaven.

Having said that, if I wanted AF and top of the line optically superb lenses, I could go the 4/3 lens route as well with the EM1. Of course the NEX and the A7, A7r have the ability to use the fast PDAF adaptors to suit Sony SLT lenses and that's a huge bonus as well.

Personally I didn't buy m4/3 or NEX because they were small, I bought them as a digital back to suit my lenses only.

So I can see all sides to this and times are just getting better and better with the choices we have now days. It comes down to what format people want and need, size comes into it for a lot of people, IBIS is important to some and fast AF to others. So I'm pretty lucky in none of those actually interest me. Makes my life easy mate

All the best and APS-C suits me at the moment. As I always say, the image couldn't care less what took it, it just exists.

Danny.

-- hide signature --
wolfie
wolfie Veteran Member • Posts: 3,750
Anyone can make a small body - the lenses will still be FF sized (nt)
-- hide signature --

Shoot the Light fantastic

 wolfie's gear list:wolfie's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M5 II Nikon 1 AW1 Olympus 40-150mm F2.8 Pro Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +1 more
RealPancho
RealPancho Senior Member • Posts: 1,313
Re: Unneccesary angst Re: OMD E-M1 vs Sony A-7, What's the Difference?
1

plevyadophy wrote:

As women often say, "it ain't the size, it's what you do with it that counts".

I think this is what men convince themselves that women say. I think they really want both quality and quantity.

-- hide signature --

Frank

 RealPancho's gear list:RealPancho's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS3 Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +6 more
larsbc Forum Pro • Posts: 14,667
Re: increased DOF

Michael Kaufman wrote:

larsbc wrote:

I think you might have things backwards. Adding an ND filter will require you to open your aperture wider, thereby narrowing your DoF.

Think of the case where you want to take a shot at F4 to have sufficient DOF for your composition. Its so bright that you need a 1/8000 shutter speed. Your camera only goes to 1/2000, so you shoot a F2 and 1/2000 instead and have a narrower DOF then you want.

You're saying that f/4 @ 1/8000 will provide the right exposure.  But your camera's max. shutter speed is 1/2000.

Here's a listing of aperture/shutter speed combinations that would equal f/4 @ 1/8000 sec:

f/2    @ 1/32,000

f/2.8 @ 1/16,000

f/4    @ 1/8,000

f/5.6 @ 1/4,000

f/8    @ 1/2,000

Basically, the larger (numerically smaller) your aperture, the faster the shutter speed you need to use.  So if f/4 requires a shutter speed beyond your camera's abilities, using f/2 isn't going to improve things at all.

You need to use f/8 in order to use the camera's fastest shutter speed of 1/2000 sec.

You could add a 2 stop ND filter and go back to F4 and 1/2000, or if you had a smaller sensor, you could shoot at F2 and have sufficient DOF.

Since you've got the relationship between change in aperture vs. change in shutter speed backwards, the above point no longer has meaning.

I think that's right.

Have a look at this DIY exposure dial to see the relationship between aperture and shutter speed:

IMO the increased DoF argument applies more for low light scenarios.

It also works in low light. Sometimes its an advantage to be able to get more DOF at a wider F-stop.

Exactly what I was saying.

The full-framers' retort, though, is that they can shoot at higher ISOs which means they can still use smaller apertures to get the same DoF as the m43 camera shooting wide open.

I wasn't arguing one way or the other, I was just explaining why someone might be happy with more DOF.

What I meant by that is this: this advantage of more DoF at a wider aperture doesn't take into consideration the fact that the 135 format sensor typically has better high ISO performance than the micro four-thirds sensor.  So, while the m43 shooter might maxed out using f/1.4 @ ISO 3200, the 135 format shooter might be able to shoot the same scene using f/2.8 @ ISO 12,800.  This would result in similar DoF and image quality.

Michael Kaufman
Michael Kaufman Senior Member • Posts: 2,714
Re: I think you need to learn a little about photography.

Great Bustard wrote:

Um, no. You would shoot f/8, not f/2. As explained, you are getting things exactly backwards.

Please spend a little time understanding your error.

Oops, you are correct, I got it backwards. Brain fart.

Thanks for being so polite in pointing this out.

 Michael Kaufman's gear list:Michael Kaufman's gear list
Fujifilm X100F Olympus PEN-F Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Rokinon 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye CS +3 more
Domagoj Batinic Contributing Member • Posts: 534
Re: The truth about the A7's large size.

Lab D wrote:

The E-M1 grip is slightly larger than the A7 and I prefer the Canon grips over both. Of course we already know the A7 doesn't focus as fast the E-M1 and can't do what a DSLR can do.

Now about that size....

http://camerasize.com/compact/#487.395,380.306,ha,t

It is too close to other FF cameras that will function better.

i have compared side by side my e-m5 with a7 at local photo fair last weekend and a7 is just slightly bigger,about 1cm wider and 5-6mm taller

-- hide signature --

my gear:
E-M5+45mm/1.8
E-520+12-60+14-42+70-300+Sigma 105 + FL-50R+EC20 + SRF-11
and good number of legacy lenses (list in profile)

 Domagoj Batinic's gear list:Domagoj Batinic's gear list
Olympus C-8080 Wide Zoom Olympus C-2000 Zoom Olympus D-620L Olympus SP-560 UZ Olympus SP-550 UZ +11 more
TheEngineer Regular Member • Posts: 360
Re: Unneccesary angst Re: OMD E-M1 vs Sony A-7, What's the Difference?

RealPancho wrote:

plevyadophy wrote:

As women often say, "it ain't the size, it's what you do with it that counts".

I think this is what men convince themselves that women say. I think they really want both quality and quantity.

Who cares?

 TheEngineer's gear list:TheEngineer's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Olympus OM-D E-M10 Olympus PEN E-PL2 Olympus PEN E-PL3 Olympus E-510 +13 more
Art_P
Art_P Veteran Member • Posts: 9,875
Really?
1

And I suppose a Range Rover HSE is in direct competition w a Porsche 911, since they are very close in price. Or maybe Porsche has to worry about something like this? http://www.rockanddirt.com/equipment-for-sale/CATERPILLAR/950H/invnum=36608146

Hey, it's got four wheels and in the same price range.

-- hide signature --

Art P
"I am a creature of contrast,
of light and shadow.
I live where the two play together,
I thrive on the conflict"

 Art_P's gear list:Art_P's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 +2 more
Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 40,751
Re: I think you need to learn a little about photography.

Michael Kaufman wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

Um, no. You would shoot f/8, not f/2. As explained, you are getting things exactly backwards.

Please spend a little time understanding your error.

Oops, you are correct, I got it backwards. Brain fart.

No worries.

Thanks for being so polite in pointing this out.

I reread my posts, and I did come off as snippy.  My apologies.

Michael Kaufman
Michael Kaufman Senior Member • Posts: 2,714
Re: I think you need to learn a little about photography.

Great Bustard wrote:

Michael Kaufman wrote:

Great Bustard wrote:

Um, no. You would shoot f/8, not f/2. As explained, you are getting things exactly backwards.

Please spend a little time understanding your error.

Oops, you are correct, I got it backwards. Brain fart.

No worries.

Thanks for being so polite in pointing this out.

I reread my posts, and I did come off as snippy. My apologies.

No problem.

 Michael Kaufman's gear list:Michael Kaufman's gear list
Fujifilm X100F Olympus PEN-F Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Rokinon 7.5mm F3.5 UMC Fisheye CS +3 more
jtan163 Senior Member • Posts: 2,265
Re: OMD E-M1 vs Sony A-7, What's the Difference?

Banger wrote:

1, OK ..but no big deal with newer technology. IQ probably very close, more dependent on particular lens used rather than anything else. I suspect Canikon are starting to get worried, particularly Nikon as the Sony is likely using the same D800 (sony) sensor.

And Sigma and Tamron, to a perhaps lesser extent, have been banging out some nice lenses lately - which may overcome one area where Sony's systems have been a bit lacking previously.

 jtan163's gear list:jtan163's gear list
Nikon D750 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Nikon D4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm 1:1.8 +7 more
BubbaHotepUK Regular Member • Posts: 469
Re: OMD E-M1 vs Sony A-7, What's the Difference?

Indeed, the IQ on my GX7 is noticeably worse than my 2-year old NEX-5N.  I'm not saying that the GX7 is a worse camera, it isn't, but in pure IQ terms m4/3 has a way to go.

 BubbaHotepUK's gear list:BubbaHotepUK's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX100 IV Panasonic FZ1000 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Canon EOS 70D +5 more
CharlesB58 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,731
Re: Really?

Art_P wrote:

And I suppose a Range Rover HSE is in direct competition w a Porsche 911, since they are very close in price. Or maybe Porsche has to worry about something like this? http://www.rockanddirt.com/equipment-for-sale/CATERPILLAR/950H/invnum=36608146

Hey, it's got four wheels and in the same price range.

-- hide signature --

Art P
"I am a creature of contrast,
of light and shadow.
I live where the two play together,
I thrive on the conflict"

I agree with you Art. However, just accept the fact that sensor size and price are the only ways some people compare cameras. Maybe AF speed for some (which, given the rep for Sony's hybrid AF on the NEX cameras, and no apparent, substantial improvement demonstrated yet on the A7, that factor alone would give some people cause to prefer the EM1).

-- hide signature --

If, in my lifetime, I will have produced just one image that makes a real difference in the life of another, I will have achieved my highest goal as a photographer.
http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/
http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

CharlesB58 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,731
Re: The truth about the A7's large size.

Lab D wrote:

captura wrote:

Banger wrote:

1, OK ..but no big deal with newer technology. IQ probably very close, more dependent on particular lens used rather than anything else. I suspect Canikon are starting to get worried, particularly Nikon as the Sony is likely using the same D800 (sony) sensor.

2. Sure, paper thin DOF easier if that's where you get your jollies, but most folks are more interested in the benefits of greater DOF with u4/3 & APSc.

True enough. I thought the DOF with APS-C was a good compromise, but now NEX is dead.

3. Body size comparable, but Sony requires 35mm sized lenses, and that is a very big heavy deal, particularly if you want f2.8 or wider lenses.

The Zeiss EF FF lenses I handled, a 35mm/2.8 and a 50/1.8 were sureprizingly smalll. Longer lenses will be large. Old E-mount APSC lenses still work OK, but only 10mp on A7 and 16 mp on A7r.

and ???

Rob

The E-M1 grip is slightly larger than the A7 and I prefer the Canon grips over both. Of course we already know the A7 doesn't focus as fast the E-M1 and can't do what a DSLR can do.

Now about that size....

http://camerasize.com/compact/#487.395,380.306,ha,t

It is too close to other FF cameras that will function better.

Try 24-70 comparison:

http://camerasize.com/compact/#487.393,380.367,ha,t

But with the 70-200 the difference is less:

http://camerasize.com/compact/#487.393,380.367,ha,t

Still, the question remains of the performance, construction and durability of both the cameras and the lenses. Especially the lenses, as Zeiss lenses (such as the 55 f1.8 vs the cheapo Canon 50 f1.8) are built like tanks and almost invariably offer some of the best optical performance available.

Of course, there are other things some photographers would consider in comparison, such as video performance, and some may even prefer an EVF to OVF, but such esoterics are seldom considered by the , ahem, "unwashed masses" who have been conditioned to think only in terms of sensor size as the measure for deciding on a camera.

-- hide signature --

If, in my lifetime, I will have produced just one image that makes a real difference in the life of another, I will have achieved my highest goal as a photographer.
http://ikkens.zenfolio.com/
http://sarob-w.deviantart.com/

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads