Misinformation about m4/3

Started Feb 14, 2014 | Discussions
Sergey_Green
Sergey_Green Forum Pro • Posts: 10,510
If it was only about the f-numbers ..
1

Ulric wrote:

Converting f-numbers between FF and MFT is something anyone can do on the fly in their head. It really is that trivial.

That is what you think, and that is what I would think, but we see the confused posts on this very same forum on the same subject nevertheless. And actually when changing focal lengths for framing, and adapting the shutter speeds it in fact becomes less trivial then it appears.

And besides, is not the book for those about to learn? Or why was it even a subject in the op's post.

-- hide signature --

- sergey

 Sergey_Green's gear list:Sergey_Green's gear list
Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1
danieljcox
danieljcox Contributing Member • Posts: 797
Re: Misinformation about m4/3

El Chubasco wrote:

I am taking a photography workshop and las night I found myself in a funny or frustrating situation. First, the group is about 15 people and of course, I am the only one who uses a m4/3 camera. Everyone else in the room uses nikon or canon.

Well, the funny thing started when the instructor stated that crop factor does not apply to APS sensors when you use APS designed lens. In other words, he stated that the 18mm lens of an APS canikon covers the exact same angle as if using a full frame 18mm lens in a FF camera. I tried to explain that the 18 lens in APS sensor would be close to a 28mm of FF but he refused to believe me. When I said that I use m4/3 as an example to make my point (multiplying focal length by 2) he said "well, with a micro 4/3 you have a real problem" making everyone believe that m4/3 cameras actually pose problems for photographers.

The discussion went on and it deviated in something else. I just learned that some old-fashion pros who have always used FF have no idea of what cropping factor means and how lenses compensate to sensor's size. Even worse, people have the conviction that m4/3 are "problematic" and make believe other the same. Anyway, I do not know where I am going with this, perhaps I am just venting.

Many Professionals stick with what has worked for them and then eventually miss the train of new and better opportunities. I personally feel the Micro Four Thirds option is serious alternative  for all photographers. It will just take a bit more time for people here in the states to get the message. I'm doing what I can to get the word out about the pros and cons of the current Micro Four Thirds gear. If you're interested you can read more on my Blog at http://www.naturalexposures.com/corkboard/. I'm absolutely love the Lumix GH3's I'm currently using.

 danieljcox's gear list:danieljcox's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Panasonic FZ1000 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic G85 +17 more
Sergey_Green
Sergey_Green Forum Pro • Posts: 10,510
What worked .. plus what they already have and know how to use well ..

danieljcox wrote:

Many Professionals stick with what has worked for them and then eventually miss the train of new and better opportunities. I personally feel the Micro Four Thirds option is serious alternative for all photographers. It will just take a bit more time for people here in the states to get the message. I'm doing what I can to get the word out about the pros and cons of the current Micro Four Thirds gear. If you're interested you can read more on my Blog at http://www.naturalexposures.com/corkboard/. I'm absolutely love the Lumix GH3's I'm currently using.

I think you mean this

Testing Panasonic’s Newest Micro Four Thirds Camera: The GH3

Yes, nice.
This is from the blog,

Fred Kurtz captured the beauty of the lilac breasted roller as it jumped from its perch to fly off. D4

My version of the same shot just a little behind the action. GH3

-- hide signature --

- sergey

 Sergey_Green's gear list:Sergey_Green's gear list
Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1
ernstbk
ernstbk Senior Member • Posts: 2,933
Re: If you have read it ..
1

Sergey_Green wrote:

jeffharris wrote:

Ignore the insufferable blowhard!

The book is excellent.

Tell us how it is on FT format, just few extracts

[img]

... at wide open aperture of f/4, the sunflower is isolated - in effect, it's all alone - but at f/16, due to increase in the dpeth of field, it has quite a lot of (background) company.

Looking at that picture clearly f/16 is not where the mFT aperture would be, and neither would it sufficiently isolate the sunflower at f/4 on mFT (f/8 FF equivalent).

[img]

Clearly a picture of crashing surf taken at f/4 and 1/500 sec would capture action stopping detail of the surf as it hits the rocks; a correct exposure using f/22 at 1/15 sec would capture less action stopping detail and show the surf as a far more fluid and wispy, somewhat angelic element.

Again, if this was f/22 on mFT, what would it be like with FF format? Do you even use f/22?

story-telling composition... focusing all objects from near to far... relies on maximum depth of field, you would first choose to set your aperture to f/22 and then align distance above your distane-setting mark on the lens.

Story telling at f/22 with mFT? - Wonder what else one could learn from it.

These are only random extracts, and if you truly are just learning, it will confuse jesus out of you. Even if you already do know and understand what the crop factor is, try the same shutter speed for the same framing (with different focal lengths), see how this works out for you.

No-one is saying it is not a good book, or it is not worth having, but you really have to think and understand what the settings mean, and the settings with examples is pretty much how the book goes by.

So if you do have it, what do you learn for it? Please share.

-- hide signature --

- sergey

It is a "historic" document, published in 2004, at the time when 135 film was still widely used and at at time the first 43 cameras were coming on to the market. Therefor it is no surprise that it the format is not mentioned as 135 was normal at that time. But it is still valuable if you know what changes using a smaller format.

I have another very interesting book "The 35mm Handbook" by Michael Freeman, published 1980. Even so it is 35 years old it still contains valuable information that applies to any format, not just 35mm.

 ernstbk's gear list:ernstbk's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 +28 more
Martin.au
Martin.au Forum Pro • Posts: 11,904
Re: What worked .. plus what they already have and know how to use well ..
2

Sergey_Green wrote:

danieljcox wrote:

Many Professionals stick with what has worked for them and then eventually miss the train of new and better opportunities. I personally feel the Micro Four Thirds option is serious alternative for all photographers. It will just take a bit more time for people here in the states to get the message. I'm doing what I can to get the word out about the pros and cons of the current Micro Four Thirds gear. If you're interested you can read more on my Blog at http://www.naturalexposures.com/corkboard/. I'm absolutely love the Lumix GH3's I'm currently using.

I think you mean this

Testing Panasonic’s Newest Micro Four Thirds Camera: The GH3

Yes, nice.
This is from the blog,

Fred Kurtz captured the beauty of the lilac breasted roller as it jumped from its perch to fly off. D4

My version of the same shot just a little behind the action. GH3

-- hide signature --

- sergey

Funny thing about that shot. If both shots were using the same EFL, then either both shots would be bad (if using the GH3's EFL), or good, if using the D4's wider EFL.

The actual difference in the bird's location is only about half the length of the bird.

Was that the point you were making Sergey?

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ +8 more
Michael J Davis
Michael J Davis Veteran Member • Posts: 3,352
Re: Misinformation about quotations!
2

Martin.au wrote:

Martin.au wrote:

"Those who can't do, teach." perhaps?

Wow. I didn't realise so many people would be unfamiliar with that phrase.

For information (Martin was only light-heartedly quoting an aphorism)

"He who can, does; he who cannot, teaches."

George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

Hope it helps

Mike

-- hide signature --

Mike Davis
Photographing the public for over 50 years
www.flickr.com/photos/watchman

 Michael J Davis's gear list:Michael J Davis's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +5 more
MOD Tom Caldwell Forum Pro • Posts: 31,577
Re: Tom, easy solution

Marty4650 wrote:

Tom Caldwell wrote:

So what crop factor will medium format have when it hits the popular public use trail? Or will users of medium format just read the focal length of their lenses of the the lens body and happily compare this to the focal length of everything else which is at present related back to 135 film standards on pretty well every lens in the pack.

A FF sensor is 36x24mm

The sensor in the Pentax 645D is 44x33mm

If you do the math, this means the medium format Pentax has a crop factor of 0.59.

Thanks Marty, I am a lazy sod, I thought some bright spark would work it out for me

But my point now is: if the medium Format is larger then do we make it the new "standard reference" and work all other sensors from there (hardly).  Or do we start looking at medium format lenses and start working out their true equivalent focal length on the FF sensor and then extrapolate this back to aps-c sensor to get the equivalent of  medium format on aps-c based on the FF sensor "standard".  What fun!

To cap it off it is possible to adapter medium Format lenses on to aps-c? Or am I simply being mentally lazy again ....

-- hide signature --

Tom Caldwell

Marty4650
Marty4650 Forum Pro • Posts: 14,114
Re: Tom, easy solution

Tom Caldwell wrote:

Marty4650 wrote:

Tom Caldwell wrote:

So what crop factor will medium format have when it hits the popular public use trail? Or will users of medium format just read the focal length of their lenses of the the lens body and happily compare this to the focal length of everything else which is at present related back to 135 film standards on pretty well every lens in the pack.

A FF sensor is 36x24mm

The sensor in the Pentax 645D is 44x33mm

If you do the math, this means the medium format Pentax has a crop factor of 0.59.

Thanks Marty, I am a lazy sod, I thought some bright spark would work it out for me

But my point now is: if the medium Format is larger then do we make it the new "standard reference" and work all other sensors from there (hardly). Or do we start looking at medium format lenses and start working out their true equivalent focal length on the FF sensor and then extrapolate this back to aps-c sensor to get the equivalent of medium format on aps-c based on the FF sensor "standard". What fun!

A "standard" does not have to be the largest, or the smallest.

It is simply an arbitrary measurement chosen, with all others referenced to it. The linear foot is iis used as a standard yet we also have inches and miles. The standard is normally the most commonly used measurement, which I suppose was why the 35mm film size is called "full frame." It certainly was more common than anything larger or smaller at the dawn of the digital age.

To cap it off it is possible to adapter medium Format lenses on to aps-c? Or am I simply being mentally lazy again ....

I don't see why not.

I know that adapters are made to use medium format lenses on M4/3 cameras. Just like you can use APSC lenses or FF lenses on cameras with smaller sensors. Naturally, you would only be using the central portion of the lens, so the effective focal length would get longer when a lens designed for a larger format is used on a smaller one.

110mm Hassleblad lens on M4/3 camera

Whenever you use a lens designed for a larger format on a smaller sensor, you effectively increase perceived focal length. Whenever you use a lens designed for a smaller format on a larger one you induce vignetting, since you cannot cover the sensor with the image circle produced.

 Marty4650's gear list:Marty4650's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +11 more
Art_P
Art_P Veteran Member • Posts: 9,875
Sounds like

He might have never shot extensively w an APS camera, otherwise he would have noticed the difference in FoV.  He was partially right tho, there is no 'crop' when using an APS camera w an APS lens, just as there is no crop using a 4/3 camera w a 4/3 lens.

I wonder just how much was that he didn't like being corrected in front of the class, and held to his comment rather than listening.

-- 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
Art_P
Art_P Veteran Member • Posts: 9,875
Re: What worked .. plus what they already have and know how to use well ..

Yes, experience counts for a lot: With the subject, anticipating the exact moment to pull the trigger, compensating for any shutter lag, knowing the right FoV to use.

-- 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
Steen Bay Veteran Member • Posts: 6,974
Re: Tom, easy solution
1

Marty4650 wrote:

Tom Caldwell wrote:

So what crop factor will medium format have when it hits the popular public use trail? Or will users of medium format just read the focal length of their lenses of the the lens body and happily compare this to the focal length of everything else which is at present related back to 135 film standards on pretty well every lens in the pack.

A FF sensor is 36x24mm

The sensor in the Pentax 645D is 44x33mm

If you do the math, this means the medium format Pentax has a crop factor of 0.59.

Sensor diagonals are 55mm vs 43.27mm, so the crop factor of 645D is 0.787x.

RichRMA Senior Member • Posts: 4,073
Re: What an awful thing to say
1

Vlad S wrote:

Martin.au wrote:

"Those who can't do, teach." perhaps?

And those who "do" learned everything by themselves, perhaps? There are some bad teachers for sure, but this generalization that only unsuccessful people become teachers, really hurts those, who went into the profession out of passion for education and for sharing their knowledge. Think about where all those "doers" would be without teachers before you say this again.

Vlad

Unfortunately, this ridiculous Nikon/Canon bias coupled with near complete ignorance about 4/3rds is shared by a lot of these teaching drones in photography schools.  I've heard this same kind of story more than once before.

Tom Ames Senior Member • Posts: 1,166
Re: Misinformation about m4/3
2

dennis tennis wrote:

Are you expecting everyone in the world to have the correct information about everything?

Do you consider mFT fanbos who goes around saying that mFT is the future and everything else are dinosaurs to be the same misinformed group or do you hail them as heroes.

You vent because people were wrong about mFT so I"m asking you this, do you publicly stand up for other systems when an mFT fanboy starts bad mouthing other systems?

An instructor at a photography workshop should know this.  You are way off.

 Tom Ames's gear list:Tom Ames's gear list
Fujifilm X100F Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S 105mm F1.4E ED Tamron SP 35mm F1.8 Di VC USD Phase One Capture One Pro +7 more
jeffharris
jeffharris Veteran Member • Posts: 8,024
Re: If you have read it ..
1

Ulric wrote:

Sergey_Green wrote:

jeffharris wrote:

Ignore the insufferable blowhard!

The book is excellent.

Tell us how it is on FT format…

So if you do have it, what do you learn for it? Please share.

Converting f-numbers between FF and MFT is something anyone can do on the fly in their head. It really is that trivial.

Exactly.

There's also a little thing called trial and error that is a critical part of the learning process.

Luckily, shooting digital means seeing results instantly and adjusting, not waiting to get film processed (I shot chromes) or spending lots of time being poisoned in a darkroom (something I never liked ). So, the learning process is accelerated in some respects.

 jeffharris's gear list:jeffharris's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Voigtlander Nokton 25mm F0.95 Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm F0.95 Aspherical Voigtlander Nokton 42.5mm F0.95 +28 more
Sergey_Green
Sergey_Green Forum Pro • Posts: 10,510
I thought we lost you ;)
1

texinwien wrote:

You're being too kind. It would appear that at least one of the primary participants in this thread is too intellectually challenged to manage simple division by two on the fly. For anyone with average intelligence or above, you're right - it shouldn't be a problem.

Actually of all the posters on this thread you are the one who should really consider some photographic classes, or assistance. Before you even mention the word "intelligence".

-- hide signature --

- sergey

 Sergey_Green's gear list:Sergey_Green's gear list
Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1
Sergey_Green
Sergey_Green Forum Pro • Posts: 10,510
Sounds like
1

Art_P wrote:

He might have never shot extensively w an APS camera, otherwise he would have noticed the difference in FoV. He was partially right tho, there is no 'crop' when using an APS camera w an APS lens, just as there is no crop using a 4/3 camera w a 4/3 lens.

It's the ratio of the imaging area dimensions, not what a certain lens can or can not cover. You are a bit too later to this argument.

I wonder just how much was that he didn't like being corrected in front of the class, and held to his comment rather than listening.

I think this is exactly how it went down. More like to fender off the questions he did not consider important, rather than spending time on answering them. Which at the end likely did not make him look good either.

-- hide signature --

- sergey

 Sergey_Green's gear list:Sergey_Green's gear list
Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1
texinwien Veteran Member • Posts: 3,326
I'd hoped we'd lost you
1

Sergey_Green wrote:

texinwien wrote:

You're being too kind. It would appear that at least one of the primary participants in this thread is too intellectually challenged to manage simple division by two on the fly. For anyone with average intelligence or above, you're right - it shouldn't be a problem.

Actually of all the posters on this thread you are the one who should really consider some photographic classes, or assistance. Before you even mention the word "intelligence".

I don't care a whit for the opinions of imbecilic t-rolls

 texinwien's gear list:texinwien's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 OnePlus One Canon EOS 300D +20 more
Sergey_Green
Sergey_Green Forum Pro • Posts: 10,510
Did I make you angry?
3

texinwien wrote:

Sergey_Green wrote:

texinwien wrote:

You're being too kind. It would appear that at least one of the primary participants in this thread is too intellectually challenged to manage simple division by two on the fly. For anyone with average intelligence or above, you're right - it shouldn't be a problem.

Actually of all the posters on this thread you are the one who should really consider some photographic classes, or assistance. Before you even mention the word "intelligence".

I don't care a whit for the opinions of imbecilic t-rolls

Why I say it. These are the types of pics you post, she was a fast machine ..

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52935767

This is what I'd rather snap with the camera phone,

So the "intelligence" is mentioned (and repeated) with whatever twist you give to it, but the canary is dead .

-- hide signature --

- sergey

 Sergey_Green's gear list:Sergey_Green's gear list
Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1
Gesture Veteran Member • Posts: 5,054
Re: Misinformation about quotations!

Bravo, GBS.

Geo Wharton Senior Member • Posts: 1,263
Re: So, what are the real problems?

El Chubasco wrote:

"well, with a micro 4/3 you have a real problem"

I think it is interesting to see what a non 4/3 or m4/3 user thinks is so problematic.

- George

 Geo Wharton's gear list:Geo Wharton's gear list
Olympus Tough TG-4 Olympus PEN E-PM1 Olympus E-M1 Olympus PEN-F Olympus E-M1 II +34 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads