APS-C Bokeh vs M43 Bokeh?

Hey, I just sold my ancient Canon T1i and horribly built 50mm 1.8 and ordered a refurbished GX7 off of evilbay. I am extremely excited about the stylish and compact form factor of M43 as well as all of the modern touches.

My only concern is bokeh though.... I have only shot APS-C and I wanted to know if the difference is very noticeable in day to day shooting. I understand about crop factors and all of that so I'm not looking for scientific explanations, just your personal opinion.

Thanks

Equivalence says APS will have a slightly shallower DOF. But DoF and bokeh are not the same thing.
Also, the reality is with m43 you might find yourself often using longer focal lengths. A 50mm lens is 100mmEFL instead of 75mm with APS.
If you want shalloer DoF take a step back and use a longer focal length. Then check reviews to see which lenses have the best bokeh.
The APS vs. 43rds will matter little.

Dillon Frazier wrote:

My only concern is bokeh though.... I have only shot APS-C and I wanted to know if the difference is very noticeable in day to day shooting. I understand about crop factors and all of that so I'm not looking for scientific explanations, just your personal opinion.

The PanLeica 42,5mm F/1,2 is the "bokeh master" of µ4/3 lenses. It is followed by the M.Zuko 75mm F/1,8. Then, in close-up photography, by the M.Zuiko 60mm F/2,8.

All native Voigtländer lenses, although soft wide open, also have a pleasant bokeh.

PanLeica 42,5mm F/1,2

M.Zuiko 75mm F/1,8

M.Zuiko 60mm Macro F/2,8

Voigtländer 25mm F/0,95

Have a look at sample images of the oly 45mm and Panasonic 42.5mm, f1.7. Those two lenses are most similar to your canons focal length and usage role.

You can create bokeh of your liking during PP

Well the difference between m43 and canon apsc is 1.25 which means that at equal equivalent focal lengths an aperture of 1.8 on the canon will equal a 1.44 aperture on m43 for the same amount of background blur. I use 1.5 apsc crop cameras where the ratio is 1.333 (so 1.8 aperture on apcs equals 1.35 on m43) and yes, i see a noticeable difference.
So the point is you need fater and longer lenses on m43 to achieve the same amount of blur so its harder. But the good news is that m43 has the neccessary lenses. After a while you'll get used to it and just enjoy your new system.

APS-C will have shallower DoF, but M43 lenses are considerably smaller... Tradeoffs.
I find the 25mm Panaleica and 45mm zuiko easily give me all the shallow DoF I could want. Wider lenses can fall a bit short of the mark, but I can deal with it.

I switched from Canon to a GX7 this past winter and getting blurry backgrounds is not an issue on m4/3.

If you liked the 50mm f1.8 on Canon, you'll be head over heels for the 45mm f1.8. They are like $200 used/$300 new now, so pretty affordable. Check out the flickr pool to appease your fears about blur/bokeh: https://www.flickr.com/groups/1759398@N21/pool/

fannta_79 wrote:

Dear Dillon,

probably by this time you already have made your own experiences regarding your question.

As I just got my first MFT gear have done a very rudimentary test at a friend with an APS-C sensor cam and a MFT cam with the very same lens. Distance and aperture and center subject were the same, please disregard ISO and WB as this is about DOF.

Here are two crops of the two photos OOO, cropped and resized (FYI- the original crops have almost the same resolution) for the web, as it was handheld -from the very same distance-. The photos have been cropped two show identical content.

I am not going to disclose now which is which, for me they look pretty close what do you think?

Let me know.

The thing is:  Like FF or APS-C, the bokeh achieved with micro four thirds cameras depends on the lens used.

Some MFT lenses have excellent bokeh, whereas others (even well regarded lenses) don't.

Having said that, beauty is in the eye of the beholder: many folks will only put up with buttery smooth bokeh whereas others are quite happy with noisy/swirly bokeh.

Wow. Hard to believe this was like 4 years ago. I guess to summarize my experience with m43, I sold my m43 gear after about a year and bought a full-frame Nikon in order to pursue more demanding types of photography. Ironically enough, I really wanted more background blur, which was a reason I left both m43 and aps-c.
M43 is still a great system however and wonderful cameras like the GH series and the g9 make it unique. I now use m43 for part of my video work and am very pleased still.
Thanks for the input!

I get great results from my 45mm f1.8 prime lens. I tried a 75mm f1.8 and that can be even more extreme due to the increased focal length.

I have zero desire to get the f1.2 lenses or use the very expensive and manual operated f.95 lenses the system has available.

for general portraits, the 45mm f1.8 is fantastic