Understanding the depth of field equivalence is mind bender - same when thinking of 35mm lens focal lengths and medium format on film. Thanks for the clarity and interesting video! M43 all the way!
When trying to anticipate depth of field I’ve learned that it is useful to think of a 25mm f1.4 as a 25mm f1.4 regardless of the sensor behind it, because that’s the way it works. The reason us MFT users have greater depth of field is because we use a wider lens to get similar framing to larger sensors. It has nothing to do with the sensor size. I’m guessing a lot of myths about smaller sensors come from photographers with little experience with them.
Exactly. Both focal length and aperture are physical measured values and regardless of the camera it's used on. This is what I explained to my wife when we compared the Olympus 75mm f1.8 with the Samyang 135mm f1.8 that they might give you a similar framing but the Olympus has a much shorter focal length
Thank you good sir, in the first 5 minutes you explained perfectly what I could never understand in the 15+ blogs/articles I read about 35mm equivalence
An important point regarding how crop sensors achieve field of view equivalence in an image: assuming all other equivalence factors have been accounted for, a printed M4/3 image captured using a 25mm M4/3 lens effectively represents a full frame image captured using a 50mm full frame lens (i.e., M4/3 offers a 2x optical zoom and therefore 2x longer "reach" at a given focal length); however, an image captured on a M4/3 camera using a native 50mm full frame lens (without a speed booster) would instead represent a full frame image cropped to the relative M4/3 field of view and then expanded to match the native M4/3 25mm image at a given print size (i.e., it would merely offer a 2x a digital zoom along with an inherent degradation in the resulting image quality). This is something to keep in mind when shopping for a Sony, Nikon, etc. APS-C camera with the intent to use full frame lenses which share the same mount.
I am not entirely sure what you're saying, but a 50mm lens on a MFT body will be equivalent to a 100mm lens on a Full Frame body. It does not matter if that 50mm lens is designed for MFT, APS-C, FF or Medium Format. It will be a 50mm lens and due to the crop factor it will have the same field of view as a 100mm lens on a Full Frame body.
Your test and reasoning makes sense for depth of field. It seems that the mft images are darker than the FF samples. In order to get almost identical images, would you need to open the mft to half the FF aperture, i.e. Mft will be f/1.4 and FF will be f/2.8? There are so many other videos that say to double aperture so I really don't know what to believe. I'm a fairly novice photographer and I shoot exclusively mft. If I want identical images in regards to composition, depth of field, exposure, can you provide an example for the focal length and aperture for both FF and mft?
The reason behind it is simply the ISO values are not standardized. If you go to DXOMark and compare the two sensors you will see that the ISO200 on both cameras are different when it comes to lab measurements, the A7R3 is measured as ISO 145 and the Olympus is measured as ISO 83. This can be due to different technologies and different standards used at different companies. For example set to ISO 100 the GH5 II from Panasonic measured as ISO 76, the GX8 63 and the GH4 88, so as you can see not even the same manufacturer will give you the exact same ISO performance. For some reason Olympus liked to way overstate their ISO values.
@@holdmylenscap7241 thanks for the response. took me a few hours to do some research and read the math behind it. in theory, if two cameras of different sensor sizes have the same rated iso, set to the same aperture, and equivalent focal length, they should produce an almost identical image? this is why a mft 50mm length set to f/2 will expose an image to the same amount of light as a mft 300mm lens set to f/2, right? because aperture is a fraction.
rewatching the video a few times makes it clearer. it's depth of field that gets indirectly affected. so a ff 50mm f/2.8 lens will have the same depth of field as a mft 25mm f/1.4?
Understanding the depth of field equivalence is mind bender - same when thinking of 35mm lens focal lengths and medium format on film.
Thanks for the clarity and interesting video! M43 all the way!
When trying to anticipate depth of field I’ve learned that it is useful to think of a 25mm f1.4 as a 25mm f1.4 regardless of the sensor behind it, because that’s the way it works. The reason us MFT users have greater depth of field is because we use a wider lens to get similar framing to larger sensors. It has nothing to do with the sensor size. I’m guessing a lot of myths about smaller sensors come from photographers with little experience with them.
Exactly. Both focal length and aperture are physical measured values and regardless of the camera it's used on. This is what I explained to my wife when we compared the Olympus 75mm f1.8 with the Samyang 135mm f1.8 that they might give you a similar framing but the Olympus has a much shorter focal length
Thank you good sir, in the first 5 minutes you explained perfectly what I could never understand in the 15+ blogs/articles I read about 35mm equivalence
Glad it helped!
You are 100% right about aperture. And I would say : when we used in the past a light meter, was there any position for 24x36 or for 6x6 ? Never !
that's a really good point :)
Right on. It surprises me how so many have never learned or have forgotten that the speed of light is a constant. Basic physics.
That would depend on how much you wish to enlarge your negative
@@brucegreaves3204 ????? what is the ratio between exposure and enlargement ?
Such a great video, very well explained!
Glad you liked it!
I will need to run this video a few times before it sinks in. Believe me I will.
Nikon D810 and Panasonic GH6 shooter here. This was very informative. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for watching. I believe MFT goes very well together with a Full Frame :D I find myself picking up the Olympus more than the Sony.
Came for the m43 video, stayed for the T-shirt!
One of the greatest games ever, without a single straight line :)
Thank you for that information. I think I already knew this but it was a good explanation.
Thank you for watching :)
An important point regarding how crop sensors achieve field of view equivalence in an image: assuming all other equivalence factors have been accounted for, a printed M4/3 image captured using a 25mm M4/3 lens effectively represents a full frame image captured using a 50mm full frame lens (i.e., M4/3 offers a 2x optical zoom and therefore 2x longer "reach" at a given focal length); however, an image captured on a M4/3 camera using a native 50mm full frame lens (without a speed booster) would instead represent a full frame image cropped to the relative M4/3 field of view and then expanded to match the native M4/3 25mm image at a given print size (i.e., it would merely offer a 2x a digital zoom along with an inherent degradation in the resulting image quality). This is something to keep in mind when shopping for a Sony, Nikon, etc. APS-C camera with the intent to use full frame lenses which share the same mount.
I am not entirely sure what you're saying, but a 50mm lens on a MFT body will be equivalent to a 100mm lens on a Full Frame body. It does not matter if that 50mm lens is designed for MFT, APS-C, FF or Medium Format. It will be a 50mm lens and due to the crop factor it will have the same field of view as a 100mm lens on a Full Frame body.
Your test and reasoning makes sense for depth of field. It seems that the mft images are darker than the FF samples. In order to get almost identical images, would you need to open the mft to half the FF aperture, i.e. Mft will be f/1.4 and FF will be f/2.8? There are so many other videos that say to double aperture so I really don't know what to believe. I'm a fairly novice photographer and I shoot exclusively mft. If I want identical images in regards to composition, depth of field, exposure, can you provide an example for the focal length and aperture for both FF and mft?
The reason behind it is simply the ISO values are not standardized. If you go to DXOMark and compare the two sensors you will see that the ISO200 on both cameras are different when it comes to lab measurements, the A7R3 is measured as ISO 145 and the Olympus is measured as ISO 83. This can be due to different technologies and different standards used at different companies. For example set to ISO 100 the GH5 II from Panasonic measured as ISO 76, the GX8 63 and the GH4 88, so as you can see not even the same manufacturer will give you the exact same ISO performance. For some reason Olympus liked to way overstate their ISO values.
@@holdmylenscap7241 thanks for the response. took me a few hours to do some research and read the math behind it. in theory, if two cameras of different sensor sizes have the same rated iso, set to the same aperture, and equivalent focal length, they should produce an almost identical image? this is why a mft 50mm length set to f/2 will expose an image to the same amount of light as a mft 300mm lens set to f/2, right? because aperture is a fraction.
rewatching the video a few times makes it clearer. it's depth of field that gets indirectly affected. so a ff 50mm f/2.8 lens will have the same depth of field as a mft 25mm f/1.4?
@@artoriaslee that is correct. Which means with the MFT you get a 2 stop brighter image, so you can use lower ISO or faster shutterspeed
I shoot weddings and clients don't care. Photographers care but not clients.
exactly. if you can't shoot something to a high quality with any ILC camera from the last 6-7 years then it's not the camera's fault :D