08-26-2011, 09:12 PM
[quote name='gnatsum' timestamp='1314391671' post='11062']
And no, a 12mm f2 is on m4/3 is not a 24mm f4, it's a 12mm f2. Field of view relative to 35mm is 24mm and light transmission is still f2, but depth of field is equal to an f4 lens.
[/quote]
Yes, and a FF camera has a 2 f-stop ISO noise advantage so a FF cameras at ISO 400 is as good as ISO 100 on MFT.
This equalizes the light transmission difference of a 12mm f/2 (MFT) vs 24mm f/4 (FF).
So a 24mm f/4 FF lens remains a perfectly valid comparison in basically all aspects from a system perspective.
As far as paper specs (focal-length, system speed, depth-of-field) is concerned - the Sony 16mm f/2.8 is absolutely identical to the Oly 12mm f/2. It is also equivalent to a 24mm f/4 (FF) and the light transmission characteristic is the same (APS-C has a 1 f-stop ISO advantage over MFT).
The Sony lens is smaller, more light weight and costs LESS THAN A THIRD of the Olympus lens (200EUR vs 660EUR). Now admittedly it is also worse - undoubtedly. The quality advantage of the Oly may be worth a double price tag, mabe even 2.5x - I would not complain in this case - but a tripple+ one ?
And no, a 12mm f2 is on m4/3 is not a 24mm f4, it's a 12mm f2. Field of view relative to 35mm is 24mm and light transmission is still f2, but depth of field is equal to an f4 lens.
[/quote]
Yes, and a FF camera has a 2 f-stop ISO noise advantage so a FF cameras at ISO 400 is as good as ISO 100 on MFT.
This equalizes the light transmission difference of a 12mm f/2 (MFT) vs 24mm f/4 (FF).
So a 24mm f/4 FF lens remains a perfectly valid comparison in basically all aspects from a system perspective.
As far as paper specs (focal-length, system speed, depth-of-field) is concerned - the Sony 16mm f/2.8 is absolutely identical to the Oly 12mm f/2. It is also equivalent to a 24mm f/4 (FF) and the light transmission characteristic is the same (APS-C has a 1 f-stop ISO advantage over MFT).
The Sony lens is smaller, more light weight and costs LESS THAN A THIRD of the Olympus lens (200EUR vs 660EUR). Now admittedly it is also worse - undoubtedly. The quality advantage of the Oly may be worth a double price tag, mabe even 2.5x - I would not complain in this case - but a tripple+ one ?