[PuxaVida]

Serkan, Sorry i mis-spelled your name earlier...

I thought that M43 lenses have to be better than FF lenses because 16 megapixel M43 sensor is harsher on the lenses than today's FF sensors. May be my concept is not in place (it generally isn't)...but the way we compare D7000 to D800...when we test a lens on D7000, we say that it will perform similarly on a D800 because both cameras are similarly pixel dense. Going by that, the lens performance on a 16 mp M43 sensor should equate with a 64mp FF sensor...so if a lens is great for 16mp M43 camera, it should be great for a 64 mp FF camera as well, theoretically speaking. Can you clarify this for me...?

anurag

Well, probably a perfect answer of your question is beyond my technical knowledge... Nevertheless I will use this opportunity to test it ...

 

Regarding the D7000 vs. D800 comparison, I don't think one can easily say a specific lens would perform similar on both just because the pixel sizes are almost the same. D7000 would only show the smaller part of the image circle (assuming that it's a FF lens), and a reasonable amount of light will not be hitting the sensor area for further data evaluations. It is also not easy to say that the resolution in the middle of the image would be the same because one should ask how big is the print we're viewing from the same distance to compare both outputs.

 

16mp MFT vs. 64mp FF: How could a specific lens (e.g. this very nice Zuiko 75mm) show the same performance on a 64mp FF sensor? Image circle is 2x cropped and the register distance is quite different from any known FF mounts. A hypothetical Zuiko 150mm f/3.6 with FX mount for instance, would have different optics and size. And when it comes to bigger glasses, a higher precision in manufacturing should be expected for the FX lens.

 

Serkan