06-26-2011, 10:27 AM
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1309082909' post='9564']
About the speed of the shutter... that is kind of incorrect. The light captured by the 4/3rds sensor will be 1/4th of what the FF sensor receives. To equalize that, the amplification of the received signal is higher, just to reach the same "ISO value" (making ISO values really rather meaningless, in digital photography... it is not about sensitivity anymore).
So.. while 4/3rds does the extra amplification before the ISO settings already, set the FF camera to do the same amplification via the ISO setting itself. So, ISO 100 on 4/3rds, then ISO 400 on FF. Equvalent field of view, equal aperture/equivalent f-value, equal exposure time, equivalent ISO setting.
Of course it is right, DOF is not a priority there (with EVILs). But a factor anyway, if one does comparisons as above. The DOF freedom is the reason for the FF or APS-C DSLRs.
And yes, a 90mm f3/5 is reasonable. Comparable to the Tamron 60mm f2, Nikon 60mm f2.8, Canon 60mm f2.8, kind of.
[/quote]
Well, in this case you may argue that FF has little advantage in terms of noise because the comparable ground would be ISO 100 (MFT) vs ISO 400 (FF) thus compensating the higher speeds on the MFT side. There's still the higher speed requirement on the MFT side due to the smaller allowed circle-of-confusion - thus a one stop advantage for FF.
e.g. 9mm f/5.6 (MFT) at ISO 100 ~ 18mm f/11 (FF) at ISO 400.
About the speed of the shutter... that is kind of incorrect. The light captured by the 4/3rds sensor will be 1/4th of what the FF sensor receives. To equalize that, the amplification of the received signal is higher, just to reach the same "ISO value" (making ISO values really rather meaningless, in digital photography... it is not about sensitivity anymore).
So.. while 4/3rds does the extra amplification before the ISO settings already, set the FF camera to do the same amplification via the ISO setting itself. So, ISO 100 on 4/3rds, then ISO 400 on FF. Equvalent field of view, equal aperture/equivalent f-value, equal exposure time, equivalent ISO setting.
Of course it is right, DOF is not a priority there (with EVILs). But a factor anyway, if one does comparisons as above. The DOF freedom is the reason for the FF or APS-C DSLRs.
And yes, a 90mm f3/5 is reasonable. Comparable to the Tamron 60mm f2, Nikon 60mm f2.8, Canon 60mm f2.8, kind of.
[/quote]
Well, in this case you may argue that FF has little advantage in terms of noise because the comparable ground would be ISO 100 (MFT) vs ISO 400 (FF) thus compensating the higher speeds on the MFT side. There's still the higher speed requirement on the MFT side due to the smaller allowed circle-of-confusion - thus a one stop advantage for FF.
e.g. 9mm f/5.6 (MFT) at ISO 100 ~ 18mm f/11 (FF) at ISO 400.