> Keep in mind that Fool Frame only has about one stop advantage, which is
> wiped out if you get a lens that is one stop faster. :-)
I'm going to say "it depends". It depends on what criteria you are
using. For example, when it comes to high ISO performance, comparing
the E-1 to the 6D you'll see a massive difference in high-ISO
performance even though the sensors' pixel-pitch is nearly identical.
Otherwise, that one-stop advantage actually does not exist. ISO 100,
1/100 and F2 will yield the exact same exposure on a full-frame camera
as a crop-sensor camera.
> Canon 70-200/2.8 on Fool Frame is roughly equal to E System 35-100/2, except
> you get more DOF from the E System lens. (PSST: that's an advantage, not a
> liability!)
So true. Little-minded people continue to mistake "optical
characteristics" to DoF. When shooting events, I'll take more, not
less DoF. But there are other times when you want to isolate the
subject against a blurred background. For that, we need to dig a
little deeper. I'll use the OM Zuikos 28/2 and 35/2 as examples. Both
lenses are EXTREMELY sharp and are among the premium line of OM
lenses. The difference in focal length between 28mm and 35mm is not
much, but equivalent to about the difference in full-frame and APS-C.
(in other words, 28mm on APS-C provides a similar AoV as 35mm on
full-frame). Will the resulting images from a cropped 28mm shot be the
same as an uncropped 35mm shot? If the optical formula is essentially
the same, the answer would be yes
HOWEVER!!!!
The 28/2 and 35/2 are of completely different designs. The 35/2 is a
"bokeh monster" and provides some of the most glorious people images
ever seen. I have absolutely no problem using the 35/2 for portraiture
as it provides substantial bokeh and subject isolation. EVEN STOPPED
DOWN! The 28/2, on the other hand, has greater apparent DoF and less
subject isolation. The images appear sharper and the subject is part
of the scene, not isolated from the scene. The "intent" of the lens
design is different. The two lenses, while of the same family and
grade, have different usages. The 28/2 is an outstanding landscape
lens, the 35/2 is a people lens. The 35/2 is FAR more "artistic" than
the 28/2 in how it renders the scene. The 28/2 is far more "honest"
than the 35/2 in how it renders the scene. Which lens to use depends
on desired outcome. If I'm shooting to provide coverage of an event,
the 28/2 is better. If I'm shooting for a print or display, the 35/2
is better. To be clear, this isn't a focal length issue, as the 24/2.8
has more subject isolation than the 28/2. When zipping through my
Lightroom catalog, I can instantly tell the difference between
pictures taken with the 28/2 and the 35/2 of my Alaska landscapes.
For other lenses, I find that the 35-80/2.8 provides wildly beautiful
bokeh and subject isolation on either full-frame or 4/3 cameras.
However, it is quite variable depending on aperture and subject
distance. It is a lens that works great in both event and portrait
applications. Another case in point would be the 100/2.8 vs. the
100/2. Which lens is better? Does that F2 vs. F2.8 have any bearing in
real life? Not really for most pictures, but the optical formula
between the two lenses is so different that at "normal" shooting
distances (not infinity) you will see a difference in rendering of the
edge of the subject from the background. But that's true with nearly
all the OM Zuiko F2 lenses and the 35-80/2.8. MY 100/2.8 is actually a
sharper lens and does infinity better. For portraiture, both are
excellent, but render differently. I can actually go either way with
the lenses, but the 100/2 does render bokeh just a bit more
organically.
So, just with the example of the 100/2 and 100/2.8, it has nothing to
do with maximum aperture (as I tend to shoot both around F5.6-8 most
of the time) or sensor format (I use them both on 4/3 and full-frame).
The most notable differences in rendering have to do with optical
formula.
Honestly, while I haven't spent any significant time with m4/3 lenses,
I would say that Olympus has done an incredible job with that entire
line of lenses to capture a look and feel to the images that totally
overcome any supposed limitation of 4/3.
AG Schnozz
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|