43 lenses and DoF

Wigelii

New to Mu-43
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
2
Location
Belgium
With the launch of the EM1 decided to return to Olympus (worked with OM-1 and OM-4 years ago).
I buy the EM1 with the 12-40 F2.8 lens but I also need a tele.
I consider the 50-200 F2.8-3.5 but I read that you can't get anything out of focus because this s like a F 4-5.6 lens on APS-C or F 5.6-8 lens on Full Frame.
Is that correct?
 

MAubrey

Photographer
Joined
Jul 9, 2012
Messages
1,469
Location
Bellingham, WA
Real Name
Mike Aubrey
With the launch of the EM1 decided to return to Olympus (worked with OM-1 and OM-4 years ago).
I buy the EM1 with the 12-40 F2.8 lens but I also need a tele.
I consider the 50-200 F2.8-3.5 but I read that you can't get anything out of focus because this s like a F 4-5.6 lens on APS-C or F 5.6-8 lens on Full Frame.
Is that correct?
Nope. The 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 is like f/3.5-4.3 on APS-C and f/5.6-f/7 on FF. But either way, you can still get plenty out of focus simply because of the focal length of the lens. The compression of the lens is what does it.

The mu-43.com image threads are a little lacking for the 50-200mm, but take a look at pixel-peeper.com:

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=694

http://www.flickr.com/photos/espaceman/3381132262/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/xenocapin/7053948977/
 

Amin Sabet

Administrator
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
10,905
Location
Boston, MA (USA)
To know what the framing and DOF will be like, you have to multiply both the focal length and the f-number by the crop factor between the two formats of interest.

-4/3 is a 1.2X crop compared to Canon APS-C, which is a 1.6X crop compared to 35mm full frame.
-4/3 is a 1.3X crop compared to Nikon/Sony APS-C, which is a 1.5X crop compared to 35mm full frame.
-4/3 is a 2x crop compared to 35mm full frame

Therefore:
-To go from 4/3 to Canon APS-C, multiply everything by 1.2.
-To go from 4/3 to Nikon/Sony APS-C, multiply everything by 1.3.
-To go from 4/3 to 35mm/full frame, multiply everything by 2.

So the 50-200 f/2.8-3.5 on 4/3 behaves like a:
-60-240mm f/3.4-4.2 on Canon APS-C
-65-260mm f/3.6-4.6 on Nikon/Sony APS-C
-100-400mm f/5.6-7 on 35mm full frame


All of the above will give you shallow DOF opportunities on their respective formats. However, if you want even more shallow DOF and can live with medium telephoto, I highly recommend the Olympus 75mm f/1.8 lens.
 

ckrueger

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
304
I've done a lot of shooting with a 100-400 (4.5-5.6), and let me tell you, at 400mm-e you'll often be wishing you had more DOF. I've had many great photos be a bit off technically because AF was off by literally an inch.

I suppose sometimes you may desire an inch of DOF for some shot-for-effect portrait where just the eyes are in focus, but the much more common scenario for me is shooting action or wildlife where I want the entire bird or car in focus, and I'd prefer to shoot at f/11 if I had the light.

Your style may be different, but in my case extra DOF in telephoto is a safety net that saves photos, not a problem.

Also, I shot briefly with the 50-200 on an E-3, and one great benefit of that lens is that it can still AF decently, and has decent sharpness with a 2x TC. 800mm-e at f/7.1, with AF in a lens package <3lbs? That's unheard of in larger formats. It was a very nice kit, which I only returned to instead buy a 40D, 300/2.8IS and 2x TC, which is a whole different beast.

Anyway, I don't have any good examples of the 50-200's DOF, but here's a few examples of 400mm on APS-C, which should be about what you'd get with the 50-200. All of these are f/5.6 except the dog photo, which is f/8:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

~tc~

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
2,494
Location
Houston, TX
I've done a lot of shooting with a 100-400 (4.5-5.6), and let me tell you, at 400mm-e you'll often be wishing you had more DOF. I've had many great photos be a bit off technically because AF was off by literally an inch.

I suppose sometimes you may desire an inch of DOF for some shot-for-effect portrait where just the eyes are in focus, but the much more common scenario for me is shooting action or wildlife where I want the entire bird or car in focus, and I'd prefer to shoot at f/11 if I had the light.

Your style may be different, but in my case extra DOF in telephoto is a safety net that saves photos, not a problem.
The exposure advantage of a smaller sensor, due to being able to get the desired DOF with a larger aperture is not to be underestimated. Motion blur is MUCH more commonly an issue than DOF in most photographic instances, and m43 has a big advantage there.
 

Wigelii

New to Mu-43
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
2
Location
Belgium
Looking at the pictures, I think it will do.
I must say, the 75 1.8 sounds tempting too (and the pics look great).
I regularly take pictures in theaters, in low light. So 1.8 would be great but on the other hand, untill now I often used a Pentax 200mm F2.8 (I am in the middle of selling all my Pentax gear and move to Olympus) and I miss the flexibility of a zoom because in theaters it is rather difficult to move around a lot and disturbing if I do.
So I think a zoom would be better there. I would have liked the 14-150mm that Olympus anounced but it will be available only by the end of 2014 (I think).
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom