1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

DOF - mFT vs FF

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by bigbluebear, Jul 24, 2013.

  1. bigbluebear

    bigbluebear Mu-43 Regular

    80
    Jul 2, 2013
    Hi,

    From my understanding, the sensor size of mFT is approximately half of a FF sensor. I've read on the internet that as a result, the DOF of a 25mm lens shot at f/1.4 on a mFT camera will be about the same as the DOF of a 50mm shot at f/2.8 on a FF camera. Basically, the rule is to just an aperture setting on a mFT camera is approximately the same as double the aperture setting on a FF camera.

    Is this true? I'm just trying to get a better understanding on what I should set my aperture at to achieve similar DOF results as my other camera kit.

    Thank you
     
  2. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Yes, that's right.
     
  3. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    Gordon
    Only 11 pages to go.

    Gordon
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. goldenlight

    goldenlight Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 30, 2010
    Essex
    John
    Basically this is true, but on a technical pont the sensor area of Micro Four Thirds is approximately ¼ that of Full Frame.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. bigbluebear

    bigbluebear Mu-43 Regular

    80
    Jul 2, 2013
    Thanks!

    Does that mean that most lenses in the mFT format are sharpest at f/5.6, which is equivalent to f/11.2 in FF standards?
     
  6. bigbluebear

    bigbluebear Mu-43 Regular

    80
    Jul 2, 2013
    Thank you. I appreciate the clarification and the fact that you added something useful to the thread.
     
  7. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 13, 2012
    Chicago-area
    David Dornblaser
    Yes, it is just like 35 lens equivalency, 2x. You can compensate by changing the focal length of your lens, adjusting length to subject, etc.
     
  8. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 13, 2012
    Chicago-area
    David Dornblaser

    Huh?
     
  9. bigbluebear

    bigbluebear Mu-43 Regular

    80
    Jul 2, 2013
    Maybe 11 more pages until it's worthwhile for him to contribute?
     
  10. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    Yes, this is true that most :43: lenses achieve maximum sharpness at about f/5.6. I'm not an optical engineer, so I can't say whether that is somehow related to why FF lens might be sharpest at f/11 (if that is the case). My vague understanding is that diffraction effects impact sharpness past that point.

    A bit of a quibble, but f/11 (not f/11.2) is generally considered to be twice (or half, depending on how you look at it) the aperture of f/5.6 -- there's a bit of rounding in the f/stop scale.
     
  11. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    no

    just assuming from past experience that this will end up a long long thread that goes nowhere.

    bigblue this is a topic that has been talked endlessly on every forum related to micro 4/3

    go take some photo and share them... then worry about the silly stuff

    K
     
  12. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    I presume that Gordon is alluding to the phenomenon of discussions of "full frame equivalency", particular regarding DOF, tending to stir up a LOT of discussion around here.
     
  13. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    bigbluebear

    earn respect before dissing members with a longer history

    K
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. bigbluebear

    bigbluebear Mu-43 Regular

    80
    Jul 2, 2013
    Hi K,

    Forums are a way for people with similar interests (in this case photography and more specifically, the mFT format) to share and disseminate information. I feel that just because I have less "history" on this particular forum does not mean my questions should be responded with smart remarks. Does a higher post count or more time spent on a forum translate to the respect one deserves? I think not. I respect people that help and assist others by providing insight and value to topics of interest, regardless of their post count.

    If this topic has been discussed to death, then I apologize. It was something I thought about while sitting in front of my computer at work. However if I had nothing of value to add to a thread, I would simply not respond. That would easily help keep threads under 11 pages :D
     
  15. carpandean

    carpandean Mu-43 Top Veteran

    827
    Oct 29, 2010
    Western NY
    While they may achieve maximum sharpness at f/5.6, by most reports many of the primes and fast zooms are closer to maximum sharpness wide open than their FF counterparts. So, to get "acceptable" sharpness on FF, many photographers will stop down almost by default, whereas the better :43: lenses are "acceptable" wide open.
     
  16. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    941
    Oct 20, 2011
    The you and flash could have just answered the question. Or be good ignore the thread without you and flash fanning the fires. A quick technical response is all that was needed, not some snark from the defense force. Lets face it, there is a ton of misinformation out there, there is no quick easy to use sticky on the m4/3 VS APS-C Vs 35mm format here. And like Flash alluded to, or was attempting to crassly turn this thread into, any thread comparison to DSLR turns into a total flame fest. No fault to the OP's, as like I said all threads turn into junk.

    And Blue I suggest using the search, as this thread will likely get ugly, close it, and don't look again.
     
  17. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    Gordon
    Lighten up people. There's no need for me to answer the question when the first response answered it more than adequately. I was just having a bit of fun. And I'll bet a case of single malt there were more than one other member thinking what I typed.

    And yet here we are at the bottom of the second page already. 9 to go. Would you all like me to add a row of smilies? You'll notice one at the bottom of my signature.

    gordon
     
  18. Mijo

    Mijo Mu-43 Veteran

    220
    Jan 23, 2012
    San Francisco, CA
    I hadn't given this topic much thought but it did notice this first hand when comparing pictures from my PL 25 and summilux 50 (both shot wide open). I guess the DOF should look more alike if the lux were stopped down to 2.8 and the PL left wide open.

    BBB - I'm glad you started this thread, regardless if there are others like it (which I must have missed). I just got learned...
     
  19. goldenlight

    goldenlight Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 30, 2010
    Essex
    John
    One thing that often gets conveniently overlooked is that DOF equivalence is a double edged sword tht works both ways. Being able to achieve narrow depth of field to isolate the subejct from the background is certianly useful and a big plus in favour of full frame compared to :43: (less so with the APS-C format)

    However, the opposite is true when you want a lot of DOF, such as when taking a landscape with foreground to background interest. Then, :43: really scores. It could also be argued, why spend a fortune on top quality lenses if over half of each photograph is going to be out of focus? :biggrin:

    Rather than look upon shallow or deep DOF as an advantage or disadvantage surely it's better to regard it as a feature? Horses for courses and all that. :smile: