'Field of View: F1.4 on Micro Four Thirds and Canon EF Full Frame'

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by RT_Panther, Jan 15, 2013.

  1. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Armanius

    Armanius Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 23, 2010
    Houston
    Muttley
    That should always be the case right? The OMD has a DOF of a 17.5mm lens even if it has an EFL of 35mm.
     
  3. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Absolutely love the composition.. great work! Except:
    * First one WB is a little off..
    * Eye's were screaming for some sort of texture... maybe offset with a lit candle flame

    Oh wait... this is a test.. Nevermind :)



    DOF difference is as expected. Some discussions probably occurred when 135 negative started to overtake MF and LF in popularity decades ago.
     
  4. arad85

    arad85 Mu-43 Veteran

    477
    Aug 16, 2012
    What has field of view got to do with it? The person doing the test has mixed a number of things - field of view, focal length, aperture and depth of field and concluded what exactly?

    Taking a FF and :43: camera to get the same picture (both field of view and depth of field) you need:

    • Half the focal length on the :43: sensor
    • Twice the aperture (half the f-number) on the :43: sensor

    So to get the same field of view/depth of field as a 50mm @ F2 on FF, you need 25mm @ F1 on the :43:. Clearly, this ignores lens rendering/bokeh issues, white balance and the fact the sensor aspect ratios are different.
     
  5. Armanius

    Armanius Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 23, 2010
    Houston
    Muttley
    Oh yeah, I just noticed that the writer wrote "field of view." I suppose he meant DOF.