Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 16, 2010, 10:24 AM   #31
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkurkowski View Post
What??? That's the whole point. To switch an existing 4/3 lens kit to a FF kit, you have to account for the crop factor. For practical use, 100mm in 4/3 really is 200mm in FF.
Sure, I agree with that, but since the sensor resolution is nearly equivalent in the center of the frame with both 4/3 and FF you can simply crop the FF image to get the same angle of view as with the 4/3 image without loss of quality. The only thing that's really different is what you see in in the viewfinder when you have a 100mm lens attached to each body.
miskur505 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2010, 12:13 PM   #32
Senior Member
 
Steven R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,910
Default

Ted is absolutely right. From a physics science point of view, to achieve the same magnification of an object in your print, you would have to crop your FF image significantly, effectively losing all those pixels that was left on the "cutting room floor." Or conversely you would have to mount a FF lens that was twice the size of the 4/3 to achieve the same object size in an image, i.e. use a 600mm FF to achieve the same object size as a 300mm 4/3rds.
Steven R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2010, 12:32 PM   #33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Washington State
Posts: 930
Default

Indeed, there is a reason photogs buy the 600mm lenses with their FF cameras. In practical terms since we were talking about the Nikon D7000 which isn't FF I'd say the best comparison would be the Oly 300mm and the Nikon 400MM both of which will end up at 600mm. In that case the Oly is about $3K cheaper. OTOH there are other options with the Nikon such as the Sigma 500/5.4 for around the same price as the Oly 300 but I doubt the quality is as good.

Of course most of us here aren't going to be buying the 300/2.8 or Nikon equivalent so the real cost of switching would be less.

John
jelow1966 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2010, 1:39 PM   #34
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miskur505 View Post
Sure, I agree with that, but since the sensor resolution is nearly equivalent in the center of the frame with both 4/3 and FF you can simply crop the FF image to get the same angle of view as with the 4/3 image without loss of quality. The only thing that's really different is what you see in in the viewfinder when you have a 100mm lens attached to each body.
Fine, but I didn't intend this to be an abstract discussion of optics. The implicit question was, what would it cost to build a particular capability (not focal lengths) in lenses if you weren't going to use 4/3 glass.
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2010, 1:51 PM   #35
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

The cost of switching to a new system is going to be really crucial and for most of us a real factor on whether being able to switch is viable at this time. Of course if you've just got the kit lenses then its a much easier decision to make a switch to a new system but if you've got the HG/SHG glass then its a lot more harder to get the same quality of glass + new body unless your a pro and getting paid to shoot. I saw a post by Donald Chin and he basically had the entire Oly HG/SHG lenses/Flash systems, 2x E3's and a E620 which he sold over the last 12months since as a Pro he could no longer wait for Oly to update the E3 last year. I wonder what he's opinion of the E5 would be right now and whether he would have stayed with Oly if this E5 had been released last year ?
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2010, 1:52 PM   #36
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jelow1966 View Post
Indeed, there is a reason photogs buy the 600mm lenses with their FF cameras. In practical terms since we were talking about the Nikon D7000 which isn't FF I'd say the best comparison would be the Oly 300mm and the Nikon 400MM both of which will end up at 600mm. In that case the Oly is about $3K cheaper. OTOH there are other options with the Nikon such as the Sigma 500/5.4 for around the same price as the Oly 300 but I doubt the quality is as good.

Of course most of us here aren't going to be buying the 300/2.8 or Nikon equivalent so the real cost of switching would be less.

John
Because my most important work is available light at EV 5 or so, personally if I weren't using 4/3 DSLRs I would be looking at FF and Carl Zeiss lenses. But at those prices "looking" means standing outside with my nose pressed against the store window...
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2010, 1:57 PM   #37
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

Ted.. or even worse... at a Leica M9 and some fast leica glass but then you'd have to be across the other side of the sidewalk!

HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2010, 3:21 PM   #38
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HarjTT View Post
Ted.. or even worse... at a Leica M9 and some fast leica glass but then you'd have to be across the other side of the sidewalk!

Fortunately (I suppose) for that scenario I have a pair of binoculars.

Ted
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2010, 4:00 PM   #39
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkurkowski View Post
Because my most important work is available light at EV 5 or so, personally if I weren't using 4/3 DSLRs I would be looking at FF and Carl Zeiss lenses. But at those prices "looking" means standing outside with my nose pressed against the store window...
And you'd be looking possibly at a "dead" system there, as from what I have seen Sony appears to be getting out of the full frame business. They obviously have lots of money to spend as I have lost count as to how many consumer-level, cropped sensor DSLR's they currently make, but they could very well be completely "mirrorless" before even Olympus.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2010, 5:35 PM   #40
Senior Member
 
tkurkowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 3,625
Default

So what happens to the great CZ T-Star glass if Sony pulls out?
tkurkowski is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:11 PM.