full frame vs 4/3rds

[wind30]

with all the new excitement over the new announcement of full frame nikon, I am thinking hard about whether olympus decision to go small sensor is the correct one.

The sensor technology did not improve as much as I had hoped.

Currently my setup for my travel pictures is

E330 with 11-22mm + E510 with 40-150mm

The problem with this is I can't get full body portrait shots with small DOF.

example


The fence is the background is rather distracting....

So I am thinking of getting
E330 + 11-22, E510 + 50mm f2

Currently this cost like 2k for bodies, 1.7k for lens. $3.7k

If I go for the canon 5D + 24-105mm f4 IS cost ard $5k
I have almost as wide, same DOF at 100mm f4, but best of all and most impt of all I have ONE BODY and ONE LENS which is so impt for travelling.

And also very impt is I get better dynamic range, probably 2 stops better (making standard assumptions). For low light shooting, the ISO adv of the canon 5D is canceled by the wider aperture of the zuiko lens.

Currently, the canon 5D does not have live view so I am not so tempted. But this is most likely to change when the new 5D is released next year.

[drakon09]

Why do you need 2 bodies?

[spidey89]

I also don't get the difference between a full frame and 4/3 sensor,isn't the 4/3 sensor a fully digital sensor that shows a full frame from fully digital lens?

[tomcat]

Originally Posted by wind30 with all the new excitement over the new announcement of full frame nikon, I am thinking hard about whether olympus decision to go small sensor is the correct one. The sensor technology did not improve as much as I had hoped. Currently my setup for my travel pictures is E330 with 11-22mm + E510 with 40-150mm The problem with this is I can't get full body portrait shots with small DOF. example The fence is the background is rather distracting.... So I am thinking of getting E330 + 11-22, E510 + 50mm f2 Currently this cost like 2k for bodies, 1.7k for lens. $3.7k If I go for the canon 5D + 24-105mm f4 IS cost ard $5k I have almost as wide, same DOF at 100mm f4, but best of all and most impt of all I have ONE BODY and ONE LENS which is so impt for travelling. And also very impt is I get better dynamic range, probably 2 stops better (making standard assumptions). For low light shooting, the ISO adv of the canon 5D is canceled by the wider aperture of the zuiko lens. Currently, the canon 5D does not have live view so I am not so tempted. But this is most likely to change when the new 5D is released next year.

It is very difficult to comment as you did not state what lens was used and what was the focal length, shutter speed and aperture settings for that shot.

[bousozoku]

Originally Posted by spidey89 I also don't get the difference between a full frame and 4/3 sensor,isn't the 4/3 sensor a fully digital sensor that shows a full frame from fully digital lens?

They should really call it 35mm film frame instead of full frame since it would be more precise. Full frame depends on the system. Medium format are also full frame systems as long as everything is matched properly. It's only the compromise of trying to attach 35mm film lenses to a body with an incorrectly-sized sensor that you get a cropped frame.

[nightpiper]

wait for "5d II", it'll come with 14bit sensor & dust buster feature. the 24-105 is an F4 lens, u'll need F2.8 (24-70) or bigger (50 F1.2) to achieve what u wanted (fence in bkgnd blurred).

[hammer_400]

even with full frame, to get full body shots with a thin DOF they have to shoot from pretty far away de and use a long focal length

[catchlights]

for full length shot with that kind of distance, what kind of lens can throw the fence out of focus?

[Mikefellh]

35mm/135 users think they are the be-all and end-all, and any other format doesn't matter!

[CYRN]

Originally Posted by catchlights for full length shot with that kind of distance, what kind of lens can throw the fence out of focus?

yeah. I agree, this shot is pretty WA already. Unlikely to get thinner DOF even with FF.

I assume that the pic is taken using 11-22.

BTW you focus seems to be on the fence, if you have less DOF, you subject would be more OOF.

[catchlights]

Originally Posted by CYRN yeah. I agree, this shot is pretty WA already. Unlikely to get thinner DOF even with FF. I assume that the pic is taken using 11-22. BTW you focus seems to be on the fence, if you have less DOF, you subject would be more OOF.

exif says 74mm.. f3.7, 1/10s

perhaps try 800mm lens, on a 1.5x DSLR, stand far far far far far away and shoot.

[drakon09]

Originally Posted by catchlights exif says 74mm.. f3.7, 1/10s perhaps try 800mm lens, on a 1.5x DSLR, stand far far far far far away and shoot.

[zcf]

with the half size sensor, very wide angle and the subject stand far away, it's really difficult to get blur background . How about a FF camera with wide angle plus manually front focus a bit, just enough to keep the subject sharp, but background a bit blur, feasible?

[drakon09]

Originally Posted by zcf how about a FF camera with wide angle plus manually front focus a bit, just enough to keep the subject sharp, but background a bit blur, feasible?

You could do the same on just about any DSLR.

[CYRN]

Originally Posted by catchlights exif says 74mm.. f3.7, 1/10s perhaps try 800mm lens, on a 1.5x DSLR, stand far far far far far away and shoot.

Wah! 108mm equivalent, that's like shooting from the other side of a wide street.

[zcf]

Originally Posted by drakon09 You could do the same on just about any DSLR.

but the smaller sensor size will tend to create a large depth of view.

[olymac]

Originally Posted by wind30 1. ......The sensor technology did not improve as much as I had hoped. 2. ......The problem with this is I can't get full body portrait shots with small DOF. 3. ......Currently this cost like 2k for bodies, 1.7k for lens. $3.7k 4. ......most impt of all I have ONE BODY and ONE LENS which is so impt for travelling. 5. ......And also very impt is I get better dynamic range, probably 2 stops better (making standard assumptions). 6. ..... the canon 5D does not have live view so I am not so tempted.

These seems to be the issues affecting the ability to get a smaller DOF with a 4/3 system ........ from what I can understand from the above post .....?!?!?

[drakon09]

Originally Posted by zcf but the smaller sensor size will tend to create a large depth of view.

See, the problem here is that the TS ain't just looking for full body shot... it's a full body shot WITH an entire forest.

I'm not sure if there is a practical solution around this (note: using an 800mm IS NOT practical! ).

[drakon09]

Originally Posted by olymac These seems to be the issues affecting the ability to get a smaller DOF with a 4/3 system ........ from what I can understand from the above post .....?!?!?

FourThirds sensors have two stops more DOF as compared to 35mmFF.

[drakon09]

Originally Posted by CYRN Wah! 108mm equivalent, that's like shooting from the other side of a wide street.

Well, you're wrong there... it is actually 148mm equivalent...