Getting a Four Third system simply for the x2 crop factor?


Reportage

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2008
5,785
2
0
#1
If use a 70-200 f/2.8 that would mean 400mm at f/2.8 which is pretty cost effective.
 

denniskee

Senior Member
Oct 26, 2003
5,468
2
0
bukit batok
Visit site
#2
but why cant u just crop for example :

a 70-200 f/2.8 mounted on a ff dslr than go home crop the image by 1/2?
 

Reportage

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2008
5,785
2
0
#3
but why cant u just crop for example :

a 70-200 f/2.8 mounted on a ff dslr than go home crop the image by 1/2?
cropped image = enlarged pixels in the case of serious cropping. On a Full Frame, a telephoto 70-200 seems kinda wasted but thats my opinion.
 

pokiemon

Senior Member
Mar 5, 2005
2,039
0
0
#4
does getting a 4/3 system mean going on a different system from what you currently have? if yes means you cant use your existing lenses and you have to buy new lenses which means no economies of scale.

imo a 1.6x crop factor is not much different from 2x.
 

Hooky3659

New Member
Mar 11, 2009
593
0
0
Singapore
#5
cropped image = enlarged pixels in the case of serious cropping. On a Full Frame, a telephoto 70-200 seems kinda wasted but thats my opinion.
Hi there Reportage, i believe cropping dosent involve enlarged pixels unless u cropped a photo and enlarged the cropped area back to its original resolution or to a bigger print size. If thats the case you might want to check out the new High Resolution APS-C cameras as they are already cropped to 1.6x and the resulting 400mm fov would be of higher resolution.
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,911
0
0
UK
Visit site
#6
If use a 70-200 f/2.8 that would mean 400mm at f/2.8 which is pretty cost effective.
Because you don't get the DoF control of a 400/2.8 nor do you get the noise performance of a FF.

You do, of course, as you point out, save a bucketload of ££.
 

wildcat

Senior Member
Sep 8, 2004
3,269
1
38
Bedok
#7
Because you don't get the DoF control of a 400/2.8 nor do you get the noise performance of a FF.

You do, of course, as you point out, save a bucketload of ££.
This is true, plus the number of lenses available for 4/3 and especially m4/3 are still limited compared to Canikon. I am moving the normal way, i.e. from m4/3 to Nikon 1.5x cropped and maybe a couple of years from now, to FF.
 

giantcanopy

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2007
6,232
2
0
SG
#8
i would probably adopt it for the compactness and the cross mounting possibilities rather than the crop
 

Rashkae

Senior Member
Nov 28, 2005
19,105
12
0
#10
The poor dynamic range of 4/3 kills it for me.
 

seafood

New Member
Jan 27, 2010
437
2
0
SG
#11
If use a 70-200 f/2.8 that would mean 400mm at f/2.8 which is pretty cost effective.
Dun think there is such a lens in the 4/3 range .....

BUT yes, if teles are what you are interested, then the 4/3 system does gives better value. More compact allowing for better handheld. Compare the 50-200/f2.8-3.5 Zuiko to ANYTHING in the Canikon system and you'll NOT find much equivalent. Esp the IQ for the price.
 

aspenx

New Member
Aug 10, 2008
1,350
0
0
here
#12
If use a 70-200 f/2.8 that would mean 400mm at f/2.8 which is pretty cost effective.
I'm assuming that the lens you are intending to use is for 35mm full frame format?

I believe it's a very bad idea, unless you are using a tripod all the time.

The handling will be lousy and you risk breaking your mount (and the adapter) when you handhold it.
 

clioboy

New Member
May 25, 2008
858
0
0
#13
mounted my 70-200 on my PEN-1 and in video mode.. :thumbsup:
 

#17
but that is a 35-100mm, equivalent to 70-200 f2.8 on FF nia, TS is talking about a focal length equivalent to 140-400mm.. :bsmilie:
There is a vertical scrollbar at the side of a browser for a reason and I did said Sigma. :)

There is also a Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 90-250mm f/2.8 if you need an even longer reach. ;)
 

denniskee

Senior Member
Oct 26, 2003
5,468
2
0
bukit batok
Visit site
#18
cropped image = enlarged pixels in the case of serious cropping. On a Full Frame, a telephoto 70-200 seems kinda wasted but thats my opinion.
sorry, i still dont understand this.

if i took a photo using the same lens on a ff dslr eg 5dmkll, than crop the image by half, u mean the image degrade to be worst than using same lens but shot with a 4/3 camera, eg oly e3?
 

denniskee

Senior Member
Oct 26, 2003
5,468
2
0
bukit batok
Visit site
#20
the 35mm sensor area is 3.5x larger than the micro 4/3 sensor, need to crop more than half ..
hahaha, i thought since oly is 2x crop sensor, so half the ff sensor lor, i forgot about the difference in aspect ratio.:embrass:

but should there be difference?
 

Top Bottom