Jun 122015

Sure, Micro Four Thirds has a smaller sensor, and the appearant DOF of a lens is as if it were two stops slower. Thus my f2.8 looks like your f5.6 (at least if you use a 35mm sensor), but that does not mean that my f2.8 does not gather as much light as yours. It may capture less light, but it concentrates it on a smaller sensor area. Light density is the same and so are my shutter speeds for the same exposure value as yours. It’s only that my lenses are smaller and lighter 🙂

And if I really crave for very shallow DOF? Well, depth of field depends at least as much on subject distance as it depends on aperture. These images have been taken at f2.8, but due to the lens’ great close-focusing capability, I can just go a little closer.

You probably know the effect best from macro lenses: once you get close enough, DOF is shallow even at small apertures.

Now, with shallow DOF clearly achieveable, bokeh is the important factor. Do the out-of-focus areas look good? Creamy? Soft? The Image of the Day is obviously as creamy as it gets. Out-of-focus highlights from the droplets are even discs with no obvious borders or onion rings, and even the second image looks pleasing to me. Its abundance of hard lines at all background distances is more or less a torture test for bokeh, and I’d say this lens behaves quite well.

The Song of the Day is “Summer Grass” by Kiyoshi Yoshida. Hear it on YouTube.

  6 Responses to “3159 – Summer Grass”

  1. Oh yes, it is as creamy as it gets. And freezing the drops, that’s quite an effect.

  2. I’ve pretty much given up comparing sensor sizes – m43 is all I am willing to carry, and whilst it doesn’t give me extreme unsharpness in the out-of-focus areas, it most often delivers images pleasing to the eye without crying “wow – see what an effect I am able to achieve”. So I can concentrate on image properties more important to me and my way of seeing and perceiving. I’ve yet to meet a paying customer who refuses my images because of the sensor size in use 😉

    • Willingness to carry, yes, that’s the point. I’ll be in Italy for a few days and I’ll take my new “heavy” kit. We’ll see how that works out.

  3. My “heavy kit” is the Panasonic LX100, and even that feels a bit too much sometimes, but I’m not complaining. Now that I’m almost in the m43 camp, I have been eyeing the E?M10, on display in shops, but haven’t succumbed, and I hope I won’t.

    • Actually as long as you don’t need or want ultra-wide or longer than the long end of the LX100, I don’t see why you would need to.

  4. I guess this is a question of what one requires vs. what one needs. In reality, I don’t think I would be ready to carry more equipment even though having a “real” macro lens or a long tele sometimes tempts.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.