Shallow depth of field and bokeh on m43?

JCJC Registered Users Posts: 768 Major grins
edited December 29, 2013 in Cameras
In that last couple of threads, I've heard people worry about not being able to achieve a desirable shallow depth of field on m43 or 43 sensors.

How's this?

i-VRVjwJD-XL.jpg

depth of field is so shallow his eyes are in focus, but the spinner isn't, which is actually kind of too bad for this shot.

OM-D E-M5
75mm prime
1.8

6:30 PM in the fog,
handheld
1/80 s
ISO 400

I'm not going to argue that m43 is better, pixel by pixel, than APS-C or full frame sensor cameras, that's kind of a red herring, and this shot won't stack up against the best over the in the Macro forum, but then again, this isn't a macro lens.

(oops, that was supposed to be "bokeh")
Yeah, if you recognize the avatar, new user name.

Comments

  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited September 26, 2013
    Even a point-n-shoot can blur the bg at close focus like this. A human portrait might make your case better... or not.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • JCJC Registered Users Posts: 768 Major grins
    edited September 26, 2013
    Even a point-n-shoot can blur the bg at close focus like this. A human portrait might make your case better... or not.

    I was about 3 meters away from the spider. I didn't take the shot to make a case, I've been trying to find this guy in the morning in better light, but he disappears in the day, and only comes out at night. I finally just tried to get the shot I could, even with the fog and wind blowing the web, and was very pleasantly surprised at how the background the just melted away. I just thought it was good example.
    Yeah, if you recognize the avatar, new user name.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited September 27, 2013
    kolibri wrote: »
    I was about 3 meters away from the spider. I didn't take the shot to make a case, I've been trying to find this guy in the morning in better light, but he disappears in the day, and only comes out at night. I finally just tried to get the shot I could, even with the fog and wind blowing the web, and was very pleasantly surprised at how the background the just melted away. I just thought it was good example.

    It's a very nice shot, but your post really reads like you were trying to make a case for shallow DOF on m4/3. Distance to subject and distance to the background are huge factors of DOF. If you get close enough to the subject, and the bg is far enough away, you will throw the background out of focus, no matter what camera.

    Maybe you're not one of these, but a lot of m4/3 owners have a major inferiority complex and are constantly trying to justify their purchase to other camera owners. It's annoying. Sorry if I assumed incorrectly that you were doing that.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,119 moderator
    edited September 27, 2013
    The truth is that there is not that much bokeh difference between Micro-Four-Thirds/Four-Thirds bodies and crop 1.5x/crop1.6x/APS-C bodies. The reason is because the aspect ratio is different for each system.

    Micro-Four-Thirds/Four-Thirds is rather more like taking a different aspect ratio crop, 4:3 in this instance, plus a very moderate crop besides.

    Here is a comparison image (sorry, I can't find the original source to attribute to this image):

    apsVS43rds.gif

    In fact, a Micro-Four-Thirds/Four-Thirds frame has about 88 percent of the height of a Canon APS-C frame, so if anyone thinks that should amount to a major, or even a generally visible, difference in bokeh, that would be a mistake.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,707 moderator
    edited December 29, 2013
    Like Ziggy said.

    It is true, that the dof is not as shallow as can be gathered with a full frame camera, but used carefully m4/3 can create quite lovely images with nice backgrounds. Choice of lenses ( like with any format ) does play a role too.

    Any of the m4/3 f1.8 lenses will give a shallow depth of field if used for near subjects, and are shot at a large aperture. I am sure the Lumix Leica designed DG Macro ELmarit f2.8 45mm ( 90 mm equivalent ) will provide quite luscious backgrounds when used for portraits or macro images.

    If you really want shallow dof with m4/3, consider what the Nokton lenses ( 17.5mm, 25mm, 42.5mm ) with an F 0.95 aperture will offer…..

    This image was shot at 140mm at f8, and I find the background not disturbing to my eye - http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/Travel/Utah-Fall-2013/i-GghMh82/0/L/red_leaves_w_fruit-1060295-3-L.jpg

    The other factor is the at the shallow bodies of the m4/3 system allows most lenses to be mated to them with an appropriate non-OEM adapter, so one could pursue using Nikon or Canon f1.4 or f1.2 lenses on a m4/3 body for special purposes as well.
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Sign In or Register to comment.