Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Old story.

    Moved from Canon FF to m43 to save the back of an old man who wants to get older with less pain.

    Started with Panny and moved to Oly. Mega happy and now enjoying a family of five lenses.

    The only time I covet other shots that I see taken at events I have covered is when I notice how much the FF photographer has been able to separate his subject from the background. Not a big deal but to me a plus.

    I've done the maths as to what it would cost to re-equip with the latest version two Sony and matching lenses.

    Can I hear from anyone around here who has made the journey from m43 to FF Sony and felt the destination was as good as the expectations?

    Foregive me if I don't respond as quickly as I'd like to. We have a few days away planned. I just want to know whether I should consider going shopping when we get back to more mundane home life.


    I thought it might help if I listed my lenses as that inevitably effects/controls the dof and the Sony substitutes are key to the equation :-

    7-14 4.0
    12-40 1.28
    25 1.14
    42.5 1.20
    45-200 4 - 5.6

    Tony

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Tony, not sure about your more blurry background with larger sensor idea. Pretty much all the old lenses I use now on the A7 series gave more blurry background on my G1 and GH2. The "problem" comes while using system lenses.

    (If in doubt check out Keith' bokeh thread.)

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Thanks Vivek,

    Search is not finding me the thread you refer to.

    And, are you comparing the bokeh on the lenses I list with their nearest equivalents on a Sony 7?

    Tony

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Tony,

    Photographing your bokeh thread on the m43 forum.

    No, the lenses you have are the system lenses. If you use lenses that are not optimised for the m43 sensor that has ~5mm stack of glass, for example, an old olympus pen F lens, you will get lot more blur.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Amin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Boston, MA (USA)
    Posts
    1,809
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Tony, the Sony 55/1.8 Sonnar and 85/1.8 Batis will give you a bit more shallow DOF than your PL 25/1.4 and 42.5/1.2. If you love the shallow DOF look and autofocus, I think you should go for it. I still shoot and enjoy both systems.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Ah V. I see what you mean.

    Snag is for my photojournalism I need autofocus.

    Amin. I presumed it would help - but wondered how much.

    Tony

  7. #7
    Senior Member Annna T's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Swiss Alps
    Posts
    1,444
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    3

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Quote Originally Posted by Tonygamble View Post
    Ah V. I see what you mean.

    Snag is for my photojournalism I need autofocus.

    Amin. I presumed it would help - but wondered how much.

    Tony

    You would get two stops more aka if you shoot at F2.8 on the FF body, you would need a F1.4 lens on an MFT body. Beware however that the Sony FE zooms are all rather slow zooms, so you'd get the same DOF with the 24-70mm F4 as you are getting with a 12-40mm F2.8 on an MFT body.

    That said, concerning your initial question, I got an A7r last year and have now several lenses (16-35mm F4; 24-70mm F4 and 70-200mm F4; 28mm F2, 55mm F1.8). All the lenses are much heavier than their equivalent MFT lenses. You would almost be back into DSLR territory when it comes to size and weight, at least if you need zooms and especially so if you get an A7RII or A7II which are quite heavier than the three initial A7s). You can keep the weight down if you get an older A7 and use mainly primes. My favorite lens is the 55mm F1.8 : I love its resolution and the way out of focus areas are handled. I'm using the 24-70mm F4 quite a lot as a walkaround lens. I regret the two other zooms which are both heavier than I'd like; the 16-35mm F4 isn't that good starting at 24mm, with my copy of the 24-70mm producing better results at 24mm; that was quite a deception. And the 70-200mm F4 is bigger than its Canon equivalent and not as sharp in the corners. I'm now eyeing the 25mm F2 Batis and perhaps also the 85mm although presently I'm happy with the Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro in Canon mount. Not all the FE primes are small and light : there is a 35mm F1.4 and a 90mm F2.8 Macro both big and weighting a ton. Among the other small primes there is the 35mm F2.8 (not very well regarded, seems a lottery to get a good one) and the two Zeiss Loxia (35mm and 55mm) which are only MF, no AF.

    That said : I didn't get rid of my Olympus bodies and lenses; on the contrary, I got an E-M5II and when I need reach, I prefer to use the E-M5II with the 40-15mm plus 1.4x extender. My favorite lenses on the E-M5 are the Olympus 12-40mm F2.8, the Panasonic 25mm F1.4 and the Olympus 75mm F1.8. This last lens is incredibly sharp and offers wonderful out of focus area, but it may be a little too long to shoot events indoors. I like to use it for landscapes.

    I think that I'll hold onto both systems, MFT and FE, but don't plan to get the A7rII (I don't need that much resolution and the body is getting too heavy for my taste). I plan to get rid of the Canon body however : three systems is just too much and I prefer mirrorless bodies nowadays.

    In your shoes, I won't get rid of the MFT system. I'd try to add a smaller A7 body and some of the smaller lenses : the 55mm F1.8 seems a no brainer and the 24-70mm F4 zoom may be convenient although a little slow. Don't expect to see a small fast standard zoom : when it comes it will be in DSLR territory.

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Quote Originally Posted by Tonygamble View Post
    Old story.

    Moved from Canon FF to m43 to save the back of an old man who wants to get older with less pain.

    Started with Panny and moved to Oly. Mega happy and now enjoying a family of five lenses.

    The only time I covet other shots that I see taken at events I have covered is when I notice how much the FF photographer has been able to separate his subject from the background. Not a big deal but to me a plus.

    I've done the maths as to what it would cost to re-equip with the latest version two Sony and matching lenses.

    Can I hear from anyone around here who has made the journey from m43 to FF Sony and felt the destination was as good as the expectations?

    Foregive me if I don't respond as quickly as I'd like to. We have a few days away planned. I just want to know whether I should consider going shopping when we get back to more mundane home life.


    I thought it might help if I listed my lenses as that inevitably effects/controls the dof and the Sony substitutes are key to the equation :-

    7-14 4.0
    12-40 1.28
    25 1.14
    42.5 1.20
    45-200 4 - 5.6

    Tony
    As Anna said the Sony FE bodies will give you ~2 Stop light advantage although you may get a higher perceived ISO advantage if you choose the A7s specifically. Regarding the DoF equivalents. The 16-35/4 will give you about two extra stops of DoF compared to the 7-14/4 but it's wide and slow that it may be mostly a non-factor. The 24-70/4 will give you about a one stop DoF advantage compared to the 12-40/2.8 but it's my opinion that the 12-40 is a better lens so it's worth keeping for a walk around lens. The 55/1.8 will give you about a 1 2/3 stop advantage compared to the 25/1.4 and I feel it's a better lens but not as neutral... this goes for comparing the 85 Batis to the 42.5 Nocticron as well. There's really no native FE equivalent to meet your longer requirement so I'd recommend that you keep your zooms on Micro 4/3 and buy a FE body of choice to use with the FE Primes if size is of concern.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Two interesting posts.

    I had not realised that the version 2 and the lenses would be so heavy. I really don't want to get back into DSLR territory.

    I also had not realised how much slower some of the Sony lenses would be. I did a bit of comparison research this morning. What did come home was the lack of a high quality medium range zoom for the times I wanted a do-it-all lens.

    I get all the speed I need from my E-M5 so getting more from a Sony is no big attraction.

    I bought the 42.5 1.2 yesterday with the intention of using it as wide open as possible and the 25mm 1.4 produces some reasonably blurred backgrounds when fully open.

    Please keep posting but my feeling at the moment is to stay with what I have got - maybe moving to the version 2 of the M5 when/if convinced it is really 'better'.

    It might also be a good move to get a second M5 (cheap if used) and work with two primes rather than the one medium range zoom.

    Tony

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Quote Originally Posted by Tonygamble View Post
    Two interesting posts.

    I had not realised that the version 2 and the lenses would be so heavy. I really don't want to get back into DSLR territory.

    I also had not realised how much slower some of the Sony lenses would be. I did a bit of comparison research this morning. What did come home was the lack of a high quality medium range zoom for the times I wanted a do-it-all lens.

    I get all the speed I need from my E-M5 so getting more from a Sony is no big attraction.

    I bought the 42.5 1.2 yesterday with the intention of using it as wide open as possible and the 25mm 1.4 produces some reasonably blurred backgrounds when fully open.

    Please keep posting but my feeling at the moment is to stay with what I have got - maybe moving to the version 2 of the M5 when/if convinced it is really 'better'.

    It might also be a good move to get a second M5 (cheap if used) and work with two primes rather than the one medium range zoom.

    Tony
    So there in lies the problem. I would go to a local camera store and decide if the combo is "too heavy" for YOU. To be honest ergonomics have a lot to do with perceived weight and how long it takes for fatigue to set in. Obviously this doesn't always apply to the camera being in the bag but the type of bag you have matters too (that's another topic for discussion though.) I'm a larger man than many (about 6'3" and 230lbs) so I don't feel that the weight of any of the FE bodies are extreme personally. Some think the lenses and bodies are too large - but that's 100% subjective.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    324
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    You can almost have your cake and eat it too with the Sony.

    You can go super blur by using lenses like:

    Canon 50/1.2 L and Canon 85/1.2 L with a Metabones IV adapter

    Or, my favorite, the Leica Noctilux 50mm, on a M adapter


    You could also go with:

    Sony's own 85/1.4 or 135/1.8 both of which also need adapters as they are A mount native

    Zeiss Otus glass also works great, with adapters. Very heavy, of course.


    In the native FE mount you can get some blur with any number of lenses:

    35/1.4
    55/1.8
    85/1.8


    Or you can go for lightweight:

    Sony A7 with the 35/2.8 or 28/2

    Many easily available, adapted MF lenses are also very compact and lightweight


    Plus, with IBIS and EVF, the old lenses are often easier to use than they were originally.

    So, basically, you can pick your poison. Want super blur? Easy. Lightweight? Can do.
    Both super blur and lightweight at once? Or lightweight and telephoto at once? Possibly those can be done with MF adapted lenses.

    Of course, M43 has an appealing combination of quality, responsiveness and light overall system weight that you cannot really duplicate so, if minimizing weight is paramount, I would not switch unless MF is no problem.

    -Bill

    Upon reading your reply above I would also note that the Sony/Zeiss 24-70/4 on a A7r2 will likely handily beat any M43 mid-zoom combination for IQ.

  12. #12
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,875
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Quote Originally Posted by Annna T View Post
    You would get two stops more aka if you shoot at F2.8 on the FF body, you would need a F1.4 lens on an MFT body. Beware however that the Sony FE zooms are all rather slow zooms, so you'd get the same DOF with the 24-70mm F4 as you are getting with a 12-40mm F2.8 on an MFT body.

    That said, concerning your initial question, I got an A7r last year and have now several lenses (16-35mm F4; 24-70mm F4 and 70-200mm F4; 28mm F2, 55mm F1.8). All the lenses are much heavier than their equivalent MFT lenses. You would almost be back into DSLR territory when it comes to size and weight, at least if you need zooms and especially so if you get an A7RII or A7II which are quite heavier than the three initial A7s). You can keep the weight down if you get an older A7 and use mainly primes. My favorite lens is the 55mm F1.8 : I love its resolution and the way out of focus areas are handled. I'm using the 24-70mm F4 quite a lot as a walkaround lens. I regret the two other zooms which are both heavier than I'd like; the 16-35mm F4 isn't that good starting at 24mm, with my copy of the 24-70mm producing better results at 24mm; that was quite a deception. And the 70-200mm F4 is bigger than its Canon equivalent and not as sharp in the corners. I'm now eyeing the 25mm F2 Batis and perhaps also the 85mm although presently I'm happy with the Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro in Canon mount. Not all the FE primes are small and light : there is a 35mm F1.4 and a 90mm F2.8 Macro both big and weighting a ton. Among the other small primes there is the 35mm F2.8 (not very well regarded, seems a lottery to get a good one) and the two Zeiss Loxia (35mm and 55mm) which are only MF, no AF.

    That said : I didn't get rid of my Olympus bodies and lenses; on the contrary, I got an E-M5II and when I need reach, I prefer to use the E-M5II with the 40-15mm plus 1.4x extender. My favorite lenses on the E-M5 are the Olympus 12-40mm F2.8, the Panasonic 25mm F1.4 and the Olympus 75mm F1.8. This last lens is incredibly sharp and offers wonderful out of focus area, but it may be a little too long to shoot events indoors. I like to use it for landscapes.

    I think that I'll hold onto both systems, MFT and FE, but don't plan to get the A7rII (I don't need that much resolution and the body is getting too heavy for my taste). I plan to get rid of the Canon body however : three systems is just too much and I prefer mirrorless bodies nowadays.

    In your shoes, I won't get rid of the MFT system. I'd try to add a smaller A7 body and some of the smaller lenses : the 55mm F1.8 seems a no brainer and the 24-70mm F4 zoom may be convenient although a little slow. Don't expect to see a small fast standard zoom : when it comes it will be in DSLR territory.
    I am actually in a similar situation, I currently shoot the EM1 with the 12-40 and 40-150 plus TC1.4 and the 75 as my main system and for speed and size/weight there is just nothing better around like that IMHO!

    I sold all my Nikon gear last year (D800E plus several zooms) and currently use the Df with 2 primes just for when I want to shoot DSLR and enjoy EVF. But I am looking for entering the Sony FE camp with the A7rII and some selected primes and zooms to shoot FF mirrorless. I fortunately refused to buy any of the other Sony A7xyz bodies and I am happy, as I have the feeling meanwhile Sony FE gets pretty everything right with the introduction of the A7rII and the latest Zeiss FE glass.

    But I will NOT leave m43!

  13. #13
    Senior Member ggibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    743
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    I came from a slightly more modest m4/3 setup:

    GF1
    9-18mm
    20/1.7
    45/1.8
    45-175mm

    Now I shoot:

    A7
    16-35
    55
    24-240

    In terms of flexibility, I've found the benefits of going with the FE system are that 1 lens can effectively cover 2 m4/3 lenses due to the extra DOF and cropping ability of the Sony cameras. For example, the 16-35mm lens can give the same wide angle range of the 9-18mm AND similar DOF to the 20/1.7 on m4/3. The FE 55 can replace the Panaleica 25 AND the Oly 45/1.8 by cropping. When I got the 24-240, I compared to the 45-175mm on my GF1 and found that their reach/resolution was similar (that is, I could crop the 24-240 enough to get a similar frame as I would on my m4/3 kit). Granted, the 16MP/20MP m4/3 sensors would have reduced that advantage, but I'm comparing on the A7, not A7r/A7rII.

    If you are concerned about size and weight however, I would say stick with m4/3. My A7 kit is much more bulky and hefty for carrying around. I've gone down from 4 lenses to 3, but my bag has gained weight in the process. I still think about switching down to an A6000 or even back to m4/3 sometimes. You already have some of the fastest m4/3 glass which can get you close to a FF look.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Let's see what emerges PT.

    I'm worried about the size. It seems to concern you as it does me when I read about the version 2 of the Sony and the lenses it needs.

    So far I am veering towards staying m43 and getting the biggest aperture lenses that it will take. That will work towards my quested blur and keep my back pain doctor at bay.

    Tony

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Thanks GG,

    Came in whilst I was posting.

    Interesting that you are considering moving back to m43.

    That is precisely the sort of comment I wanted to suck out of this thread. I don't want it to become a format war but only people who have been on both sides of the fence can really help folk like me.

    Tony

  16. #16
    Senior Member ggibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    743
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Yeah, I'm always rethinking my setup in my head If the E-M5II had come out when I was in the market, I probably would have just stuck with m4/3, haha. But the Sony A7 was new and shiny at the time, and I had kept from upgrading my camera body all through grad school so it was time to treat myself. The FE system has some great lenses, and you can certainly stay somewhat light if you just stick to the primes.

    You might find a middle ground with Fuji's APS-C system since they offer some f1.4 and f1.2 lenses. I looked hard at the X-T1 before I jumped into Sony FE. I eventually ruled it out because I wasn't crazy about the ergonomics of that camera (a personal thing), Fuji's video is pretty lackluster, and their sensor tech wasn't playing nice with an Adobe workflow at the time (they may have resolved this partially). But the X-T10 looks like a cool little camera, and again they have an awesome lens lineup.

  17. #17
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,875
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Quote Originally Posted by Tonygamble View Post
    Thanks GG,

    Came in whilst I was posting.

    Interesting that you are considering moving back to m43.

    That is precisely the sort of comment I wanted to suck out of this thread. I don't want it to become a format war but only people who have been on both sides of the fence can really help folk like me.

    Tony
    Tony,

    as I said in my previous answer - I will always keep my m43 gear! But I also want to have some FF alternative and I am very tempted by the A7rII as it does now almost all I (we all) were asking for and some even better. And the Zeiss and certain G lenses are for sure on the same level as the best Olympus glass.

    So for me it is rather the question to invest into a Sony FE FF system or more in Nikon FF (like an upcoming D850/D900). It is not that I m in a hurry, I need to close this for me till next summer, when also the next generation Nikon DSLR should be around. But I lately started to do more video as well and here a mirrorless solution like the A7rII would definitely shine compared to whatever DSLR solution.

    Time will tell, but at least for me the A7rII is a BIG step into the right direction for my needs

  18. #18
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,875
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Quote Originally Posted by ggibson View Post
    Yeah, I'm always rethinking my setup in my head If the E-M5II had come out when I was in the market, I probably would have just stuck with m4/3, haha. But the Sony A7 was new and shiny at the time, and I had kept from upgrading my camera body all through grad school so it was time to treat myself. The FE system has some great lenses, and you can certainly stay somewhat light if you just stick to the primes.

    You might find a middle ground with Fuji's APS-C system since they offer some f1.4 and f1.2 lenses. I looked hard at the X-T1 before I jumped into Sony FE. I eventually ruled it out because I wasn't crazy about the ergonomics of that camera (a personal thing), Fuji's video is pretty lackluster, and their sensor tech wasn't playing nice with an Adobe workflow at the time (they may have resolved this partially). But the X-T10 looks like a cool little camera, and again they have an awesome lens lineup.
    I owned the Fuji XT1 about one year or so and finally sold it, as APSC is something in the middle for me between m43 and FF and if you do not want to rely just on APSC, then it brings almost no advantages in size compared to FF but is significantly bulkier and heavier than m43 if you include lenses in this consideration. And IQ was not really better IMHO compared to the EM1 (with the right processing applied).

  19. #19
    Senior Member ggibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    743
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    A couple other options for getting the full-frame look on a smaller format:

    Consider the Metabones speedbooster on m4/3. They would allow you to keep your m4/3 kit for most normal shooting and add a couple of fast lenses to adapt with the speed booster. The latest 0.64x speed boosters make m4/3 behave like a 1.3x crop, so a 50/1.2 shot wide open is like a 65/1.5.

    Or, try shooting bokeh panoramas (aka the "Brenizer" method)! This is best used with static subjects or patient models, but you can get a nice look out of a m4/3 camera and the fast telephotos. Here's a 9-shot merge that I took with my Olympus 45/1.8, which after merging creates a field of view of a 50/2 on full frame (so a similar look to the Voigtlander 25/0.95, I suppose):



    Of course, once you start doing these, you might be jealous of some of the ones done on full-frame cameras with an 85/1.2!

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Two fascinating suggestions, GG.

    I have written off the thought of moving to Sony. I won't go into the reasons as they are well rehearsed in the posts above.

    So the idea of getting more from my m43 kit is interesting and helpful.

    EDIT. You say " The latest 0.64x speed boosters make m4/3 behave like a 1.3x crop, so a 50/1.2 shot wide open is like a 65/1.5. "

    I thought the boosters gave a wider aperture. Should that not be 0.96? And the length being 32 multiplied by two as you say.

    So, to get the equivalent of a 50mm normal lens I am probably looking for something around 35mm. Any suggestions?

    Thanks again.

    Tony
    Last edited by Tonygamble; 11th August 2015 at 02:15. Reason: Don't understand the maths.

  21. #21
    Senior Member ggibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    743
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Their page will probably be more informative than I can be:

    http://www.metabones.com/products/de...B_SPEF-m43-BT3

    When I say "65/1.5", I was quoting the full-frame equivalent spec. Their wording is a bit more clear:

    the speed of any attached lens is increased by 1 1/3 stops, with a maximum output aperture of f/0.80 when an f/1.2 lens is used. For example, a 50mm f/1.2 becomes a 32mm f/0.80, which is the fastest aperture available for full size Micro Four Thirds format.
    I'm probably not the best person to go to for Canon/Nikon lens recs, but a lot of people seem to like the new Sigma 35/1.4. BIG lens for a m4/3 camera, but it should perform!

    Oh, and I don't know what m4/3 camera you're shooting, but note that not all of the speedboosters are compatible with all m4/3 cameras.

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Moving from M43 to get better blurred backgrounds

    Oh, and I don't know what m4/3 camera you're shooting, but note that not all of the speedboosters are compatible with all m4/3 cameras.

    Thanks gg,

    I was interested until I saw that they did not support autofocus for the E-M5.

    Tony

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •