World’s Smallest/Lightest DSLR Photos

[tony-in-japan]

Just received my Olympus E-420 with 25mm f2.8 Pancake Lens a few days ago which is marketed as the smallest DSLR in the world (probably lightest too if combined with the Pancake lens).

I have had two photoshoots so far and have just created a Photostream on Flickr. For those interested in seeing what the quality of this camera and lens is like, then you can see a selection of my shots on here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/26154011@N07/

All of the images have had very little adjustment (only the Levels have been adjusted) to show the kind of quality straight from the camera in factory settings. Most have been taken at f2.8 aperture to achieve a shallow DOF.

Any questions on the Olympus E-420 and Pancake lens (which should be released around the world in May) then let me know. If I have some spare time, I will try and answer them. Enjoy!

 

[terriyaki]

Just out of curiosity on just how flexible a setup like this is in terms of shallow dof, how close would you say you roughly were to the flower and the shaker in those two shots? Within 15 inches? Within 10 inches? Within 5?

 

[Adrien Baker]

This camera really appeals to me as a compact "P&S." I'll have to try one out after I finish some other gear on my priority list.

Adrien

 

[tony-in-japan]

Just out of curiosity on just how flexible a setup like this is in terms of shallow dof, how close would you say you roughly were to the flower and the shaker in those two shots? Within 15 inches? Within 10 inches? Within 5?

I don’t think you could get such shallow DOF from 15inches with this ‘prime’ 25mm lens. From what I recall, the camera was quite close: around 5-6". Any closer and it would not auto-focus.

I could imagine shallow DOF with smooth bokeh would be better with the Zuiko 50mm f2.0 Macro Lens (which is next on my shopping list! )

 

[compuwar]

Just out of curiosity on just how flexible a setup like this is in terms of shallow dof, how close would you say you roughly were to the flower and the shaker in those two shots? Within 15 inches? Within 10 inches? Within 5?

Not as flexible as a larger sensor would be:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

Smaller sensors are an advantage for things like landscapes where you generally want a larger DoF, and less advantageous for subject isolation, though you generally have to get closer or use a longer lens with a larger sensor to fill the frame the same way (negate the "crop factor".)

The "Depth of Field Equivalents" box on the link above is pretty good for comparing. For example, if you take a 400/2.8 on a 1.5x CF body, you'll need 300mm at f/2.1 to get the same thing on a 4/3rds body or 600mm at f/4.2 on a 35mm body. Obviously, if you go with a 50mm 1.4 or 1.8 on a 35mm body, you're looking at 25mm and less than f/1 on 4/3rds (f/.7 and f/.9 respectively I think.)

For the case in point, a 25mm f/2.8 lens on 4/3rds, you can get the same DoF at 33mm at f/3.7 on an APS-C camera or at 50mm at f/5.6 on a full-frame 35mm.