>>4032598>noise is a concern of mineHmm, a fair point, so I went ahead and did the maths for you.
I had to give you the most preferable situation for you, which is that you're having to shoot iso 800 or above wide open, and your copy of the leica lens is a super special one with absolutely zero vignette and a constant t1.4 across the frame.
The areas in red on the vignette chart are the areas that would have less noise on your super special theoretical mft setup after doing vignette correction on the sony lens to make it completely flat. 2.33EV is the cutoff point, 2 stops due to the small sensor, 1/3 of a stop for the f1.4 vs f1.2 lens.
If we use actual aperture equivalence, or the mft lens has it's actual vignette, or you can shoot under iso 800, then the Sony is better across the whole frame for noise after vignette correction. Which made the comparison not very fun.
I'm glad by your own standards you agree that the noise from MFT makes too many photos simply unusable.
>>4032599>f values aren't real >:(The f value is just the ratio of the aperture and the focal length, it's simple maths and you can't really lie about it.
Are you saying that the lens transmission value isn't t1.2 across the lens, so therefore it's not a t1.2 lens? transmission is measured in the centre, brightest part of the lens and is a measure per unit area, not total sensor area, trust me, you wouldn't want lenses brightness measured per total sensor area ;)
The fact you used a shot with severely compromised dynamic range, like you would find on smaller sensors, and tried to pin it on FF is absolutely hilarious and speaks volumes of your technical ability and self awareness
