>>3354839>you won't find a single person who wouldn't rather have a modern full frame body over one of those.I personally wouldn't care. I don't shoot astrophotography so why would I care about getting minimal noise at 12800 ISO? I can't even recall the last time I shot above 2500 ISO, it's been at least over a year now. It's rare I'd ever go over ISO 800, even at night. So why would I rather have some FF sensor that is 4x more expensive than an MFT sensor that has basically no noise up to ISO 800 and minimal noise to ISO 1600 like most FF sensors today? I'm *telling* you, once MFT sensors can match the noise performance of current gen FF sensors up to ISO 1600, almost no one is going to give a fuck about FF anymore except people with extremely niche uses like astrophotography.
>There's no point have 24mp if your lenses aren't good enough to resolve that amount of detail.Oly's 25mm and 75mm f1.8 lenses are some of the sharpest lenses available for any system, and they aren't even the PRO series. Look them up. Sharpness is not a problem on MFT, but resolution *can* be.
>The difference between full frame and 4/3 in terms of depth of field is something like 2 stopsIt's technically 1.8 stops, but it doesn't matter anyway. Only faggoty ass bokeh whores give a shit about 1.8 stops. It's a complete and utter non issue for photographers who are so bad that they obsess about their bokeh instead of their subject matter.
Pic related is shot with a 17mm f1.8 and anyone who would complain that's not enough bokeh for a 34mm equiv. lens is a fucking retard.
>>3354845Here, whore; a snapshit for your shit-eating eyes.
