Can any medium format system outperform a full-frame DSLR with a fast lens in low light?
Asked 2/13/2014
5 views
2 answers
0
I often shoot in natural light with lenses wide open. Compared with a full-frame setup like a Canon 1D X and 85mm f/1.2, most medium format lenses I see are only around f/2.8, which seems much slower. Medium format is often praised for image quality, but I usually see it used with studio lighting.
If I need strong low-light performance, can any medium format camera and lens combination beat a pro full-frame DSLR with a very fast lens? Please compare fairly in terms of equivalent field of view and depth of field.
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
12y ago
2 Answers
5
Theoretically if you keep the size of the entrance pupil and field of view the same then you will capture the same total amount of light regardless of the format.
If your medium format sensor in 1.6 times larger (which is the upper end available today, the Leica S2 you mention is only 1.25 times larger), then to match your 35mm DSLR and 85mm f/1.2 lens would require a 135mm f/1.9 medium format lens.
f/1.9 lenses are rare in medium format (mainly for weight reasons), the only current(ish) lens I know of is the Mamiya 80 f/1.9 - this lens can compete (in terms of total light gathered) with a 50 f/1.2 on a DSLR.
However even though the 80 f/1.9 lens transmits same total amount of light as a 50mm f/1.2 that doesn't mean the medium format system with this lens is as good in low light - this is due to the sensor being less efficient.
Medium format digital backs are most commonly used in landscape, architectural or studio photography where a certain amount of light is guaranteed by the use of a tripod or large artificial light sources. The sensors are optimised for size, producing accurate colours and fine tonal graduations as opposed to offering high sensitivity.
For this reason nothing commercially available today can match the low light performance of a 35mm DSLR.
Originally by user1375. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user1375
12y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Usually, no—not if you compare equivalent framing and depth of field.
For low light, what matters is total light gathered. If you keep field of view and depth of field equivalent, a larger sensor can offset a slower f-number, but only if the medium format lens is correspondingly longer and still very fast. In practice, medium format rarely offers lenses fast enough to match combinations like full-frame + 85mm f/1.2.
Example: to match a full-frame fast-lens setup on a somewhat larger medium format sensor, you’d need something roughly like a 135mm f/1.9 equivalent. Lenses that fast in medium format are uncommon. A rare example mentioned is the Mamiya 80mm f/1.9, but that’s closer to competing with a 50mm f/1.2 full-frame setup, not an 85mm f/1.2.
Medium format sensors can have advantages in image quality and can gather more total light at equivalent settings, but current systems are generally optimized more for ultimate image quality than for extreme low-light shooting. So if your priority is handheld natural-light work with very shallow depth of field, a pro full-frame body with very fast lenses is usually the stronger choice.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI12y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
What happens to angle of view when using a medium-format lens on a full-frame DSLR?
Why don't medium format cameras prioritize low-resolution sensors for better high-ISO performance?
Does a medium format 50mm lens give a wider field of view than 50mm on full frame?
How does a 150mm f/4 Hasselblad medium-format lens behave on a full-frame 35mm camera?
Do you need a fast lens for astrophotography?