joedlh wrote in post #18301661
One positive technical aspect is that the depth of field is a bit deeper than you'd easily get with a macro on a camera with a larger sensor. So the small sensor could be seen as an advantage. I'm not sure I could say the same if I wanted to print it at 16x20.
Let us assume a 24mm tall object in the frame of the FF format vs. the 4/3 format...
- FF (50mm f/8) would capture an area 24x36mm, or it could photograph the macro subject at 1:1 magnification
- 4/3 format (25mm f/8) would capture an area 13x17.3mm, or it would photograph the same macro subject at 13/24ths or 0.54x
...so the FF image at original size has DOF zone of 1.02mm, and the 4/3 format original size image has DOF zone of 1.66mm
But if both images were enlarged to 16x24" print size, the object is at same final magnification, (with FF image enlarged by 16.9x and the 4/3 format image enlarged by 31.3x) so the DOF in print is THE SAME.