A bit of a contradiction, but it is true and one of the realities of M43 format, one that I only recently realised is nearly perfect for my shooting style.
Micro Four Thirds format renders deeper depth of field than larger formats at the same relative magnification, because it uses smaller/shorter lenses to reach these magnifications.
A wide angle 25mm lens on a full frame camera is a normal lens in M43. This is physics, it is neither good nor bad, just a reality.
On the flip side, M43 with its smaller sensor has a faster quality drop-off at extreme ISO settings.
Because of these two factors, more often than not, I find myself shooting with my lenses wide open. I use fast primes for low light, fast zooms and slower primes in intermediate light and slower zooms in good light.
This look right to me, wide open on the 75mm in M43 format.
M43 lenses almost without exception perform well wide open or near it and generally they render their Bokeh (out of focus areas) well enough also. This balance of (ff equivalent) f2.8-4 depth is just about perfect if you want natural looking files.
When I purchased full frame for video, I feared the inevitable slide back into all things big, cumbersome and expensive, but something interesting happened. It turns out I really have little practical use for the super shallow depth of field of a fast full frame lens.
This is the other extreme, a full frame 150mm up close and wide open at f2.8. Lovely, but limited in practical application (I used it to show how even the ugliest stand of pest grass beside a building can be beautiful).
Sure, in really low light, a fast lens and large sensor are a genuine benefit and they are effortlessly beautiful in rendering, but I have to be careful how I use it, both creatively and practically. The reality is, most professional photographers will use super shallow depth of field sensibly, even sparingly. Some may not use it at all.
They want and need to make images that have depth, that tell a story, that place the viewer in the frame as an observer, not just an observer of a technical phenomenon.
Shot wide open on a 15mm lens (acting like a semi wide in M43), I have enough depth to avoid a tell tale drop off point on the subject, but a subtle shift away from the candle to avoid it being the central focus. It 1.8 on a full frame 35mm, I would have a sharp face only, so I would stop down to f2.8 or 4, to emulate the M43 physics.
This is not a revelation to me, but it did go unnoticed until I got some full frame gear again and it really hit home with video.
It seems I have an aversion to unnaturally shallow depth of field in video or stills, This super shallow look is in fashion, but I prefer f4 in full frame (f1.8-2 in M43, 2.8 in Super-35) for a more natural depth transition, more like our eyes actually see. The thing is, in M43 that is wide open, so win-win.
This depth allows focus transitions and visual clarity to be obvious and malleable, without making shallow depth the only thing you see, it also lets a lens be at its sharpest and cleanest, helps manual focus, reduces breathing etc.
This is f4 on the 7Art Spectrum full frame 50mm, just about the perfect balance of depth to de-focus and very natural to the eye (at this distance)
This extra depth of course means good blocking, decent story quality and acting and properly setting the scene, heaven forbid.
Favourite combinations in my kit are;
The S5 Mk1 with 50mm Spectrum at T4.
The S5 Mk2 with 35 S-Prime at f2.8 (and AF) in auto focus.
The GH5s or G9 Mk1 (limited codecs) with 25 and 50mm Hope wide open at T2.1.
G9 Mk2 with 9mm (stabe crop is handled well)
For stills the Olympus 12-40/40-150 at f2.8 or 17/25/45/75 at f1.8, Sigma 30 at f1.4, Leica 9/15 at f1.7 and so on. This is even ok in AF mode with the 9mm.
If I use full frame I rarely set wider than f2.8-4. Just because we can, does not mean we must.
I have never been a conformist, it seems to be anathema to me, but in some things I will happily conform to what makes sense, what is right and what works and fight newer trends, no matter how cool they are.
The “modern” look of super silky smooth, artificially perfect lighting and CGI baked in is repelling me these days. I just want reality, not fake reality and over time these things fade anyway. When you look a little deeper, the best at this trade, the biggest names and ones we try to emulate are also resisting it.
Fashion is its own nemesis by definition.
Being true to your self is never fashionable.