Originally posted by hbarnwheeler Thanks for the sample shots.
For what it's worth, the lens on the mx-1 is slower than the kit lens you took that photo with. At it's widest end (12mm), it's f/1.8. That works out to an aperture of 3.3mm (f-number = focal length / aperture diameter). At the widest end (18mm), that kit lens can open up to f/4. That works out to an aperture of 4.5mm.
Hmm... I do understand that the f/stop is a fractional whatchamacallit. The MX-1's widest focal length is 6mm, though, not 12. As the aperture opening is a function of a fraction, I did not believe any sort of equivalence computation was necessary, as it would be when we are comparing "equivalent" fields of view with focal lengths...?
1/2 is 1/2 no matter if it is 1/2 of 100 or 1/2 of 1,000,000.
This has the potential to be VERY confusing.
EDIT: I'm seriously sitting here with my calculator, but it's not helping me visualize. I'm gonna have to draw a picture. I'm a visual learner.
EDIT 2: OK. I did draw a picture, and that makes sense now. (Although, unless I mis-read your post, you say 12mm, but you calculate for 6mm?) I guess the practical application is all that matters, though, and I feel like I've had better results from the MX-1 in similar settings with similar light.
I'm gonna blame the less-than-stellar results on having a new camera and a new lens, plus pressure of recording family events. ^_^