As the owner of an EM1mk2 and an A7r3 I agree with every comment in this video. For once RUclips came up trumps with this objective review. Sadly it will not get as many clicks as the "micro four thirds is dead" clickbait merchant on another channel.
Sorry naive question so @tony green so are you saying em1m2 is as good as A7r3? I am thinking of getting omd em1 m3, my first omd, but my friend is recommending A7r3 due to diff b/w FF And mft sensor size. I mainly do macro, birds and landsape. Any thoughtswould be appreciated. Here in india we cannot try out the tool before buying so researching like crazy ☹️
Karthika UIJ The A7-3 has very good dynamic range (though the E-m1 series in general doesn’t suck) but if you want “the best”, I’d say get the A7-3. Both will produce good images that you can tweak in post, thanks to the Sony’s larger sensor, you’ll have a little easier of a time recovering shadows and not having as much noise as the E-M1.
@@karthikauij1180 As someone who owns both em1-2 and Sony A7III I can tell you the Em1-2 is a more versatile camera. It can do a lot more. I use the high res shot a lot, 50 megapixel is amazing. The em1-3 has it in handheld, it's even better than mine. If you're going to do a lot of static subject photography go for the em1-3. If you do low light moving subject go for the A7III.
@@karthikauij1180 Hi there. When making a decision consider that for macro it's usually preferable to have more dof. M43 will give you more depth of field at the same aperture than ff. The same goes for landscape photography.
Great reviews. I use full frame canon 6d II and Olympus 4/3 OMD I mark II. I don't have any doubts about all in one camera: olympus. Why I choose 4/3 If I have full frame? The 4/3 are small and better stabilization. I don't need tripod (I have one new that I never use after use Olympus). The color, dynamic range, the Pro lens, ergonomic, 2 memory card, the body construction. The ISO of full frame a better. ok but I many time a really need that? If I use pro lens with 1.2 do I really need more? how many time do you need push for more that 6400 ISO? how many time you feel bad because you have to carry 2-3kg or more of full frame equipment? for video don't thing twice. The micro 4/3 are great option. I use for profissional jobs and I have great result. The camera are not only technical specifications, you have to enjoy ;)
I have a Lumix GX80 and even on a consumer grade camera with an older tech sensor, I never needed more than ISO 1600 no matter how dark! I just keep the 20mm f1.7 handy for those low light occasions and I'm good to go!
I take it that you have not just asked these questions in the abstract. Personally I find the on-camera IS whether lens or body to be a sign that I need to use a tripod. It's a good idea for handheld shooting in low light which is exactly what you shouldn't be doing for the best IQ. Either you need more speed (faster lens, higher ISO) or you need a tripod. But sure I could shoot handheld ISO6400 with a crappy point & shoot. Yep, that's always an option.
THIS! THIS is the review I needed. A FF photographer’s honest perspective of the EM1iii compared the the venerable A73. I especially appreciate the autofocus comparison. I get the ISO performance difference - it’s physics, but it looks like the IBIS makes up for it a little (for static subjects and photos) and really made an impression on you. I’m sharing this! ❤️🙌🏽
I totally agree with you, @Laurence. I have both a7iii and E-M5iii, and I’m very happy with M43-video results, because I can shoot at F=1.8 and keep ISO low.
@@Stefan1968ful It is a truth with modifications. On my safari trips I had no problem keeping up with the FF guys when using my OMD kit. On the contrary I was the only one abe to an acceptable shot of the bat eared fox near it's den at sunset by using an extremely low shutter speed. But on the other handm when shooting at dawn and dusk, then a FF camera with fast lenses will normally perform way better than any smaller camera. You can't have it all, But I was able to carry two OMD bodysm a 300 mmF4, an old 50-200 mm F2.8-3.5 foru-thirds and a couple of small primes togehter with batteries and carger in a carry on backpack. My FF friends had to pay for excess carry on lugage
When I got into photography (about 2 years ago) all I heard was full frame this, full frame that, GOTTA BE FULL FRAME! Well, all I could afford at the time was APS-C. I loved it. When I finally was able to purchase a "pro" camera I ended up going with the Panasonic G9. I am so glad I did. I love everything about the camera and if I need better low-light performance I just pull out my A6400. With both of them I can cover all my needs but my G9 is definitely my primary shooter. Great video on the two systems.
I love my E-M1 III for the numerous featutres this camera offers, i.e. focus stacking/ bracketing, high res, Live Composite, Pro Capture, Live ND filter, starry sky etc. And I actually use most of these features all the time. Having a smaller sensor also is a big advantage for the macro photography.
A great comparison, very balanced and objective. Your comments comes from a photographer, much better than other gear-tograpghers who constantly harp on sensor size; likely to make up for their inferiority complex.
Joel Edelman work is not a good example, its all controlled and studio lighting, any $300 to $400 Nikon or Canon crop sensor cameras can shoot amazing portrait and fashion with the same setup
@@TheMPTV check Mircea Bezergeanu and InTufisuri blog for olymus work .... youll be amazed how olypus can also handle non studio conditions , it can shoot better then Nikon , and micrea was ex Nikon ambasador that sitched to Olympus, long exposures in low light due to its stabilisation , and nobody can beat that so far ... in the right hands olympus its an amazing tool... 7.5 EV stops of stabilization ..., the new EM1-MKII can shoot 25 seconds handheld with no blur on the image , try to beat that with a sony or Ca/nikon :))))
@@adriangpuiu .... try to beat that with a sony or Ca/nikon :)))). Good point. I have film culture with Leicas, Nikons. And you know what? I love the Olympus visionary. They are small in market share (not so small in Japan), but they are BIG in INOVATION. May I make the list? Ultra sonic wave filter, live view, IBIS (not the ivention but put it to an untoucheable level), etc etc. Look! I'm not a Nikon or Canon or full frame hatter. They're BIG they are awesome. Thus Sony. But Olympus guys are commited with all of us with passion, inovation, hightech, and not only proffits. Am I wrong?
Excellent comparison overall! I do think you were very quick to concede shallow DOF as being something you can only achieve with full frame. I switched from Full Frame to MFT when the E-M1II first came out. I shoot portraiture and weddings and the ability to isolate the subject with shallow DOF is important to me. You can get that with MFT if you know what you are doing. It helps a lot if you have really fast glass, and there are plenty of options in the Olympus and Panasonic/Leica lens lines. Using fast primes will also help to mitigate some of the challenges with high ISO. Shooting with fast primes in low light wide open will help to keep the ISO manageable, and since you do get a bit more DOF with MFT that actually helps there as well.
Thanks for the great comment Scott. I do agree with everyone in the comments about DOF. That said, we need to consider that with *most* lenses wide open, we often see a softening of the image. 3 stops in from wide is often the best optics. Some lenses even have 5.6 or 8 marked as the best stop for sharpness. Depending on what results you're after, that can be an issue or not. Having a speed booster (while being costly), can offer a better solution sometimes.
Someone talking sense at last! Incidentally, I use micro four-thirds for studio portrait work and the results are excellent. The lenses for the system are astounding. Subscribed.
Probably the best review I watched in putting the Micro 4/3 system in a very clear and fantastic perspective. Thanks a lot for that brilliant and just views..!!!
great comparison! It is truly important! Currently, there is a small “format war”! Which is ridiculous! All formats have their strengths and weaknesses. And it is very good that we have as many options as possible and that work according to the needs of those who use them. In my case, for small commercials on the web, interviews, a little bit of wildlife and Macro, MFT is ideal! Thanks for the video
I am sending this message from Hiroshima, Japan. I used to use the Olympus E-M1 Mark II, but about a month ago I changed it to a new Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III. The lenses are OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 300mm F4.0 IS PRO and OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm F1.8 [Black] I have an OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 17mm F1.8 [Black] and an OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 25mm F1.2 PRO. I really like this camera because it looks really cool.
You seem to have missed all the internet hype that only full frame matters. What a well balanced review! Well done. I have access to both Sony and OM-D and the Olympus is usually the camera with me. Image quality is excellent as is the portrait capability. Good review
A very objective comparison. Size & weight important my Oly 12-40 2.8 was about quarter price of Canon 24-70 2.8 and les than half weight. The 40-150 2.8 was about half price of Canon 70-200 2.8. Not same lens range but a fair comparison. I could not afford Canon lenses. High ISO as you rightly point out it significant. In many other aspects the important difference is the photographer.
Great review, this warms the heart of all micro four thirds owners ahah (among which I am) I would add that with 1.2 lenses what you're saying with DOF and autofocus is still true and quite usable for most content
Olympus is just flat out reliable. I switched from sony. I personally think olympus/fuji are the best systems available. Modern day m43 sensors are good enough for what I do. Lens are more important the sensor imo. The only thing I miss is crazy bokeh at shorter focal lengths.
absolutely, I'm shooting Fuji right now but SERIOUSLY considering adding the EM1iii with the 10-25 f1.7 as a general walk-around camera and for good wide angle video for weddings
If you looked at actual market data instead of your echo chamber you'd know that MFT is actually a very tiny niche market and it's rapidly shrinking. At this point it's fairly obvious that the system will disappear within the next 3-5 years.
@@youknowwho9247 non (du moins j'espère pas...), le m4/3 a l'avantage du crop pour ceux qui souhaitent un téléobjectif tout en gardant un gabarit compact et léger, et certains boitiers disposent de la double stabilisation. Pour le bruit il est souvent suffisant pour une bonne partie d'entre nous, la profondeur de champs peut être un avantage comme un défaut. Les lumix sont réputé être très bon en video, les derniers em1 et em1x ont une très bonne tropicalisation. La seul chose qui risque de tuer le m4/3 c'est youtube. et si vous voulez un gros capteur parce que c'est mieux prenez un hasselblad :p résumer : achetez en fonction de vos besoin :) good luck with google translate hehe
Good review! As for working in low light conditions, I use M43 camera's (like OM-D E-M1 II with Pro lenses) for concert shoots and they absolutely perform. I just don't go beyond ISO 3200, but that has never been a problem so far. For some examples backing this up, you may have a look at my photostream at Flickr, with for example shots of Floor Jansen at a theatre with full light show and shots of a classical concert at the library of a monastery without a light show (just 2 spots and the regular ambient light).
Great review. Especially the ergonomics reference,... people never weight this aspect of cameras appropriately. Today all cameras are technically good, but significant differences exist in the comfort & relative usability of the various models. Theses issues are of far greater relevance in daily use compared to marginal differences in AF speed, shooting speed, or, dare I say it, noise levels. The vast majority of cameras sold will have the images they capture viewed electronically as this video rightly points out. I for one prefer the compromises of the m43 system v full frame.
People do take ergonomics into account. It's one reason to buy full frame. The ergonomics of the bigger system are much, much better than the flimsy bodies one gets with MFT.
Been using Oly Em1s for 5 years along a lot of other ones and I would not have done a better job describing why it is a relevant technology. Being able to shoot in low low light at f1.2 and still have a decent DOF is invaluable sometimes. Great educated video!
e-m1.1 is an 8 year old camera now in terms of design and can be gotten for fairly low price on the second hand market. But like you said it's still a very capable camera. I still use mine as well. It just goes to show how great these cameras are.
Very interesting and well explained! I am an Olympus shooter and have been tempted by FF but I still love this system so I will probably try out the m3 as well. Thank you for your insights!
Hi Matteo, I am all in favor of people to make they own mistakes because it is the best way to learn. At the same time, please consider an advise from "old fart" like me ;) who down graded from FF in favor of m43 and Olympus Pro primes. Your "upgrade" most likely will benefit people who sells a gear not you.
This is a technical comment. The photosite size has little to do with low light performance. What makes the difference is the size of the aperture. The physical aperture size is the same at F4 on a FF lens as at F2 on m43rds (for example). If you gave both sensors the same light, they would perform the same in terms of noise. However, there is no f0.7 lens to compare to an f1.4 in FF, so in this respect FF is better in low light. However, where you can halve the aperture, the low light performance is the same. Good video, by the way.
Hi Tim. Thanks for the very informed comment. I agree with you in part. I do believe, at least in my conversation with some camera engineers that photosite size does indeed play an important role. I think you can simply see this by shooting F8 on FF and F2.8 on MFT but then upping the gain on the sensor. There will likely be a very noticeable difference in the amount of noise each camera must contend with. That said, it's not that MFT is incapable of decent low light performance. The GH5s and the BMPCC 4K have proved that.
Fantastic review. I'm an Olympus shooter and use it for everything, and even I've been looking at FF (specifically Sony) since the release of the M1MKIII. The new iteration didn't check many items from my wishlist, so I was a little disappointed. That being said, you've reminded me that no camera is perfect, they all have their shortcomings, and ultimately it's up to the photographer to make the best of it all. Cheers
Great comparison. One thing I would add to this review is that OM E-m1 has exceptional weather sealing. And combined with OM/Olympus weather sealed lenses they have some of the best ruggedness and rough weather capabilities in the industry. A73 on the other hand doesn't even offer basic weather sealing. This feature usually comes at a price premium on many cameras. So even though Sony A73 has a full frame sensor, these cameras are priced the same because e-m1 is a pro camera in terms of build.
Thanks for this, very much appreciated. I've invested quite a bit in the m43's, and with the Olympus farming off their imaging business and release of Canon R6 and soon, Sony A7S III, I admit being tempted to jump ship to full frame. Unfortunately, (or fortunately!) I have invested far more in the m43 lenses than the body - Olympus pro lenses, Voigtlander, etc. Your review was very helpful in that I might just hold back and hope that Olympus doesn't kill off their m43 business... thanks again.
Nice review, and I like the comparison! Might be worth pointing out as well with the Olympus lens you compared to Sony (12-100), it actually has a “100mm equivalent” reach compared to the Sony - very useful for a lot of travellers. I’m a Canon user, but I see the benefits of the Olympus cameras - if they work as good as advertised, the focus stacking, star AF, ND filters, so on.
This is brilliant and just the video that I was looking for since I was torn between the two cameras for quite a while now. I'm going to stick with my Olympus system and upgrade some of my lenses as well.
As an EM1x owner/wildlife shooter I would say you nailed the benefits of MFT. The biggest being the weight/cost savings when combined with the 300mmf4 and the incredible IS which removes the need for a tripod. No weight savings when using short lenses. Increased DOF is both a blessing and a curse depending on subject.
Agree with most of your points except for the part where you state the greater DoF allows you to get more light for video without blurring out eye/nose. It's not letting in more light, the ISO on the smaller sensor just boosts the image to make it bright. While exposure rating wise the F numbers are equivalent, the sensor is still smaller, is still collecting less light. If you stopped a full frame down to F5.6, and ramped the ISO up, you'd get the same result as M43 at a lower F stop, and a lower ISO (as evidenced by the ISO test where the full frame shows much less noise at higher ISOs). The full frame just gives you more flexibility while the M43 starts at a lower base exposure, and hence the ISO on the smaller sensor cameras are set to boost the image higher. ISO200 on a M43 is not the same is ISO200 on a full frame.
Mumbo Jumbo B.S. ; manufacturers have been lying about ISO (formerly ASA) since the dawn of certification, but this aside, the illumination per area unit is the same whatever the format. Yes you gather more light total with a bigger format camera, but you spread it further too. And the proof is easy. Take a 8x10 land camera, put a sheet of whatever iso negative in the holder, compute exposure, take the image. Now take a sample of the same film from a 24x36 canister, cut some and fix to your sheet film holder, expose to the same value and process : ISO doesn't depend on the sensor format. What was true with film holds with electronic sensors. Per unit of area, exposure is the same.
What an excellent, and reasoned, review of both the E-M1 mkiii and the MFT format in general, one of the best I've seen (The best...?!). The history of photography formats have always been about strengths and weaknesses, and compromise...Box Brownie, 120, 35mm, 6x6, 6x7, 10x8...ets, and now we have 1", MFT, APS-C, full frame, and 'medium format'(though it's not really). Pick your tool, or tools, and do whats best with each. Or find your happy compromise.
Can't give you two thumbs up but would if I could :) Unbiased, down to the facts and great conclusions for the various things with m43 and full frame. Very well done! :)
As an Olympus OMD E-M1 Mark ii owner, I have to say that your assessment is spot on. I used to shoot with a Nikon D810 and I over to Olympus because of the weight savings. I travel a lot and the extra beef of a Nikon D810 was too much. I was worried about overall personal fatigue and real possibility that air-lines would force me to check my luggage. I can now carry a small bag with Pro level lens without any of these concerns. Cheers, Keith Pinn (Barrie, Ontario)
What always blows my mind is how some people refused to accept that M43 has a place in the market and go around M43 camera reviews and talk smack about the system. Really bizarre. Excellent review btw, definitely hit some good points that many others didn't talk about.
One of the best comparisons between mft and full frame. I noticed you compared the size of a 24-105 full frame and a 12-100 mft: this is a bit uncorrect because the 12-100 has a double reach!
Very very helpful. Some of us live in countries where it is not easy to personally do a physical comparison. We therefore depend on reviews like yours to make a buying decision. I have been thinking of pairing my Fuji Xt with a Lumix g9. This has definitely helped. Thanks
Nice and balanced video. I use Em1 MkII at sea and feel I can't live without the excellent IBIS that effectively takes care of waves and engine vibrations.
you did a great job on this video. As an Olympus shooter I got so many 'attack' from FF users... but they never see my pictures only talkes about specs...
In my opiinion it is mostly true for small Oly cameras. I really enjoy ergonomics of 10-2. When it comes to 1-2(3) - I do not see a lot difference in ergomoc from Nikon bodies I have.
Thanks for the excellent video comparing the new Olympus OMD E M1 Mark III camera to the Sony a7RIII camera. I have an Olympus OMD that I purchased three years ago and I was considering moving to the Sony full frame. After watching this video, I am now considering sticking with Olympus. So this video is very timely. There are a lot of things I do not like about the Olympus: the wifi function sucks, the menu is not intuitive, it has stopped working for about an hour when I was travelling. Anyway, excellent video.
Well if you dislike the Olympus menu system like almost everyone...there are some bad news. If Olympus's menu system is bad, Sony's system is nothing less than atrocious - and their touch screen implementation even less implemented than Olympus. Now that Olympus' Face detection appears to be soo close to Sony's you would have some very specific application that desperataley requires full frame. Only low-light capability can be assigned to that.
Thank you very much for making this video. At this time when everyone is making a first impression review, having a comparison video like this is a great move. I shoot using Olympus, and with the arguments of your video, my decision in staying with the format makes sense. More power to you.
That’s easy. It’s low light vs light weight. For the trendy very low light receptions that some people favour, you’ll want f1.2 primes in M4/3 land. You can still cope with an f2.8 zoom in Full Frame land for these scenarios. Of course an even faster prime will kill the noise better. I use Sony FF & Olympus. Finally Topaz Labs DeNoise AI is fantastic.
I have been shooting with the Sony A7R3 for almost 4 years with the 100-400 G Master and 1.4 TC. I have been thinking about switching to MFT because of the weight and size. As a wildlife shooter, walking for hours with this thing gets old. Yes, the images are fantastic, but if I can find an alternative with less weight and similar image quality, I would be interested. This is a compelling video. Nice work.
ruclips.net/video/wo0fRHFprVw/видео.html you will not understand much , but to see the photos you don;t need english language :P , 1mark iii it;s a good camera , very good
As an Olympus user I really have my doubts about what they are doing. At the very least I would have liked to see a new, higher megapixel sensors, improved evf and touchscreen. Olympus really needs to start putting some innovative hardware into their camera if they are going to survive in a world of full frame mirrorless systems with weather sealing and weather sealing on par or even better.
I shoot my EM1.2 almost exclusively for wildlife. I have the 300mm and it rocks. Especially with such effective stabilization. No need for a tripod just crazy stable.
Good review . I,m agree on everything. The best point is that the 4/3 system allows you to have excellent professional lenses for photography of wild life, without paying for it what a small car costs.
Thanks for the fair review. Incidentally, the Em1 iii does not have the same processing power of the EM1x. The Em1iii has a single TruePic IX chip, whereas the EM1x has dual TruePic VIII chips.
Thank you for the video. There is a bit of an oddity with the weight comparison at 1:33, though. The E-M1 III with battery weighs 580g, and the 12-100mm f/4 weighs 560g, for a total of 1140g, not 1755g. Are you counting additional accessories or maybe a bag? Likewise for the A7 III + 24-105 combination which should total roughly 1310g (650g + 660g) if I got the values right.
Thanks Tangerine. Good catch. I'm not sure what's going on there TBH. I went off specs that Olympus sent me, but I may have mis-calculated. This video was SUPER rushed and I experienced some computer issues while editing - so I couldn't be as thorough in my proof-reading. When I look at the weights again based on information available online, I get a combined weight of 1141 grams. This includes the batter and media. So well under the 1755g. A fairly glaring difference. Good catch. I'll update the description.
Nice video. I have both these cameras as well. Usability goes to the Olympus 100%. I agree mostly with your assessment, except on the telephoto argument. You should try shooting the same focal length on both cameras and then cropping and up scaling the Sony image to match the Oly. You won’t see much difference if any. So the upshot is that this cost/weight savings of MFT on long focal lengths is not real. So the Sony 100-400mm going to give you similar results as the Oly 300mm at a similar price/size/weight.
the dust on the sony A7 was always an big problem for me, Olympus never have this problem, I own both system, but i did waste lots of time to clean up the dust on my landscape image.
My A7ii has a dust problem too. Ever since I got the E-M1ii and some Leica and Zuiko primes, my A7ii has been gathering dust. Gonna sell it and rent a Hasselblad whenever I need more than the Oly can give.
@@keithrjoseph9528 And never change lens in the field. I have had Olympus 4/3 cameras since they were first released and have never had to clean the sensors.
Dear Dale, wonderful video, love the way you make your points. I am filming video with my three Oly E-M1.2 and am still waiting for any significant improvements on the video formats Oly offers. Since the E-M1.2, nothing substantial has been added for the 1X and the 1.3. Still stuck with C4K 24p or in my case 4K 30 with 4.2.0 and 8 bit. No 4K 60, no 10 bit, no 4.2.2, no 6K, nothing has changed since the EM1.2. That's why I am cannot convince myself to buy the EM1.3 now. I don't see that Olympus makes any progress in Video. They leave it completely to Panasonic. Very sad. Best regards, Markus
Hi Sandra & Markus - thank you for your great comment. The Mk3 did add 120p at HD, but still lacks UHD 16:9 which is a bit odd. The Olympus OM-Log is also a bit puzzling. It seems to me to be barely a log profile at all. Perhaps that makes it better, as it's easier to grade (almost like Black Magic Film/Log), but I wonder how that clamps the DR a bit. I think the colours are nice in video and the lack of rolling shutter is a huge win in my opinion. I would just be worried if I had to shoot above 1600. It's bit rate of 234 at 4K is also more than double that of Sony's (100mb/s). So you technically have more information and less compression noise.
@@vistek Thank you very much, fully agree FHD 120fps was the last addition, but as we are filming everthing in Ultra-HD 4K 30 fps, any Full-HD addition are not what we are looking for. I love our 4K-videos with Olympus, but Olympus has not improved anything on the formats sind the E-M1.2 where as Panasonic is giving you a full range of high quality video formats (up to 6k anamorphic), color-depth (10bit) and 4.2.2. There is no improvement on Oly side, even thought the processor power has been significantly raised since the 1.2. I just wonder if there is actually no video expertise in Olympus and they just bought a fully licenced packed with the E-M1.2 and that's all there is. I love the Olympus cameras for all the reasons you stated in your video, but as we have switched to video, Olympus has not improved in that area at all for us. I still hold strong to the Olympus company, but I am worried what will happen when I read the specs of the future GH6. Thank you very much for providing such great content and best regards, Markus
I came into this video super optimistic and excited for the comparison, but I was disappointed in the lack of brevity. I wish it were longer, I want to see a part 2, I want more of a comparison. Maybe more of your opinion. I just want more.
Thanks for the comment Brent. I had a bunch more footage and photos. lots to cover, but I had deadline to meet, and also didn't want the video to go on endlessly. Somethings simply had to be omitted. Better to leave them wanting more, no? ;)
There is another area that MFT might be considered a good option - macro. Wish Sony would add this feature but for some bizarre reason does not provide in-camera focus bracketing. Something that comes in quite handy for many situations compared to needing to carry additional apparatuses to complete the task.
One of the best reviews I have seen in a long time. Factual, well illustrated, covering a lot of angles. The one thing that did not fully work for me though was the price/weight comparison: the Sony 24-105 has about half the FF equivalent reach as the Olympus. The new Zuiko 12-45 F4 would be a closer match, at roughly half the price and weight of the Sony lens. That would give m43 approximately a 20% cost and 35+% weight advantage, which is not insignificant. Your point is still valid though: the cost difference is rather small and the weight difference is mostly in the lens, specifically with increased focal length.
I was actually wondering/hoping someone would do this very comparison. Yea! And well done; felt you really covered the main points well and concisely. Am considering adding a 4-3 camera to my kit for light travel, their better lens options (than my apsc Canon), and that super reach possibility with telephoto lenses for birding. Much appreciate the review.
Thank you for talking about the positives of M43 without also ignoring the occasional downsides. I love my Olympus but I also can't stand when fanboys act like it doesn't have both pros AND cons
One important difference almost nobody talks about in stills is the native aspect ratio. Photography is also about composition. Composing in 4:3 (and not only in portrait mode) has, from my humble point of view, nothing to compare with 3:2 Especially when you can't choose 4:3 in A7 bodies except in the R4. Good comparison by the way.
You should be comparing the Olympus 300mm f/4 to the Sony 200-600mm considering that the Olympus 300mm f/4 has about the same amount of bokeh as an f/8 lens on a FF body. The Sony 200-600mm lens is $1,500 less than the Olympus 300mm and a much better deal than the Olympus combo and you'll get better autofocus too. Furthermore, the amount of noise at equivalent ISO's is about 4x higher on an m/43 body. For birds/wildlife/sports, I'll take the Sony A7III with the Sony 200-600mm hands-down.
I thought the exact same way about the Sony system. I had a chance to use the a73 along with the 200-600 lens about a month ago. I was shooting Lynx here in Canada. After 3 hours of patiently waiting, i had a mother Lynx and 2 kittens come into view. The sony simply would not work. I even tried it with a warm battery from my pocket. When i got it home and warmed up it worked fine again. Thankfully its not always that cold her, but winter season is a big part of my wildlife work. I haven't had a chance to try the Olympus system, but i sure would like to. Thats actually what brought me to this video. So for now, i continue with the Canon dslrs, looking at different brands, perhaps Nikon or Olympus for mirrorless wildlife work.
If we're moving from high-end fixed lens to lower-cost zoom, then do it for both cameras. The brilliant 75-300 f4.8-6.7 Olympus lens costs $650 - 1/4 the price, 1/4 the weight and 1/4 the size of the Sony.
Really well-balanced, insightful video. A friend of mine shot a running event last weekend with the EM1 iii. Turned out great - made me want to check it out.
Excellent review. One of the best I have seen so far. Olympus definitely has its place in the market and for me as full-time landscape photographer I appreciate the weight, weather sealing and portability. For me none of the other manufacturers can match this.
MFT has it limitations especially in low light . ISO 6400 is pushing the noise limit. I shot entirely with Olympus MFT cameras from 2013-2015 for all my concept shoots and the image noise was too much. However, with decent to good light, the Olympus cameras gave great results.
Nice and objective comparison! I like that you really compare the cameras on a practical level and not just based on their tech-sheets. I am mft shooter and wonder if I should upgrade to the new EM1 or get an full frame just for astro photography, because that is one scenario mft lags a bit and can't compensate with it's otherwise great IBIS. 🤔 Nevertheless thanks for not joining the 'format war', which is ridiculous.
We've been weighing up getting the Olympus camera for vlogging. This video was very useful, we need something light and has a good middle point for price vs quality. Almost 100% sure to go ahead with the purchase thank you for the video!
Thanks for the excellent review. Olympus always brings a smile to my face, while my own 44-year old OM-1 from my teenager days stares back at me from its bookshelf. Thanks also for helping to bust the fullframe craze running around YT nowadays. The main difference besides price and size, are indeed high ISO/low light performance and lattitude in post. However, DOF is not depending on sensor size, but on focal length and aperture. A 90mm at f2 on fullframe has the same DOF as it has on APS-C or on MFT. However, it has a different field-of-view, hence the confusion. Like many people also state that f2 on an APS-C is actually f2.8 on fullframe. It’s not. It’s still f2 in terms of light transmission. Fun fact: it’s Olympus that led to the nickname ‘fullframe’. With their PEN camera they made half-frame (12x18mm) popular, which lead to the nickname full-frame for the 24x36mm cameras using 135 film. Since MFT is close to half-frame, they actually stayed true to their heritage...
It’s measured on the diagonal, hence half-frame. That’s why focal lengths have to be multiplied by 2 to get the fullframe equivalent. But the mm2 is indeed 4 times less... ;-)
Thank you for this video. I'm still using an em10 mkii and want to upgrade so I can shoot in foul weather. I've looked at other systems, but...I already have all these lenses! Your video was informative and really sold me on the em1 mkiii. Thanks for the information and the things civil. A lot of folks just bash on mft, and I think there's room for every system out there - all have their strengths and weaknesses. After this video, I'll be subscribing and I look forward to your thoughts in the future, for any camera system. Thanks again and keep up the great work. I appreciate it.
Well reviewed and compared. Weight, cost, and size with so little to trade off with full frame, why five years ago I tried out the Oly E-M5 mkII an with in six months I was in love with the cameras and lenses. My Canon cameras and gear have sitting idle ever sense. In the long term I’ve discovered I’m bring the camera with me far more regularly the I was doing with the bigger, heavier Canon gear and I’m enjoying photography more again. Thanks for the well thought out comparison.
Actually MFT has a huge advantage in something like street photography for example. I can get the light of an f/1.4 aperture for my exposure, but still have the deeper depth of field of f/2.8 in full frame terms, all with lenses that are half the size and weight (and often half the cost too). The A7 series are small bodies, but for full frame guy to get close to the size and weight, they need to use f/4 zooms or f/2.8 primes, negating any noise advantage of the larger sensor.
Great review. I shoot with two EM1 Mkii's currently and will be replacing one of them with the mkiii. Moved from full frame when i realised 36mp was overkill for what i shoot. Olympus primes are solid and some of the finest glass you can purchase.
I currently use an EM1-3, mainly for bird photography. I was tempted to look at an used Sony A73 because of its autofocus and FF (so more pixels to crop in post). But this video shows me that I might not be getting a jump in improvement moving to a Sony A73. Thanks for a great video :)
Great video. I have an olympus stylus 1 and I'm thinking of getting either a om5 or a om1. Are these cameras still available? My 1st choice right now is fugi xpro2, but I also want a better olympus as well. I like both systems.
Hi. This is a very fair review of this camera. It’s a camera that I am considering and this review convinced me to go with the Olympus camera. Thanks so much again for a very fair and informative review.
When you comare the Face Detection, you did not use the C-AF+Tracking at the E-M1 III? Why? And what's about the Eye-Tracking? This would be very interesting. Could you tell me your opinion?
As the owner of an EM1mk2 and an A7r3 I agree with every comment in this video. For once RUclips came up trumps with this objective review. Sadly it will not get as many clicks as the "micro four thirds is dead" clickbait merchant on another channel.
Thanks Tony!
Sorry naive question so @tony green so are you saying em1m2 is as good as A7r3? I am thinking of getting omd em1 m3, my first omd, but my friend is recommending A7r3 due to diff b/w FF And mft sensor size. I mainly do macro, birds and landsape. Any thoughtswould be appreciated. Here in india we cannot try out the tool before buying so researching like crazy ☹️
Karthika UIJ The A7-3 has very good dynamic range (though the E-m1 series in general doesn’t suck) but if you want “the best”, I’d say get the A7-3. Both will produce good images that you can tweak in post, thanks to the Sony’s larger sensor, you’ll have a little easier of a time recovering shadows and not having as much noise as the E-M1.
@@karthikauij1180 As someone who owns both em1-2 and Sony A7III I can tell you the Em1-2 is a more versatile camera. It can do a lot more. I use the high res shot a lot, 50 megapixel is amazing. The em1-3 has it in handheld, it's even better than mine. If you're going to do a lot of static subject photography go for the em1-3. If you do low light moving subject go for the A7III.
@@karthikauij1180 Hi there. When making a decision consider that for macro it's usually preferable to have more dof. M43 will give you more depth of field at the same aperture than ff. The same goes for landscape photography.
One of the best reviews of the E-M1iii I've seen so far (and I've seen a lot). Thank you very much for the good work ! :)
Thanks so much UBd'Air! Really appreciate that you took the time to comment and show your support!
Not a review but Chris Eyre Walker has a cool promotional video showcasing the E-M1 mark III.
Why do you watch RUclips reviews of a camera you already own? Are you uncertain that you made a good choice?
Great reviews. I use full frame canon 6d II and Olympus 4/3 OMD I mark II. I don't have any doubts about all in one camera: olympus. Why I choose 4/3 If I have full frame? The 4/3 are small and better stabilization. I don't need tripod (I have one new that I never use after use Olympus). The color, dynamic range, the Pro lens, ergonomic, 2 memory card, the body construction. The ISO of full frame a better. ok but I many time a really need that? If I use pro lens with 1.2 do I really need more? how many time do you need push for more that 6400 ISO? how many time you feel bad because you have to carry 2-3kg or more of full frame equipment? for video don't thing twice. The micro 4/3 are great option. I use for profissional jobs and I have great result. The camera are not only technical specifications, you have to enjoy ;)
Vitor Teixeira Your comment is as good as the review.
Tripod is required with Em1 mark 3 for videos and photos ?
I have a Lumix GX80 and even on a consumer grade camera with an older tech sensor, I never needed more than ISO 1600 no matter how dark! I just keep the 20mm f1.7 handy for those low light occasions and I'm good to go!
I take it that you have not just asked these questions in the abstract. Personally I find the on-camera IS whether lens or body to be a sign that I need to use a tripod. It's a good idea for handheld shooting in low light which is exactly what you shouldn't be doing for the best IQ. Either you need more speed (faster lens, higher ISO) or you need a tripod.
But sure I could shoot handheld ISO6400 with a crappy point & shoot. Yep, that's always an option.
Nice compare! I prefer OMD M1 iii. Amazing camera.
THIS! THIS is the review I needed. A FF photographer’s honest perspective of the EM1iii compared the the venerable A73. I especially appreciate the autofocus comparison. I get the ISO performance difference - it’s physics, but it looks like the IBIS makes up for it a little (for static subjects and photos) and really made an impression on you. I’m sharing this! ❤️🙌🏽
Thanks so much for the great comment, Laurence! Really appreciate the support and sharing with you community.
I totally agree with you, @Laurence. I have both a7iii and E-M5iii, and I’m very happy with M43-video results, because I can shoot at F=1.8 and keep ISO low.
AF comparison???))) with different DOF?? It’s cheating. Make the same conditions: f/1.4 in Olympus and f/2.8 in A7. And you will see the truth.
IBIS means nothing for Wildlife as you need fast shutter speeds and good low light performance. M43 can’t convince here. Sorry.
@@Stefan1968ful It is a truth with modifications. On my safari trips I had no problem keeping up with the FF guys when using my OMD kit. On the contrary I was the only one abe to an acceptable shot of the bat eared fox near it's den at sunset by using an extremely low shutter speed. But on the other handm when shooting at dawn and dusk, then a FF camera with fast lenses will normally perform way better than any smaller camera. You can't have it all, But I was able to carry two OMD bodysm a 300 mmF4, an old 50-200 mm F2.8-3.5 foru-thirds and a couple of small primes togehter with batteries and carger in a carry on backpack. My FF friends had to pay for excess carry on lugage
When I got into photography (about 2 years ago) all I heard was full frame this, full frame that, GOTTA BE FULL FRAME! Well, all I could afford at the time was APS-C. I loved it. When I finally was able to purchase a "pro" camera I ended up going with the Panasonic G9. I am so glad I did. I love everything about the camera and if I need better low-light performance I just pull out my A6400. With both of them I can cover all my needs but my G9 is definitely my primary shooter. Great video on the two systems.
Full frame, 45 Megapixels, dual card slots and 8K video! You need the Canon R5!
I love my E-M1 III for the numerous featutres this camera offers, i.e. focus stacking/ bracketing, high res, Live Composite, Pro Capture, Live ND filter, starry sky etc. And I actually use most of these features all the time. Having a smaller sensor also is a big advantage for the macro photography.
A great comparison, very balanced and objective. Your comments comes from a photographer, much better than other gear-tograpghers who constantly harp on sensor size; likely to make up for their inferiority complex.
Haha. Thanks for the support ZD. Super appreciate it.
It's called sensor envy lol.
Look at Joel Edelmans work with olympus...fashion, portrait ..in the right hands olympus can knock it out of the park!.
aikiR do seen his billboard?
Joel Edelman work is not a good example, its all controlled and studio lighting, any $300 to $400 Nikon or Canon crop sensor cameras can shoot amazing portrait and fashion with the same setup
@@TheMPTV check Mircea Bezergeanu and InTufisuri blog for olymus work .... youll be amazed how olypus can also handle non studio conditions , it can shoot better then Nikon , and micrea was ex Nikon ambasador that sitched to Olympus, long exposures in low light due to its stabilisation , and nobody can beat that so far ... in the right hands olympus its an amazing tool... 7.5 EV stops of stabilization ..., the new EM1-MKII can shoot 25 seconds handheld with no blur on the image , try to beat that with a sony or Ca/nikon :))))
@@TheMPTV Come on guy! Glass quality from Olympus, don´t you think?
@@adriangpuiu .... try to beat that with a sony or Ca/nikon :)))). Good point. I have film culture with Leicas, Nikons. And you know what? I love the Olympus visionary. They are small in market share (not so small in Japan), but they are BIG in INOVATION. May I make the list? Ultra sonic wave filter, live view, IBIS (not the ivention but put it to an untoucheable level), etc etc. Look! I'm not a Nikon or Canon or full frame hatter. They're BIG they are awesome. Thus Sony. But Olympus guys are commited with all of us with passion, inovation, hightech, and not only proffits. Am I wrong?
Excellent comparison overall! I do think you were very quick to concede shallow DOF as being something you can only achieve with full frame. I switched from Full Frame to MFT when the E-M1II first came out. I shoot portraiture and weddings and the ability to isolate the subject with shallow DOF is important to me. You can get that with MFT if you know what you are doing. It helps a lot if you have really fast glass, and there are plenty of options in the Olympus and Panasonic/Leica lens lines. Using fast primes will also help to mitigate some of the challenges with high ISO. Shooting with fast primes in low light wide open will help to keep the ISO manageable, and since you do get a bit more DOF with MFT that actually helps there as well.
Thanks for the great comment Scott. I do agree with everyone in the comments about DOF. That said, we need to consider that with *most* lenses wide open, we often see a softening of the image. 3 stops in from wide is often the best optics. Some lenses even have 5.6 or 8 marked as the best stop for sharpness. Depending on what results you're after, that can be an issue or not. Having a speed booster (while being costly), can offer a better solution sometimes.
Excellent and intelligent comparison of the two systems!!
Thanks Steve! Really appreciate the support and generous comment.
Someone talking sense at last! Incidentally, I use micro four-thirds for studio portrait work and the results are excellent. The lenses for the system are astounding. Subscribed.
Thank you Brian!
What body and lenes do you use?
Probably the best review I watched in putting the Micro 4/3 system in a very clear and fantastic perspective. Thanks a lot for that brilliant and just views..!!!
Thank you Uday!
great comparison! It is truly important! Currently, there is a small “format war”! Which is ridiculous! All formats have their strengths and weaknesses. And it is very good that we have as many options as possible and that work according to the needs of those who use them. In my case, for small commercials on the web, interviews, a little bit of wildlife and Macro, MFT is ideal! Thanks for the video
THanks titaostein! Really appreciate the support and taking the time to make the great comment.
I am sending this message from Hiroshima, Japan.
I used to use the Olympus E-M1 Mark II, but about a month ago I changed it to a new Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark III.
The lenses are OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 300mm F4.0 IS PRO and OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 45mm F1.8 [Black]
I have an OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 17mm F1.8 [Black] and an OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 25mm F1.2 PRO.
I really like this camera because it looks really cool.
You seem to have missed all the internet hype that only full frame matters. What a well balanced review! Well done. I have access to both Sony and OM-D and the Olympus is usually the camera with me. Image quality is excellent as is the portrait capability. Good review
Thanks for the wonderful comment, Doug! Super appreciate it!
Objective comparison, straight to the point, no babbling on specs you can read anywhere but real use considerations. Subbed
A very objective comparison. Size & weight important my Oly 12-40 2.8 was about quarter price of Canon 24-70 2.8 and les than half weight. The 40-150 2.8 was about half price of Canon 70-200 2.8. Not same lens range but a fair comparison. I could not afford Canon lenses. High ISO as you rightly point out it significant. In many other aspects the important difference is the photographer.
Great review, this warms the heart of all micro four thirds owners ahah (among which I am)
I would add that with 1.2 lenses what you're saying with DOF and autofocus is still true and quite usable for most content
Thanks so much Valère. I agree, and adding a speed booster also opens up a wealth of lensing and DOF options.
Olympus weatherproofing is second-to-none and part of the reason I stick with the system.
I agree FFF. It's something that I wanted to talk about but didn't have time to in the edit. It's one area that it trumps the A73 big time.
Got to disagree the Leica and new Sony ARiv has a better overall weather sealing
@@keithrjoseph9528 [citation needed]
... there's always one
@@keithrjoseph9528 you can run a shower on top of an EM1 and still use it
Olympus is just flat out reliable. I switched from sony. I personally think olympus/fuji are the best systems available. Modern day m43 sensors are good enough for what I do. Lens are more important the sensor imo. The only thing I miss is crazy bokeh at shorter focal lengths.
absolutely, I'm shooting Fuji right now but SERIOUSLY considering adding the EM1iii with the 10-25 f1.7 as a general walk-around camera and for good wide angle video for weddings
Me too i have x-t3 and em1 but can't afford lens for either
So I've been buying used canon ef and ef-s mount lenses for 1/4 the cost of native glass.
Micro four-thirds have a huge following, the full-frame folks just don't know that
If you looked at actual market data instead of your echo chamber you'd know that MFT is actually a very tiny niche market and it's rapidly shrinking. At this point it's fairly obvious that the system will disappear within the next 3-5 years.
@@youknowwho9247 non (du moins j'espère pas...), le m4/3 a l'avantage du crop pour ceux qui souhaitent un téléobjectif tout en gardant un gabarit compact et léger, et certains boitiers disposent de la double stabilisation. Pour le bruit il est souvent suffisant pour une bonne partie d'entre nous, la profondeur de champs peut être un avantage comme un défaut. Les lumix sont réputé être très bon en video, les derniers em1 et em1x ont une très bonne tropicalisation. La seul chose qui risque de tuer le m4/3 c'est youtube. et si vous voulez un gros capteur parce que c'est mieux prenez un hasselblad :p
résumer : achetez en fonction de vos besoin :)
good luck with google translate hehe
Haha the mft followers are too busy enjoying their camera ;)
@@lothy4632 yep, all 1% of the market 😀.
The iso is trash in micro 4/3
Good review! As for working in low light conditions, I use M43 camera's (like OM-D E-M1 II with Pro lenses) for concert shoots and they absolutely perform. I just don't go beyond ISO 3200, but that has never been a problem so far. For some examples backing this up, you may have a look at my photostream at Flickr, with for example shots of Floor Jansen at a theatre with full light show and shots of a classical concert at the library of a monastery without a light show (just 2 spots and the regular ambient light).
Great review. Especially the ergonomics reference,... people never weight this aspect of cameras appropriately. Today all cameras are technically good, but significant differences exist in the comfort & relative usability of the various models. Theses issues are of far greater relevance in daily use compared to marginal differences in AF speed, shooting speed, or, dare I say it, noise levels. The vast majority of cameras sold will have the images they capture viewed electronically as this video rightly points out.
I for one prefer the compromises of the m43 system v full frame.
Thanks for the great comment, Stephen.
People do take ergonomics into account. It's one reason to buy full frame. The ergonomics of the bigger system are much, much better than the flimsy bodies one gets with MFT.
@@youknowwho9247 get a life!
Been using Oly Em1s for 5 years along a lot of other ones and I would not have done a better job describing why it is a relevant technology. Being able to shoot in low low light at f1.2 and still have a decent DOF is invaluable sometimes. Great educated video!
e-m1.1 is an 8 year old camera now in terms of design and can be gotten for fairly low price on the second hand market. But like you said it's still a very capable camera. I still use mine as well. It just goes to show how great these cameras are.
Very interesting and well explained! I am an Olympus shooter and have been tempted by FF but I still love this system so I will probably try out the m3 as well. Thank you for your insights!
Thank you so much Matteo! Really appreciate the kind words!
Hi Matteo, I am all in favor of people to make they own mistakes because it is the best way to learn. At the same time, please consider an advise from "old fart" like me ;) who down graded from FF in favor of m43 and Olympus Pro primes. Your "upgrade" most likely will benefit people who sells a gear not you.
@@mfreider do you mean that the only upgrade from m43 is for FF?
This is a technical comment. The photosite size has little to do with low light performance. What makes the difference is the size of the aperture. The physical aperture size is the same at F4 on a FF lens as at F2 on m43rds (for example). If you gave both sensors the same light, they would perform the same in terms of noise. However, there is no f0.7 lens to compare to an f1.4 in FF, so in this respect FF is better in low light. However, where you can halve the aperture, the low light performance is the same. Good video, by the way.
Hi Tim. Thanks for the very informed comment. I agree with you in part. I do believe, at least in my conversation with some camera engineers that photosite size does indeed play an important role. I think you can simply see this by shooting F8 on FF and F2.8 on MFT but then upping the gain on the sensor. There will likely be a very noticeable difference in the amount of noise each camera must contend with. That said, it's not that MFT is incapable of decent low light performance. The GH5s and the BMPCC 4K have proved that.
Fantastic review. I'm an Olympus shooter and use it for everything, and even I've been looking at FF (specifically Sony) since the release of the M1MKIII. The new iteration didn't check many items from my wishlist, so I was a little disappointed. That being said, you've reminded me that no camera is perfect, they all have their shortcomings, and ultimately it's up to the photographer to make the best of it all. Cheers
Thank you for the kind comment, Krzysztof!
Great comparison. One thing I would add to this review is that OM E-m1 has exceptional weather sealing. And combined with OM/Olympus weather sealed lenses they have some of the best ruggedness and rough weather capabilities in the industry. A73 on the other hand doesn't even offer basic weather sealing. This feature usually comes at a price premium on many cameras. So even though Sony A73 has a full frame sensor, these cameras are priced the same because e-m1 is a pro camera in terms of build.
Thanks for this, very much appreciated. I've invested quite a bit in the m43's, and with the Olympus farming off their imaging business and release of Canon R6 and soon, Sony A7S III, I admit being tempted to jump ship to full frame. Unfortunately, (or fortunately!) I have invested far more in the m43 lenses than the body - Olympus pro lenses, Voigtlander, etc. Your review was very helpful in that I might just hold back and hope that Olympus doesn't kill off their m43 business... thanks again.
Thanks for the comparison! Since I got my EM1 miii I have been shooting a lot more, it brought joy back into my camera bag.
Nice review, and I like the comparison! Might be worth pointing out as well with the Olympus lens you compared to Sony (12-100), it actually has a “100mm equivalent” reach compared to the Sony - very useful for a lot of travellers. I’m a Canon user, but I see the benefits of the Olympus cameras - if they work as good as advertised, the focus stacking, star AF, ND filters, so on.
This is brilliant and just the video that I was looking for since I was torn between the two cameras for quite a while now. I'm going to stick with my Olympus system and upgrade some of my lenses as well.
Thanks Viktoria! Really appreciate the comment and that you're happy with your Olympus system!
thank you for this great video. I have never seen sutch a objektiv test between these two systems!
As an EM1x owner/wildlife shooter I would say you nailed the benefits of MFT. The biggest being the weight/cost savings when combined with the 300mmf4 and the incredible IS which removes the need for a tripod. No weight savings when using short lenses. Increased DOF is both a blessing and a curse depending on subject.
Agree with most of your points except for the part where you state the greater DoF allows you to get more light for video without blurring out eye/nose. It's not letting in more light, the ISO on the smaller sensor just boosts the image to make it bright. While exposure rating wise the F numbers are equivalent, the sensor is still smaller, is still collecting less light. If you stopped a full frame down to F5.6, and ramped the ISO up, you'd get the same result as M43 at a lower F stop, and a lower ISO (as evidenced by the ISO test where the full frame shows much less noise at higher ISOs). The full frame just gives you more flexibility while the M43 starts at a lower base exposure, and hence the ISO on the smaller sensor cameras are set to boost the image higher. ISO200 on a M43 is not the same is ISO200 on a full frame.
Mumbo Jumbo B.S. ; manufacturers have been lying about ISO (formerly ASA) since the dawn of certification, but this aside, the illumination per area unit is the same whatever the format. Yes you gather more light total with a bigger format camera, but you spread it further too. And the proof is easy. Take a 8x10 land camera, put a sheet of whatever iso negative in the holder, compute exposure, take the image. Now take a sample of the same film from a 24x36 canister, cut some and fix to your sheet film holder, expose to the same value and process : ISO doesn't depend on the sensor format. What was true with film holds with electronic sensors. Per unit of area, exposure is the same.
I’m always shooting my MFT at f/4 to f/8 because I want MORE depth of field (i.e. whole subject in focus). Very happy with Olympus cameras and lenses.
What an excellent, and reasoned, review of both the E-M1 mkiii and the MFT format in general, one of the best I've seen (The best...?!). The history of photography formats have always been about strengths and weaknesses, and compromise...Box Brownie, 120, 35mm, 6x6, 6x7, 10x8...ets, and now we have 1", MFT, APS-C, full frame, and 'medium format'(though it's not really). Pick your tool, or tools, and do whats best with each. Or find your happy compromise.
Can't give you two thumbs up but would if I could :)
Unbiased, down to the facts and great conclusions for the various things with m43 and full frame.
Very well done! :)
Really appreciate the super kind comment, Rasmus!
As an Olympus OMD E-M1 Mark ii owner, I have to say that your assessment is spot on. I used to shoot with a Nikon D810 and I over to Olympus because of the weight savings. I travel a lot and the extra beef of a Nikon D810 was too much. I was worried about overall personal fatigue and real possibility that air-lines would force me to check my luggage. I can now carry a small bag with Pro level lens without any of these concerns. Cheers, Keith Pinn (Barrie, Ontario)
What always blows my mind is how some people refused to accept that M43 has a place in the market and go around M43 camera reviews and talk smack about the system. Really bizarre.
Excellent review btw, definitely hit some good points that many others didn't talk about.
One of the best comparisons between mft and full frame. I noticed you compared the size of a 24-105 full frame and a 12-100 mft: this is a bit uncorrect because the 12-100 has a double reach!
Thanks Marco! Yes - well aware, but they are the only closely comparable "medium range" f4 zoom lenses that I could use as examples.
Nicely composed, thoughtful and insightful video. Cheers! Subbed👍🏻
Thanks for the support skidcrew!
Very very helpful. Some of us live in countries where it is not easy to personally do a physical comparison. We therefore depend on reviews like yours to make a buying decision. I have been thinking of pairing my Fuji Xt with a Lumix g9. This has definitely helped. Thanks
Thanks Meshack!
Nice and balanced video. I use Em1 MkII at sea and feel I can't live without the excellent IBIS that effectively takes care of waves and engine vibrations.
Thanks Hávard!
you did a great job on this video. As an Olympus shooter I got so many 'attack' from FF users... but they never see my pictures only talkes about specs...
I think people underestimate how amazing the ergonomics are on this camera.
Very true!
In my opiinion it is mostly true for small Oly cameras. I really enjoy ergonomics of 10-2. When it comes to 1-2(3) - I do not see a lot difference in ergomoc from Nikon bodies I have.
Nice video, lots of good points! It is always nice to see when people consider all angles.
Thanks Mike! I always do my best!
Thanks for the excellent video comparing the new Olympus OMD E M1 Mark III camera to the Sony a7RIII camera. I have an Olympus OMD that I purchased three years ago and I was considering moving to the Sony full frame. After watching this video, I am now considering sticking with Olympus. So this video is very timely. There are a lot of things I do not like about the Olympus: the wifi function sucks, the menu is not intuitive, it has stopped working for about an hour when I was travelling. Anyway, excellent video.
Thanks Paul! Really appreciate the support and love for Olympus. Yeah I agree the menu isn't amazing.
Well if you dislike the Olympus menu system like almost everyone...there are some bad news. If Olympus's menu system is bad, Sony's system is nothing less than atrocious - and their touch screen implementation even less implemented than Olympus. Now that Olympus' Face detection appears to be soo close to Sony's you would have some very specific application that desperataley requires full frame. Only low-light capability can be assigned to that.
I just got my MC20 teleconverter for my Oly 40-150. It is so cool to have that much iq and reach in such a small package.
Thank you very much for making this video. At this time when everyone is making a first impression review, having a comparison video like this is a great move. I shoot using Olympus, and with the arguments of your video, my decision in staying with the format makes sense. More power to you.
Thanks Marvin!
You have a great video here, congratulations. I would like to hear comments from each user camp on the usability of each system for Weddings. Thanks!
Thanks tkarlmann. I agree - would love to hear what people think when it comes to shooting weddings.
That’s easy. It’s low light vs light weight.
For the trendy very low light receptions that some people favour, you’ll want f1.2 primes in M4/3 land.
You can still cope with an f2.8 zoom in Full Frame land for these scenarios. Of course an even faster prime will kill the noise better.
I use Sony FF & Olympus.
Finally Topaz Labs DeNoise AI is fantastic.
I have been shooting with the Sony A7R3 for almost 4 years with the 100-400 G Master and 1.4 TC. I have been thinking about switching to MFT because of the weight and size. As a wildlife shooter, walking for hours with this thing gets old. Yes, the images are fantastic, but if I can find an alternative with less weight and similar image quality, I would be interested. This is a compelling video. Nice work.
ruclips.net/video/wo0fRHFprVw/видео.html you will not understand much , but to see the photos you don;t need english language :P , 1mark iii it;s a good camera , very good
As an Olympus user I really have my doubts about what they are doing. At the very least I would have liked to see a new, higher megapixel sensors, improved evf and touchscreen. Olympus really needs to start putting some innovative hardware into their camera if they are going to survive in a world of full frame mirrorless systems with weather sealing and weather sealing on par or even better.
I shoot my EM1.2 almost exclusively for wildlife. I have the 300mm and it rocks. Especially with such effective stabilization. No need for a tripod just crazy stable.
Good review .
I,m agree on everything. The best point is that the 4/3 system allows you to have excellent professional lenses for photography of wild life, without paying for it what a small car costs.
Thanks Bob!
Thanks for the fair review. Incidentally, the Em1 iii does not have the same processing power of the EM1x. The Em1iii has a single TruePic IX chip, whereas the EM1x has dual TruePic VIII chips.
Thanks for the clarification Andy. I wanted to say that in the video but somehow missed it.
@@vistek But Olympus is actually touting the TruPic IX as having the resolving power of 2 TruPic VIII chips, soooo...
Thank you for the video.
There is a bit of an oddity with the weight comparison at 1:33, though. The E-M1 III with battery weighs 580g, and the 12-100mm f/4 weighs 560g, for a total of 1140g, not 1755g. Are you counting additional accessories or maybe a bag?
Likewise for the A7 III + 24-105 combination which should total roughly 1310g (650g + 660g) if I got the values right.
His comparison was poor anyway. The Sony focal length equivalent would have been 24-200, not 24-105.
Thanks Tangerine. Good catch. I'm not sure what's going on there TBH. I went off specs that Olympus sent me, but I may have mis-calculated. This video was SUPER rushed and I experienced some computer issues while editing - so I couldn't be as thorough in my proof-reading. When I look at the weights again based on information available online, I get a combined weight of 1141 grams. This includes the batter and media. So well under the 1755g. A fairly glaring difference. Good catch. I'll update the description.
This comparison is what I need. Your videos are neat, keep it up! Subscribed!
Thanks so much Bagus! Really appreciate the support!
As a former Olympus shooter and now Sony i can totally agree!!! Fantastic review!
What do you prefer? Em1-3 or Sony a7iii? Thanks.
Nice video. I have both these cameras as well. Usability goes to the Olympus 100%. I agree mostly with your assessment, except on the telephoto argument. You should try shooting the same focal length on both cameras and then cropping and up scaling the Sony image to match the Oly. You won’t see much difference if any. So the upshot is that this cost/weight savings of MFT on long focal lengths is not real. So the Sony 100-400mm going to give you similar results as the Oly 300mm at a similar price/size/weight.
The major reason to get EM1 for straight out of camera jpeg which has canon like skin tone.
Loved the EM-1 whilst I had it for a short while. The IBIS was RIDICULOUSLY good and I still miss it dearly (A7iii user now).
same…leaving my A7III today and going back to OM-1
the dust on the sony A7 was always an big problem for me, Olympus never have this problem, I own both system, but i did waste lots of time to clean up the dust on my landscape image.
If you pair the Sony with weather sealed lenses that problem should disappear
@@keithrjoseph9528 I believe it is a matter of sensor-dust-magnet-during-lens-change thing, something I recall Tony Northrup mentioning...
My A7ii has a dust problem too. Ever since I got the E-M1ii and some Leica and Zuiko primes, my A7ii has been gathering dust. Gonna sell it and rent a Hasselblad whenever I need more than the Oly can give.
@@keithrjoseph9528 And never change lens in the field. I have had Olympus 4/3 cameras since they were first released and have never had to clean the sensors.
W Hoggdoc that you can change the lenses in adverse conditions is one I’d the reasons why I chose Olympus
Well done. Sound like the ISO is the biggest kicker to be considered.
Dear Dale, wonderful video, love the way you make your points. I am filming video with my three Oly E-M1.2 and am still waiting for any significant improvements on the video formats Oly offers. Since the E-M1.2, nothing substantial has been added for the 1X and the 1.3. Still stuck with C4K 24p or in my case 4K 30 with 4.2.0 and 8 bit. No 4K 60, no 10 bit, no 4.2.2, no 6K, nothing has changed since the EM1.2. That's why I am cannot convince myself to buy the EM1.3 now. I don't see that Olympus makes any progress in Video. They leave it completely to Panasonic. Very sad. Best regards, Markus
Hi Sandra & Markus - thank you for your great comment. The Mk3 did add 120p at HD, but still lacks UHD 16:9 which is a bit odd. The Olympus OM-Log is also a bit puzzling. It seems to me to be barely a log profile at all. Perhaps that makes it better, as it's easier to grade (almost like Black Magic Film/Log), but I wonder how that clamps the DR a bit. I think the colours are nice in video and the lack of rolling shutter is a huge win in my opinion. I would just be worried if I had to shoot above 1600. It's bit rate of 234 at 4K is also more than double that of Sony's (100mb/s). So you technically have more information and less compression noise.
@@vistek Thank you very much, fully agree FHD 120fps was the last addition, but as we are filming everthing in Ultra-HD 4K 30 fps, any Full-HD addition are not what we are looking for. I love our 4K-videos with Olympus, but Olympus has not improved anything on the formats sind the E-M1.2 where as Panasonic is giving you a full range of high quality video formats (up to 6k anamorphic), color-depth (10bit) and 4.2.2. There is no improvement on Oly side, even thought the processor power has been significantly raised since the 1.2. I just wonder if there is actually no video expertise in Olympus and they just bought a fully licenced packed with the E-M1.2 and that's all there is. I love the Olympus cameras for all the reasons you stated in your video, but as we have switched to video, Olympus has not improved in that area at all for us. I still hold strong to the Olympus company, but I am worried what will happen when I read the specs of the future GH6. Thank you very much for providing such great content and best regards, Markus
You provide compelling arguments for me as an armature. I will now have to compare between the Olympus O-MD E-M1 Mark III and the Panasonic G9.
Great video! Thanks for doing this. I shared this with my community.
Thank you very much Rob! Super appreciate the support!
Thanks for this review. You absolutely nailed it. Factual and even handed. So rare on RUclips.
Thanks Roger!
I came into this video super optimistic and excited for the comparison, but I was disappointed in the lack of brevity. I wish it were longer, I want to see a part 2, I want more of a comparison. Maybe more of your opinion. I just want more.
Thanks for the comment Brent. I had a bunch more footage and photos. lots to cover, but I had deadline to meet, and also didn't want the video to go on endlessly. Somethings simply had to be omitted. Better to leave them wanting more, no? ;)
Great points , still loving the portability of M4/3
Excellent comparison video. It would have been nice if you also compared the battery life of the 2 cameras also.
Great video. Refreshing to hear an accurate take on the strengths of MFT.
There is another area that MFT might be considered a good option - macro. Wish Sony would add this feature but for some bizarre reason does not provide in-camera focus bracketing. Something that comes in quite handy for many situations compared to needing to carry additional apparatuses to complete the task.
One of the best reviews I have seen in a long time. Factual, well illustrated, covering a lot of angles. The one thing that did not fully work for me though was the price/weight comparison: the Sony 24-105 has about half the FF equivalent reach as the Olympus. The new Zuiko 12-45 F4 would be a closer match, at roughly half the price and weight of the Sony lens. That would give m43 approximately a 20% cost and 35+% weight advantage, which is not insignificant. Your point is still valid though: the cost difference is rather small and the weight difference is mostly in the lens, specifically with increased focal length.
I was actually wondering/hoping someone would do this very comparison. Yea! And well done; felt you really covered the main points well and concisely. Am considering adding a 4-3 camera to my kit for light travel, their better lens options (than my apsc Canon), and that super reach possibility with telephoto lenses for birding. Much appreciate the review.
That's a really good comparison of the two systems.. Nicely done 👏
Thanks Nikos!
Thank you for talking about the positives of M43 without also ignoring the occasional downsides. I love my Olympus but I also can't stand when fanboys act like it doesn't have both pros AND cons
Agreed, There has yet to be a camera system that "does it all" Every system has its drawbacks. EVERY... SINGLE... ONE
First video I have seen of yours. I found it to be very well done and helpful .
Thank you Ethan!
I buy in 43 systems for the same reasons. Thanks for proofing it is still valid!
My pleasure! :)
Really great review - I think your explanation of your key points are clear and concise. Well done!
One important difference almost nobody talks about in stills is the native aspect ratio.
Photography is also about composition.
Composing in 4:3 (and not only in portrait mode) has, from my humble point of view, nothing to compare with 3:2
Especially when you can't choose 4:3 in A7 bodies except in the R4.
Good comparison by the way.
You should be comparing the Olympus 300mm f/4 to the Sony 200-600mm considering that the Olympus 300mm f/4 has about the same amount of bokeh as an f/8 lens on a FF body. The Sony 200-600mm lens is $1,500 less than the Olympus 300mm and a much better deal than the Olympus combo and you'll get better autofocus too. Furthermore, the amount of noise at equivalent ISO's is about 4x higher on an m/43 body. For birds/wildlife/sports, I'll take the Sony A7III with the Sony 200-600mm hands-down.
I thought the exact same way about the Sony system. I had a chance to use the a73 along with the 200-600 lens about a month ago. I was shooting Lynx here in Canada. After 3 hours of patiently waiting, i had a mother Lynx and 2 kittens come into view. The sony simply would not work. I even tried it with a warm battery from my pocket. When i got it home and warmed up it worked fine again. Thankfully its not always that cold her, but winter season is a big part of my wildlife work. I haven't had a chance to try the Olympus system, but i sure would like to. Thats actually what brought me to this video. So for now, i continue with the Canon dslrs, looking at different brands, perhaps Nikon or Olympus for mirrorless wildlife work.
The Sony 200-600 costs only 500$? That‘s a steal.
@@lucyphress7776 If it is 200-600 f8-11.
If we're moving from high-end fixed lens to lower-cost zoom, then do it for both cameras. The brilliant 75-300 f4.8-6.7 Olympus lens costs $650 - 1/4 the price, 1/4 the weight and 1/4 the size of the Sony.
Such a great comparison video. By watching this video you remark that he was exerting oneself making this video.
Really well-balanced, insightful video. A friend of mine shot a running event last weekend with the EM1 iii. Turned out great - made me want to check it out.
Excellent review. One of the best I have seen so far. Olympus definitely has its place in the market and for me as full-time landscape photographer I appreciate the weight, weather sealing and portability. For me none of the other manufacturers can match this.
Thank you NLPT! Super nice comment.
1k view but no comment!? Great video my friend. I'm actually considering to trade my A7iii for this or maybe have both for different purposes
Depending on what you shoot, you might want to hold on to the Sony. If you can afford it, I think they both have a great place in your kit.
MFT has it limitations especially in low light . ISO 6400 is pushing the noise limit. I shot entirely with Olympus MFT cameras from 2013-2015 for all my concept shoots and the image noise was too much. However, with decent to good light, the Olympus cameras gave great results.
Nice and objective comparison! I like that you really compare the cameras on a practical level and not just based on their tech-sheets. I am mft shooter and wonder if I should upgrade to the new EM1 or get an full frame just for astro photography, because that is one scenario mft lags a bit and can't compensate with it's otherwise great IBIS. 🤔
Nevertheless thanks for not joining the 'format war', which is ridiculous.
Thanks a lot for the support HilbertHotel!
We've been weighing up getting the Olympus camera for vlogging. This video was very useful, we need something light and has a good middle point for price vs quality. Almost 100% sure to go ahead with the purchase thank you for the video!
Thanks for the excellent review. Olympus always brings a smile to my face, while my own 44-year old OM-1 from my teenager days stares back at me from its bookshelf. Thanks also for helping to bust the fullframe craze running around YT nowadays. The main difference besides price and size, are indeed high ISO/low light performance and lattitude in post. However, DOF is not depending on sensor size, but on focal length and aperture. A 90mm at f2 on fullframe has the same DOF as it has on APS-C or on MFT. However, it has a different field-of-view, hence the confusion. Like many people also state that f2 on an APS-C is actually f2.8 on fullframe. It’s not. It’s still f2 in terms of light transmission. Fun fact: it’s Olympus that led to the nickname ‘fullframe’. With their PEN camera they made half-frame (12x18mm) popular, which lead to the nickname full-frame for the 24x36mm cameras using 135 film. Since MFT is close to half-frame, they actually stayed true to their heritage...
Except now they are quarter frame. :\
It’s measured on the diagonal, hence half-frame. That’s why focal lengths have to be multiplied by 2 to get the fullframe equivalent. But the mm2 is indeed 4 times less... ;-)
Thank you for this video. I'm still using an em10 mkii and want to upgrade so I can shoot in foul weather. I've looked at other systems, but...I already have all these lenses! Your video was informative and really sold me on the em1 mkiii. Thanks for the information and the things civil. A lot of folks just bash on mft, and I think there's room for every system out there - all have their strengths and weaknesses. After this video, I'll be subscribing and I look forward to your thoughts in the future, for any camera system. Thanks again and keep up the great work. I appreciate it.
Well reviewed and compared. Weight, cost, and size with so little to trade off with full frame, why five years ago I tried out the Oly E-M5 mkII an with in six months I was in love with the cameras and lenses. My Canon cameras and gear have sitting idle ever sense. In the long term I’ve discovered I’m bring the camera with me far more regularly the I was doing with the bigger, heavier Canon gear and I’m enjoying photography more again.
Thanks for the well thought out comparison.
Actually MFT has a huge advantage in something like street photography for example. I can get the light of an f/1.4 aperture for my exposure, but still have the deeper depth of field of f/2.8 in full frame terms, all with lenses that are half the size and weight (and often half the cost too). The A7 series are small bodies, but for full frame guy to get close to the size and weight, they need to use f/4 zooms or f/2.8 primes, negating any noise advantage of the larger sensor.
Larger sensors do not have noise advantages. Lenses matter, thats true
Great review thanks. Would you recommended the Mark III for wildlife and BIF
Great review. I shoot with two EM1 Mkii's currently and will be replacing one of them with the mkiii. Moved from full frame when i realised 36mp was overkill for what i shoot. Olympus primes are solid and some of the finest glass you can purchase.
I currently use an EM1-3, mainly for bird photography. I was tempted to look at an used Sony A73 because of its autofocus and FF (so more pixels to crop in post). But this video shows me that I might not be getting a jump in improvement moving to a Sony A73. Thanks for a great video :)
Thanks for the comment!
Great video. I have an olympus stylus 1 and I'm thinking of getting either a om5 or a om1. Are these cameras still available?
My 1st choice right now is fugi xpro2, but I also want a better olympus as well. I like both systems.
Hi. This is a very fair review of this camera. It’s a camera that I am considering and this review convinced me to go with the Olympus camera. Thanks so much again for a very fair and informative review.
Thank you for the comment Bill!
When you comare the Face Detection, you did not use the C-AF+Tracking at the E-M1 III? Why? And what's about the Eye-Tracking? This would be very interesting. Could you tell me your opinion?