Everything Wrong With Micro Four Thirds
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 июл 2024
- PayPal www.paypal.me/robinwongphoto
Buy Me Coffee www.buymeacoffee.com/robinwong
Amazon www.amazon.com/?&_encoding=UT...
B&H www.bhphotovideo.com/?BI=19301...
Adorama adorama.rfvk.net/5bjPvD
My Photo & Video Gear kit.co/robinwong
I am a huge fan of Micro Four Thirds format but I also admit they did not get everything right. Let's start with the name "micro" itself!
Follow me on:
Instagram: / shutter.therapy
Facebook Page: / shuttertherapy
Blog: robinwong.blogspot.com
Music in video:Song: Niya - A Bloom (Vlog No Copyright Music)
Music provided by Vlog No Copyright Music.
Video Link: • Niya - A Bloom (Vlog N...
I'm a man and never felt intimidated by the word "micro"
Yeah, agreed. When I hear micro 4/3 I think compact and light vs something like a canon 5d that is ginormous.
M43/MFT new name: Mirrorless Four Thirds. Problem solved. They do get criticized with the name micro when they build big glass or bodies.
Yup! They should have called it mirrorless four thirds.
Good idea but a little long : 3 syllabus instead of two
Mirrorless, not Micro. Exactly the first thought that came to my mind. Start a grassroots, rebel movement to simply never refer to it as micro four thirds again. To address Torodo’s excellent point, do what is often done with English (especially in some parts of the US) and just drop the middle syllable. ‘Murrless Four Thirds’ It is now the Murrless Four Thirds Revolution!!
Excellent suggestion, and not too late to do. The sooner, the better. In fact, the name change could be incorporated into a marketing campaign designed specifically to address some of the misconceptions tied to the old name, while highlighting the strengths and ground breaking originality of the system...
Unless the mirror is coming back (which won't happen), it should just be called "four thirds".
Having started my photography journey with an OM-1, I understood the benefits of a smaller camera body. When I was making the switch to digital I was so pleased to discover that Olympus was still making fantastic small cameras. I spend a lot of time hiking in the San Juan mountains of Colorado, taking pictures in some pretty remote spots. Having a small, lightweight camera setup is a huge advantage!
So for me, 'micro' is definitely not a bad word.
I agree with the most part. You made very good points.
Thanks Peter!
damn it, the Olympus titans are here!
@@stehlealexander wrong channel!
@@robinwong wrong answer ;-)
You sir, are a gem in the M43 community, keep it up!
Thanks! Much appreciated kind words.
You should definitely make a series of videos called "Everything Wong!"
Totally agree with everything in this video, especially the inclusion of the word micro in the name. So many own goals!
I was seriously tempted to name that "everything wong" but that would be too.... I don't know... vain somehow?
@@robinwong Actually when I first saw the title, I read it quickly and had to re-read it because I read "Everything Wong"! It got my interest immediately as I appreciate all your videos for their depth, informative and inspirational nature and straight-forward approach. So I watched this video.
I agree with your comments about Panasonic and Olympus and although you may not have known what was coming at the time, we now know the sad impact of their visionless collaboration. It's so silly -- if they had just had the vision to understand that working together, they could accomplish so much more toward building a strong feature-rich MFT platform--which would benefit both companies AND the MFT community--than working alone competitively! Rant over :)
@@david_allen1 i also read everything Wong. I find it an amusing title for a video (or series), in the good way
I'm wondering if another problem facing the micro four thirds platform is the perception that the lenses are expensive. I remember that when I bought my Olympus OM-D E-M5 (first generation), I was surprised at how expensive the Olympus lenses were.
The lenses are exceptional, I think, and all good lenses are expensive. But somehow there is this perception that a smaller lens should come with a smaller price tag. When you see a giant lens for a full-frame system, you think you are getting your money's worth. You pick it up and it feels big and heavy and expensive. So it can be difficult to justify the price tag that comes with a lens like the Olympus 12mm F/2. The price has come down, but I remember the price coming as a bit of a shock when I bought it back in 2012.
Your praise of the original OM-D E-M5 brought a smile to my face. I've loved mine, and I would still be using it today if it hadn't broken down. I'm hoping that the E-M5 III will come out this year and that it will be awesome. 😁
I think only a few Olympus lenses are truly expensive. Take the main trinity workhorse lenses - 7-14mm, 12-40mm and 40-150mm PRO, all three lenses were priced well below what the equivalent counterparts, and those who have used these 3 lenses can testify how amazing they perform.
Robin, once again, a very thoughtful and insightful video! The older I get, I'm 62, the LESS amount of camera and lens weight I want to lug around. The four thirds system makes sense for me!
Indeed, the smaller footprint and light weight system makes sense!
Cool Video! I just like to add that 2x crop makes sense and medium format has a cropfactor of around 0,71 depending on the sensor. The Northrups made a perfect video about how to apply the cropfactor to get a realistic numbers when it comes to focal lengths and f-stops. A 25mm f1 Lens has not as much Bokeh and not the same fov as a 25mm f1 lens on full frame, but applying the cropfactor to both focal length and f-stop give you the same fov and bokeh. IT does actually work well!
Brilliant video, Robin! I appreciate your insights and your perspective as a
professional who is committed to the system. Thanks for sharing them with us!
Thanks Gilbert for the kind words! More videos coming for sure.
I’m with you all the way Robin. I’ve been saying it for some time now that they should have named it Mirrorless Four Thirds... it’s obvious and basic psychology! The marketing department really scored a massive own goal with that one. I would add that Micro Four Thirds is a ‘Full Frame’ system all of it’s own with lenses designed specifically for the sensor.
Physiology is a crucial part when it comes to marketing, I just wish the Japanese companies would spend more effort, energy, budget and time to get this right from the start! Indeed, Micro Four Thirds itself is a full frame system.
This was a good one and I couldn't add much to what you said. KL looks good, by the way. I can feel the tropical warmth😀
Come back soon!
@@robinwong I'll be back😀
I fully agree with you Robin. I have 40+ years of professional photography behind me. When I finally decided to 'go digital' I had to make a choice. It became the Olympus E1 , then E3 and almost E5 .... I deviated to Nikon - actually back to Nikon ... D2x , D700 , D810 ... why ? perhaps that 'micro' played a role? I was not happy with Nikon digital , just not my style of camera , regardless the quality. So went for Fuji X-Pro1 and X-T1 and X-pro2 , maily because of their traditional user interface. But something kept nagging me ... I loved the 'out of the box thinking' of Olympus. So got a EM5 and an other one. Then the EM1 and now the EM1.2 , all Nikon is gone , all Fuji is going. What nailked Olympus for me ? The build quality of the Pro lenses - never in my 40+ years as pro I have come across such build and optical quality. Not even the Carl Zeiss and Schneider lenses of my Rolleiflexes can beat them. Not even the Leitz lenses on my Leicas...
Precision in manufacturing is where Olympus shines, the problems with the old Zuiko 4/3 lenses have over come , the sometimes flimsiness of the old E series cameras has overcome , the OMD-EM1.1 and most likely the EMX in combo with the Pro lenses are the benchmark in precision where other manuafacturers can look up to. Fuji for instance has a small play or to tight on most lenses, their lens hoods either are impossible to mount or can not be taken off. Not so with Olympus , it all fits the way one expects it. Every shot is a hit , not a hit or miss as with some other brands.
Maybe we have to see 'MICRO' in an other light : MICROscopic Precision !
Glad you brought up the optics manufacturing expertise, not many people know about how skillful Olympus is when it comes to lens manufacturing. Olympus shines when it comes to lenses. Not just being able to design great optics, but having the know how to manufacture them too.
@@robinwong Since you are closer to the Olympus 'fire' as I do:
Suggest Olympus to upmarket that riddled 'MICRO' >>>> they can seamless change it to MICRON which is know as the highest precision in manufacturing. If they then change that logo to a section of the finest part of a lens sharpness chart and they have a winner.
I would be able and proud to design that.
Excellent video. I love how passionate you are about working with MFT cameras. I purchased a Panasonic G9 last year - after owning a much older Olympus E-520 in the past. I love olympus, but Panasonic's approach to a true hybrid cameras really appealed to me. I agree with you completely about Panasonic and Olympus working closer with one another to optimize lenses, stabilization and video specs. Also, two amazing tech companies working together have the potential to produce many innovative products - they should work closer with one another to truly create a system that could eradicate the term "micro" forever. Thanks again for you quality content.
I really enjoy your videos, m43 is a great format, and by watching your videos I made the decision to order an Olympus OMD EM 10 Mark2! I can't wait!
Very helpful video, and holds up well even three years later. Thanks, Robin.
Love your observations Robin, I use both full frame and "four thirds" and I'm happy to use either system, they are both excellent systems.
No worries, both systems have their places!
bang-on Robin, really enjoy your vids. Cheers.
Thanks Rick!
Very good points - some I have wondered about for ages (the lack of cooperation in particular). Keep the videos coming Robin!
Thanks Nick!
The only thing I can say is that I love my omd, thanks for your honesty
Very good points Robin. It would be good to make another video with everything right with MFT. Including the fact that even some features being disabled (apperture ring and function buttons) when matching Olympus and Panasonic cameras and lenses, all basic and important functions (blazing fast AF, 5-axis IBIS, etc) is still fully functional, giving us, MFT shooters, a huge amount of lenses to choose from when considering both companies (and other third party, such as Sigma).
Love your videos. I follow you since 2014, on your blogs. Keep up the great work.
Let's not be too optimistic, because I also want both Panasonic and Olympus to drive innovation for Micro Four Thirds further. We cannot undo what has been done in the past, but moving forward I sure hope both companies will make better decisions.
Very accurate. Apply for Marketing Manager at Olympus HQs
I think you need to be a Japanese to qualify for such positions.
One point that I never see mentioned is that back in the early 1980's, Olympus had already researched, produced and marketed a "half-frame" 35mm camera, the PEN. It was capable of producing twice as many photos out of a single roll of film. This "feature" and the relatively smaller size of their PEN camera was their major selling point. That idea never gained a lot of traction, but I think it was still the driving force behind Olympus going to the FourThirds format. They already had a lot of knowledge and experience with "half-frame" and they wanted to capitalize on it in the digital market. You also must remember that in those days "smaller was always better" as long as technology (quality) remained high. That concept is how we ended up with laptops, cell phones, USB sticks, and even flat screen TV's and compact cars.
There has always been a trade-off between size and power, but the consumer market always prefers smaller size as long as power is sufficent and not drastically reduced.
Bottom line, Micro Four-Thirds was an excellent compromise that fit the bill very nicely which is why they became quite popular with the "enthusiast" segment of the digital camera market. You got a lot of bang for your buck in a small package (at least for a while). But, time marches on and ever newer technologies always (or mostly always) end up replacing older technologies.
1963 to 1970 to be exact. The Pen-F line was replaced by the still smaller-than-the-competition OM camera series.
I never questioned the Micro Four Thirds format. I questioned the branding, the choice of word "micro", and some of the mistakes and poor decisions made by both Olympus and Panasonic.
You don't have to convince me hat Micro Four Thirds work. I am a firm believer in the system and am actively shooting with them.
Agee on everything you say and would like to add one thing. I was an early adopter of the E-M5, it actually made me switch from the Nikon D700 at the time much thanks to one test I did. When I got the E-M5 and still had the D700, I printed a few tests prints at different ISO's up to 6400 at A4 and A3 paper size. I could tell no difference, at all. If it doesn't show in print, it doesn't matter and this is a point I think is very important.
Most people keep comparing m43 to larger sensor and say they are noisy. Well, yes, you can see more noise on screen but none of it shows in print. This is something that Olympus and Panasonic should communicate to people. Have large prints at expos etc, prove that once you print, the quality is fantastic. That's where it counts.
/Rasmus
Thanks Rasmus for sharing your experience. Indeed when it comes to printing, all modern cameras perform incredibly well! I guess it is the culture of pixel-peeping that we need to start readjusting our expectations on what is good enough. Surely there is no end when we chase technical numbers. A company's 61MP will become obsolete when someone else makes a 120MP image sensor. Does that mean the old sub 10MP cameras can't do a good job? Of course not. An old 5MP shot can still print large and win photo contests!
This year 2019, Africa wild life photography winner was shot by a camera with a 1M pixel sensor. It was told by Thom Hogan.
@@spritual_enlightenment I don't believe in photography competitions. I should do a video about that. Everything Wrong with Photo Contests.
@@robinwong, I'm not into photo competitions, either. I was just quoting a case of a low pixel number sensor-camera.
@@spritual_enlightenment When it comes to a competition, no matter how good the composition is if the technical aspects of the print are low it will fail in front of the judges.
Fully agree, especially about Oly And Pany not cooperating. However, there is one benefit to that: strong competition between them drives innovation. But working together would ultimately help the MFT platform to survive in a highly competitive field of FF, APS-C and last but not least smartphones.
Due to its compact form factor, MFT is in a slightly better position to compete with smartphones than the larger FF and APS-C formats.
That is true, competition is needed.I just felt that both companies are making things a lot worse than better over the years! Moving forward, i do want to see them working closer to achieve a common goal in surviving the shrinking imaging market.
Very good Robin! An excellent analogy!
Thanks!
I swear, naming issues aside... people like you and Joe Edelman make me want to switch to m4/3. It looks as if the latest m4/3 tech's ironed out many of the low light issues. I'm currently on APS-C for most of my 'serious' photography. I don't know if I'll just add or ditch my APS-C stash. Anyway, great video, very informative and entertaining.
And ya, if I do take on m4/3 I'll probably start with Olympus. I had an OM-2 rig years ago. I always loved how well functioning that camera was, even with all of the features packed into that relatively small body.
The Panasonic/Olympus compatibility dilemmas are valid, for sure.
I added APS-C because of low light issues (fast shutter speed to freeze bird's wing flap ...≥2500th while keeping ISO ≤800), also focus tracking with D7500 is better. So, for that particular field of interest, birding, and in winter, and N of 49th, I added APS-C. My m(irrorless)43 gear consists currently of a G85 and the amazingly small GM5 (with ƒ1.7/2.0) with lenses from wide to moderate zoom and the Olys macro 60/2.8 and the fabulous 75/1.8. I sold the Panasonic Leica 100-400 because its zoom mechanism was poor (jerky, sticky) and it turned out a dust pump. But I'm missing a longer reach than the G Vario 35-100/2.8; considering PL 50-200/2.8-4.
I shot a Nikon APS-C DSLR and after that a Pentax DSLR. Now I’m shooting an Olympus OMD-EM10 mk 2. It almost seems impossible how good this camera is, especially considering its size. My favorite aspect of the system is the affordability of the lenses. For a thousand bucks you can outfit yourself with a nice set of primes, or for a little less money, get the amazing 12-40 f2.8 pro.
Olympus has completely fallen off the map this year. I hope they can make a comeback soon.
The year is not over yet.
@@robinwong You're right. I'm just afraid that if the EM5III doesn't offer something fresh, Olympus will go out of business very soon.
I hope this ends better. They still have a strong medical devices sector - actually, that's the company birth business. Olympus was a very innovative company in the camera business and a trusted name. I don't mind if the camera section is sold as long as the new buyers keeps it high quality and maintains the camera lines already released.
I think you nailed it and hope that Olympus and Panasonic reconsider their positions about this.
Totally agree Robin, the word ‘micro’ should never have been introduced and it frustrates me when people wrongly describe the sensor as a ‘micro four thirds sensor’ rather than a ‘four thirds sensor’. Even some professional reviewers mis-use the term.
Thanks Charlie, I feel that the word "micro" misrepresented what the system really was!
Great arguments Robin and as always very informative videos. I fully embraced MFT from the beginning, coming from film OM series cameras and then Nikon crop sensor cameras (still use my trusty D7100 for some work).
Maybe we should start calling it Mirrorless Four Thirds (still abbreviated MFT) to distinguish from the DSLR Fourth Thirds systems of old. Anyway hoping that some day Olympus and Panasonic will sit down and iron out all the problems for the benefit of the Four Thirds community.
This is gold 👍
I think it is a bit too late now to change the name, since everyone is already calling it Micro Four Thirds. But I agree with you, Mirrorless Four Thirds sounds so much better.
Why camera companies need to listen to street level photographers like Robin , rather than "paid for pros " " to tick the boxes" when it comes to product development
I have shot with iPhone for several years, but soon will upgrade to 4/3 system. I have eliminated crop factor thoughts, since my iPhone came with the “micro” sensor system! Olympus simply provides me with more computational photography and greater lens choices. Great video by the way.
Thanks Paul, Olympus OM-D system will suit you well!
One of the things you said that jumped out to me was the cropped discussion. I think that what has really become lost in the Olympus conversation and selling point is how the company didn’t just take a standard sensor and cut it down to the 4/3 format and size, they went in and re-engineered the sensor from the ground up. When I made the switch from Canon to Olympus (think EP-2 timeframe) I really looked into the work Olympus engineers did in the sensor development. That was a huge selling point to me. Since then, I think Olympus has continued to push the envelope, but some of it gets lost in the whole “micro 4/3” description. As an Olympus owner, the best thing I try to do is just go out, take as good as photos (and video) as possible and when someone asks what I use I tell them Olympus. I don’t dive into the whole 4/3 issue but let the photos and quality of the gear speak for themselves. Just my thoughts.
I agree with you, somehow the marketing did not do enough to educate or promote awareness that Four Thirds is not a crop format sensor! It was indeed a huge selling point, and it was something that set them apart from the traditional DSLR systems.
Yes!! I think they can rebrand to m4/3 with the “m” meaning mirror less. Also, when I started with 4/3 DSLR lenses they had the EFL listed. So, the 35-100 was listed as a 70-200 F2 lens. I think that needs to happen again. People are amazed when I tell them the 40-150 has a 300mm reach but then are confused by the 150mm designation. Now that you are a visionary, I hope some of your ideas can now reach the top brass. Also, it’s been a pretty dry year or so of releases. I surely hope some things are dropping in the Fall and that a more regular release pattern happens in 2020 and beyond.
I don't think a Visionary can do much, but a collective voice from the photographers/camera users can surely make a big difference.
NO NO NO.
Focal length is irrelevant. What matters to me when I stand before a landscape is the coverage I require. So, I choose a field of view. That is what matters. From there, I choose a lens that gives that coverage, or a little more (I often use prime lenses). The lens I choose is guided by the camera I use, and that might be MFT, APS-C or 35mm. I have medium format covered too, should I decide to resort to film.
Great video, Robin - some excellent points.
Thanks Jim!
Agreed 100%! Channel is really great, man! Keep going!
mft is a perfect system. Not too large, not too small - perfect size to image quality ratio. Smaller and you've got compact image quality, larger and the lenses start to get bulky.
The real problem with micro four thirds is that there are not enough bright lenses. The lenses need to be brighter in order to achieve proper equivalence to full frame. 14-35 f2.8 is not really 28-70 f2.8 (the nifty all rounder zoom so many photographers use) - it's actually f5.6. That's a big difference. The real challenge is building a series of lenses 12-40 and 40-100 (or thereabouts) that are constant f1.4 . I suspect this hasn't happened because they are simply to hard to manufacture. Because they are small all the tolerances have to be extra tight. I think they just haven't been able to make lenses at these f stops that are reliable and with good optics and that don't cost an arm and a leg. The real compromise of mft is smaller bodies and lenses but larger f numbers.
The other major issue with mft is that there is a limitation on megapixel count. I read this some time ago but basically if you make a mft sensor above 16mp the pixel density start to approach that of a 2/3 compact camera sensor. 20mp on the latest bodies are about as high as it will ever go. Not that that's a problem. 20mp is plenty imo.
i agree with you but i would add this : i think M43 users should just give up on trying to isolate subjects as well as larger sensor . If it is that important , to match a modest f1.8 on full frame will need to be 0.9 on M43 , so just add or replace it with another system . In practical term , the f1.2 Olympus primes series are already big, pricey and as far as they should get if you maintain AF . M43 is my main system and i choose to live with its limits .
“Mirrorless 4/3!” Works for me! Will still need the small m out in front of m4/3 though, especially for the lenses!
Sounds good to me too
Great video and I totally agree. I came to Micro four thirds from APS-C and Full Frame because of a bad back. I love the small form pf the cameras. My E-PL5 fits in my pocket and the other Olympus and Panasonics I have are not much larger. As for crop factor I think that need to be chucked in the garbage. Full Frame is not in-itself a standard it is based on the size of a 35mm negative. As you rightly point out the M43 sensor was designed from the ground up and not as a crop on the full frame version. I think crop factors are the most misused and misunderstood aspects of digital photography.
I strongly agree with you John, the "crop" was a false description of the format. I'd use "equivalent field of view", that is more accurate.
There are two things that are the most misunderstood in photography. They are related. One is this crop factor. And the other is the question you always see everywhere. What lens did you use?
agree very much, love the video.
i have used the Zuiko 300mm f4 with one of lumix bodies and had no issues with stabilization what so ever, got very steady videos, and images with very sharp bird details at low shutter speed.
Interesting points.
Thank you for the info!
Cheers!
Very good vision...I am very agree with u..for first I would like try Micro Fourth Third system...but and for the first time too I confused choose G85,OMD-EM10 mark II/III or OMD-EM5 mark II...thank you for your sharing knowledge
Thanks for the show of support! Appreciate it.
Great post, I'm a long time Olympus user and didn't know that stuff. Thanks for the info.
No worries, always something new to learn, and I am glad I could share.
Hi Robin great video, a few years ago I returned to college as a so called mature student, the thing I remember the most was various pointless arguments about cameras and sizes. If our professor heard these silly arguments he would give the following advice "A good photographer is defined by the ability to conceive and create outstanding images, not by the gear they lug around and the forums they frequent."
Amazing professor you have.
Robin Wong sadly no longer with us. For those who really listened I still think that simple statement was the most important thing he taught
Very good! I think with the falling sales of cameras, the point of Olympus and Panasonic cooperating would be the most important thing. "Pride comes before a fall"
That would be a wise thing to do, strategically. I strongly believe both companies working together, they can take on the giants!
I agree with the points you make. I have recently made the all in jump to micro four/thirds, from APS-C. One of the main reasons I haven’t done this sooner was my thinking that it was inferior to APS-C but that is not the case. It’s just marketed that way.👍
Yeap, marketing is very powerful!
Mr. Chesworth. I made this comment a while back concerning going to MFT.
“I got an Oly EM5 with the 12-50 kit lens and also got the 40-150 inexpensive zoom for $99 as a special with that camera. I specifically got it to bring on a project I worked on through many countries in Africa, along with my primary Nikon FF gear. I wanted to see how it would work for me. I got many favorite photos, along with photos used in my project, with the EM5 and was so impressed with the camera, I switched to the MFT system.”
I should add that, upon my return home and editing my photos, I was a little surprised to note that the Oly to Nikon used image ratio was about the same. That was the real clincher for me. Another point, one of my Oly photos ended up on the side of a truck. Didn’t notice any problem with blowing up that ‘micro’ image.
I'm not sure of the correct term here, but there's so much "collective internet knowledge." Perhaps "collective internet ignorance" is a better description. Things get repeated, and repeated, and repeated, and they become accepted as real. Even when people have absolutely no experience with the gear. Everyone knows m43 IQ isn't good, so it gets repeated over and over by people who've never used m43 and who probably haven't even looked at many images made by m43 bodies. Everyone knows the cdaf system sucks. And while it may still not be up to the best pdaf or hybrid systems with respect to CAF and tracking, it's dang fast for SAF and doesn't suffer from front/back focusing. And frankly, I find the pure cdaf focusing in my G9 to do a dang good job in CAF. W.I. Thomas had a famous quote that went something like "that which is believed to be real is real in its consequences."
Douglas Olsen Yeah thats great to hear. I have had an EM10 and a 80d for a while now. I would gravitate all the time to the Olympus and this would be my camera of choice. I have had images in exhibitions taken on the EM10, so all the talk about M4/3 being inferior is just nonsense and the vast majority of the people don’t even use APS-C or Full frame to its full potential anyway. More than happy with my jump to M4/3.
Bradley Anderson Yeah there is a lot of misinformation out there about m4/3 I absolutely love my Olympus for the weight, the focus speed and the stabilisation. I wouldn’t go back. It’s absolutely awesome.
Hi, I have a dmc g1 and I think it was a revolutionary camera....maybe not from a performance perspective but in terms of compactness, user interface and ease of use I think it’s great...I am still using mine today :-) I enjoyed the video and I agree that micro 4/3 does seem to have something of an image problem that was due to mistakes at launch. Interestingly a few years ago I bought a g3 secondhand as a backup and also to have the option of using video...although the image quality was slightly better I sold it after a few weeks as it was just not as easy to use as my g1.
Thanks for your videos. They are great and been very helpful in my decision to take the plunge and purchase an Olympus 25mm f1.2
I've been using mft since 2013 and I love it. I've had many Panasonic FZ and G series cameras for my wedding video and films and having switched from large over the shoulder video cameras to mirrorless Micro four thirds has been great. Honestly o can fit my entire setup in two small pelican cases and still hold three Panasonic g85's and a G9 with many lenses, mics, lights and accessories. Great for traveling and I do agree I wish the name was different but I believe you're right it's not going to change. I've considered buying the Panasonic S lineup that just came out but I'm going to stick with mft for the time being. Might buy buy an S1 or S1R when I retire in a few years as a fun post business toy however.
Glad to know that Micro Four Thirds work wellfor you and your photography business! More people should hear stories like this, thanks for sharing. The compact form factor was the key advantage, I also shoot wedding (stills) so I treasure the lightweight and smaller footprint setup!
@@robinwong I would agree with that! I love the smaller form factor and I still get a great quality image from the sensors too. I many times see others doing wedding video using Sony and APS sensors but they quality is about the same when you use a quality lens like the sigma 16mm or the lumix 25 1.7, you can get very similar results with it. My only major issue with MFT is that I wish they would do a better job at branding honestly.
Agree with your points, Robin. The E-M5 as a first MFT body would have meant a more explosive start to the system and probably wider adoption from the beginning. My entry to the MFT system was the E-P3, which I shot alongside a Nikon system, but I wasn't fully sold on MFT until the E-M5 came out.
If only they released the E-M5 as the first body!
Great video Robin. All good points.
Thanks! Appreciate the kind words.
I am 2 meter tall. My weight is 115 kilo. And I should say, what all tiny things make me happy. It plays huge part in choosing Olympus camera over large DSLRs!!
Glad that Olympus cameras work for you!
Very interesting! As a female photographer, I wonder if the male to female ratio holds true in the USA. I know a number of serious female photographers. I am a big fan of the micro four thirds system in general and an Olympus fangirl. You made some excellent points. I hope Panasonic and Olympus get the message!
The survey was made based on a data pool of 3000 photographers, so it is not representative of a country. Yes, I hope Pana and Oly work closer together.
PanOly cooperation! Yes!
You hit the nail on the head with this video Robin. The divergent standards are infuriating at times - you mentioned the aperture rings and image stabilisation implementation, but the zoom ring directions differ, the flash system differs in very subtle yet crucial ways are another couple of examples. It makes life unnecessarily complicated and means that you can miss photo opportunities. I would like to see tighter implementation of the standard. I use a mix of Panasonic and Olympus equipment. I like the image quality. I like the smaller and lighter form factor. I like the technology that both manufacturers have packed into the cameras. I don't like these quirks.
As far as the name goes Micro four Thirds does not bother me. I began my photographic career using the Olympus OM system because I wanted high quality images from a small and compact system. I value the small size. I do find the whole hang up about sensor size, equivalency and crop factor rather perplexing. When I shot film I used everything from 5x4, 6x6, 645, 35mm and 110. There was never the near religious fervour of promoting one format size over the other. Everyone understood what each format brought to the table. Want the best possible quality then shoot 10x8 or larger and contact print the negative. Want ultimate speed, portability and convenience shoot 35mm film. Now people who exclusively use the so called full frame format (I prefer to call it 35mm) use format size to browbeat users of smaller format cameras and shore up their fragile egos. I can remember a time when 35mm was called "miniature format".
I think the future of m4/3 is good. It will be the convergence between traditional photography with interchangeable lenses with computational photography being offered by mobile phones. Offering high resolution modes, focus stacking, converging verticals correction, simulating the effects of ND filters are just the start. It won't be long before we see other software solutions to photographic problems being implemented in camera.
Thanks Paul for highlighting more inconsistencies between Panasonic and Olympus. I only used several examples, if I were to name more that would have taken a lot more time, and I believe I made my point quite clearly about cross-compatibility. Indeed, I want to see better standardized implementation across all Micro Four Thirds products.
It was interesting that you pointed out the 35mm was a small format back during the day!
I think that bridge cameras with their fixed long zoom lens & one inch sensors should be given a serious consideration before ' condescending ' to the cel phone camera.
You're right, that E-M5 is legendary and it was the reason I moved from Nikon to Olympus. I still have it and shoot with it!
I love my E-M5 too!
@@robinwong I still own 3 EM5 Mk1 bodies for when I'm shooting outdoors and the weather is sketchy, otherwise my workhorse bodies are a trio of Pen-f's. When Olympus Visionary, friend and colleague Larry Price first suggested I try Olympus, I purchased a couple of used EPL3 bodies and the kit zoom lenses. Within a month of testing I sold off all my Canon DSLR gear in December of 2015 and haven't looked back. It's not a perfect system, but IMO, the Pen-F is the fullest expression of what a digital documentary and street photography camera should be. The number of Pen-F bodies I have might seem excessive to some, but TBH, if Olympus doesn't decide to release a Pen-F MkII, I want to be able to shoot with them as long as possible. The EM5 form factor is IMO, the balance of size, weight and features and unless one has a specific need to shoot 4K video, the Em5 MkII is more or less a refinement of the Mk1 version and I'll probably be swapping out my aging first generation EM5's for the MkII's.
I agree in everything you said’ Every time I take a shower I’m thinking of the “micro” 4/3 system.😂👍
I think the best name for MFT that really focuses on what it is is FTF. Four-Third Format. Done. Medium Format uses 4:3 ratio, and with FujiFilm, Hasselblad, PhaseOne pushing for wider adoption of that format, changing MFT to FTF seems to be the smart thing to do. It also helps to make it sound bigger (not that it matters in real life).
- - -
I have to also add that i think Panasonic's bet of video was both wise and timely. Olympus's attempt to fight in the photographic space is really difficult because there are simply so many users who don't know enough (eg. me!).
There is a saying in the camera shop i frequent, "Came in to buy a Olympus, left with a FujiFilm". The sales staff in the shop told me that many curious customers walk in because they were drawn to the beauty of the Pen F. But it is so much easier to sell the benefits of a bigger sensor. So unknowing customers who came in for a Olympus usually walks out with a FujiFilm, or a Sony. The same approach is also used for Canon-Nikon enquires to convert them to Sony.
- - -
Bottomline, i can only share my very limited personal experience. As someone who has not touched a DSLR, i used film cameras, a few decades ago, moved on with life, and avoided cameras, then came back into the market to look at cameras in 2015, Olympus was never the choice. Websites were not helping, RUclipsr were mostly not recommending too. I was pretty much led to the believe that i have 3 options, FujiFilm, Sony, or Leica if i am THAT rich. Since i am not, there was really only 2 choices. Canon-Nikon were on their way out, Olympus and Panasonic were the small sensor boys. As someone starting fresh, there seemed to be little reason to pick from these 4 companies.
Moving forward, i really hope Olympus will do well. But i really don't know if a single sensor size is the way to go... Panasonic now goes Full Frame, and even before that, they have a close rebranding with Leica. Olympus is all on its own.
Some good points but Micro was a great word. That first EP-1 was micro compared to other interchangeable lens cameras of the day. The fact that everyone stoped buying “Four-Thirds” and bought a ton of EM1’s. EM5’s, GH’s etc says something for the “micro” branding otherwise we might have a E9 or E5 mk4 today. Their problem is that many m43 bodies grew large while APC and FF shrunk.
The camera body size is another issue and that is due to the decision making of both companies. That is a separate topic. No matter big or small the sensor is still the same Four Thirds. And I'm discussing the issue with that here.
This should have been called "Everything Wong With Micro Four Thirds"
Well, I am a former Olympus shooter and left the system due to the better price / feature ration of another system for my use. But I liked it for being a good system.
On the other hand I do disagree with what you said about the "micro": I don't think it would have gone a different way if the just kept the name 4/3...
The thing with the crop factor... I highly disagree! The crop factor is just a tool to compare the angle of view of a lens and it's dof based on FF. So it does apply! At least I do not get your point in saying it does not apply...
Appreciate your feedback. Keep it up. I like your content
if you want to compare field of view, just say equivalent field of view, or angle of view, or focal length. Using the description "crop" is wrong, and not applicable to Four Thirds sensor. What exactly do we crop it from? The Four Thirds sensor was essentially fully utilized from edge to edge, it is FULL FRAME by itself.
@@robinwong now I get your point. Ok. Thanks for explaining 👍
Yes, the lens incompatibility when it comes to IS is really frustrating. As there are not many third party lenses particularly in the tele range where IS is needed you are effectively stuck with one brand of lenses.
If only they worked closely together.
Mirrorless 4/3, since the original 4/3 seem to be non-exist. ....just need to make sure lens are configured to Micro 4/3 mount and NOT original 4/3 mount! Just downloaded last Olympus firmware...WOW...major improvement! Also just arrived, Panasonic G-9 camera body and Panasonif 100-300 OIS lens....fantastic combo shooting 4K. 4/3 is still the pace-setter. Love Wong's videos....
Newly subscribed! Curious, what camera sensor was used to shoot this video? Gratefully.
I really like the way you describe sensor formats... by far the best description of 4/3 and full... btw I have enjoyed your videos... thank You!
Thanks!
I'm a proud owner of a Micro Four Thirds, Rode VideoMicro, and MicroPenis
Great video! I love mft system and I have gh5 and gh5s. The only question I got is what was your camera for this video, what lens and what picture profile and frame rate?
Thanks! It was another OM-D with either a 45mm F1.8 or 17mm F1.8 (quite obvious which lenses I used), picture profile natural and shooting at 24p.
Great content. Much appreciated.
Great video! What camera and lens was used for the shot at 1:40?
Hi Robin, you are absolutely right, I think. The lack of full cross compatibility is really annoying.
It is us, the community that suffers
Thanks for the video, very informative. I didn't realize that the "crop factor" is a bit of a misnomer when it comes to m43.
(And I agree that the macro name was a mistake!)
Dear Robin, i fully agree with you. Especially taking rhe name "micro" four thirds was a big mistake. Maybe it would have been better to name the system "mirrorless" four thirds.
Thanks for the show of support! Mirrorless does sound better!
I reckon, MFT system is the future. Pysical advantage of being smaller and lighter can not be "stolen". Then, Artificial Intelligence, faster processors, time of flight auto focus will make superior cameras.
I agree!
Some really good points. I am confident that MTF Still has a future, especially with the release over a year ago of the GH5s
Me too!
Compact 4/3 rods.? How do I change language settings on OMD E5 mark one?
Not only do Olympus and Panasonic shoot each other in the foot but Olympus does a good job on itself. When I bought the original E-M10, I also bought the 12mm f2 and the 17mm f1.8.But, the AF/MF snapback feature did not work properly like it did on the 12-40mm f2.8 I also bought. When I complained to Olympus Customer Service, their response was the lenses were too old to work with new OMD bodies. But then I told them that the snap back feature worked properly on my newer Panasonic GM5, so they add "we cannot be responsible for how our lenses perform on other companies cameras". Fast forward to last year when I returned to MFT, I went all Panasonic with a GX7, a GM5, and now my GX9. Bought new copies of the 12mm and 17mm and the snapback feature worked perfectly on all three Panasonic bodies. But some OMD owners I know, tell me they still don't work properly on any OMD body. Maybe OMDS will notice that and fix it.
I wonder if in the future if Pany or Olim will figure out how to make a long zoom fixed lens bridge camera with a m4/3rds sensor ? I have the Fz2500 that I enjoy for it's ease-of-use & versatility. In the near future I hope to add the G9. I liked you pointing out that an APSC sensor is only 20% larger than the m4/3 sensor. Thanks for this video.
It all comes down the the sales figures and demands for such a camera. If there is a market for it I am sure someone will make something happen. My honest thought? Not enough user base to justify creating such a camera. I could be wrong.
Excellent review, one hundred percent agree
Thanks Sadik!
LOL! I call this Supercharged Robin! :) Good points made.
With regard launching MFT with the E-P1 generation, Panasonic and Olympus had no choice. At that time, Olympus finances was bleeding red, although the E-5 was a well made models and there were champion big pro lenses like the Tuna(s), sales volume was bad. They could not wait for Sony sensors to appear (used in the E-M5 generation), they had to go with the Panasonic sensor tech from the E-5, E-620 generation.
And the lack of EVF in the E-P1 - that PEN series was not targeted at "alpha male" camera geeks, the tech was not ready, yet they had to earn enough cashflow to keep the camera department alive until the E-M5 tech was ready. CDAF tech was not ready either. it took Panasonic several years to develop high frame refresh CDAF.
On the other hand, the lack of collaboration currently between Panasonic and Olympus extends to their Ambassadors and Visionaries. Peter Fosgard, Matti Sulanto and you are the first from each company that even spend time to make joint RUclips videos. Even then using cross brand lenses is not frequent. Prior to this we had Guilo Scorio and Kirk Tuck using cross brand gear but they are not brand ambassadors
I think first impression is very important. The fact that E-P1 and G1 could not even match the performance of similarly priced APS-C DSLR cameras (things would have been different if they priced the products lower), meant that those products were not ready. Not receiving good reviews that early did some damage into the branding of Micro Four Thirds. I understand that Olympus and Panasonic may not have much choice in business decision making, but it did take them too long to develop something as universally praised as the E-M5.
I think the world of RUclips is quite a strange thing for many photographers. While there are many great photographers out there, there are not many making videos on RUclips. I myself am so noob in this! We have so much to talk about. When are you coming back to KL again? CNY?
@@robinwong You have done well in establishing your RUclips channel, the enthusiasm, the behind the scenes persistence, work, planning, scripting, rehearsing - many people still don't realise how much work and how many minutes of bts provides the output of 1 minute of edited video. Bravo!
Although the E-P1 to E-PL3 sensor tech was not "good enough", it was much better than the E-510 sensor tech (I remember you had the E-520) - that sensor was really weak. It is a tribute to Olympus and Panasonic to survive against the generation of Nikon D40 / Sony A100 / Canon EOS 350 who overall had good enough sensors. They managed to convince us to be loyal to them - even now, if you do the cost / sensor size ratio, I have a feeling, we are paying a premium even though the sensor size is 20% smaller than APS-C.
I went back every year for at least 7 years to see my Mum and enjoy your company and my other friends. Now she has passed, I want to make a trip back but wife has illness handicap and I have to watch $$$ - no plans yet, have to see how things go for a while.
@@AnandaSim thanks for acknowledging the fact that video making takes a lot of effort!! It certainly was not easy.
No worries, I guess I will see you when I see you!
Completely agree with the crop statement. It assumes a lack of usage of the sensor.
That is very true!
I certainly do agree, a breath of sanity !
Now we have more affordable medium format digital, people wont be thinking that they no longer want full frame as they are inferior...
4/3 are professional quality, and superb travel, wedding and street cameras. If you need a medium format camera for a specific job you rent one, as was always the case with film. I always owned three formats for film according to the specific job.
According to current logic I would have had to do weddings with a 5x4 or a10x8 ???
I haven't tried a M43 camera yet but your argument sounds logical and I think you are right... Still according to what I see on photography sites I still think that the APS-C system is the sweet spot...
Thanks!
BTW, I do a lot of professional video and I'm curious if you use Olympus cameras to shoot your videos? Thank you very much!
Yeah it was another OM-D camera. I am still terribly noob in video though, but slowly learning and improving.
I use mFT since 2011 with GH2. It is a fantastic small tool yet now. Yes, some bodys got larger, some lenses really big (Pana Leica 10-25, but this lens is a amazing masterpiece and one of the best lenses you could get).
I fully agree, that Oly and Pana should work closer, make the systems more compatible. And I still wish, that other companys join this standard.
Let's hope they do work together closer!
Hey Robin...been checking out your website for 3-4 years now...nice work!!!
Re: this rant though...Not sure either company lost any sales because of the "micro" designation...it may have even helped sales IMHO...
Re: the companies working more closely...I believe that (in true Asian fashion) that things were spelled out VERY early in the development stages...Olympus would have IBIS...Panny would use stabilized lenses...Panny would develope and market the VIDEO features and leave the PHOTO market to Olympus...after all...that is what their respective customers expected from each company!
Also...I THINK that on the Oly EPL-6 body it was possible to use both the IBIS AND the Mega IOS if a Panny lens was attached...
In fact we are starting to see more parody in each companies offerings...BUT...with Panny's new FULL FRAME system coming to market...will Olympus consider as bold a move???
I don't know but...I think we have at LEAST another decade of 4/3 developments before we go into panic mode...just my 2 cents =^))
Nice video. I started with MFT long ago, but when the prices went up and the FF prices went down, . . . .
The Pen F nearly made me buy one. But I've heard there will be no more Pen F (2). Although I still sometimes use the Pen E-P2 I'm worried about the future of MFT. No other companies joined in and Panasonic went also FF. Olympus should hire you (again) and listen to your ideas! You might be the Olympus saver.
I can't save the entire company. But if we all voice up as consumers collectively, I am sure they will listen and do something.
+Robin Wong I think the 2x crop still applies as the sensor size does give a 2x to the focal length. It isn't a "crop" but it has the same effect. As for MF and LF if it ever becomes digital they have always referenced the focal length in relation to the "standard 35mm frame" even back in film days.
then call it equivalent angle of view, or field of view.
What do you think the best mft camera for low light gig photography would be? I should go with a full frame system really, but I've already invested in the mft system for video and it's nice and small.
Thanks for this video by the way!
I personally use E-M1 Mark II for gigs. The trick = get some F1.8 fast primes. They made a huge difference.
Panasonic GH5s?
A thorough collaboration between Panasonic and Olympus is quite remote at this time. Now that Panasonic is also focusing on its full frame business. With regards to the lens incompatibility, I heard Robin that when you use a Panasonic lens on the OMD EM1 ii, Pro capture does not work? Is this true? Nice content as always.
I have not tried using Pro Capture when Panasonic lens was mounted on E-M1 Mark II, I should probably give that a try soon. It is a shame if that is true.
I love this guy. So on point.
Agree with you.I use the olympus system and they are great. Just hope tgey will stay with us for the future.
I hope the same
I agree with Panasonic and Olympus working towards better interchangeability with their products. Very few of their lenses directly overlap. the 35-100mm is much smaller than the more rugged 40-150mm and they fit in different niches. So it would be nice to see lens corrections in body for both Oly and Pana lenses in both companies bodies.
Having two first parties releasing lenses for a system which they both fully support means a stronger whole.
It is indeed sad to see the cameras and lenses not having full corrections when used cross brand. This should not have happened in the first place.
@@robinwong Agreed. One of the major points for FT was designing a new digital mount that could become a standard. Hard to claim it as a "standard" with such incompatibilities.
I totally agree Robin!
Thanks!
I would expect that the lens mount including the information passed through contacts would be the same as "standard" and it would also make it easier for 3rd parties to support both cameras equaly and more lenses is a good thing and could be a good platform for a wider variety of smaller vendors -- but that isn't the way the market ever has been but it is just so painful in these lens issues you point out
Indeed, that is one frustrating problem that should not have existed for a claimed "open standard".
Hey great video, very open minded with mft, but one thing i have to share my opinion about, the crop factor isnt wrong
You take full frame as "one" so you take the angle of view with a given focal length (which is a physically quantity independent from any sensorsize), the angle of view changes with the sensorsize
A medium format sensor is easy to describe, has a factor of 0,8 or 0,7 or whatsoever, below 1
Its no problem that mft have a bigger crop factor, with the crop factor everything makes even more sense
Would you apply the crop factor to the aperature too, so for a 85mm 1.8 you would have equally a 42,5 f0.9 lens, you would get the EXACT SAME results as with full frame. The lens would be equally big then also, the iso performance would be matching also..
Thats actually speaking positively for 4/3 because they could just come out with bigger lenses maybe would be easier to build also match fullframe or if you take it to the limit even medium format..
Proofs even more that sensor size isnt really relevant, put a, whatever, 8mm f0,1 glass on a phone sensor and you get "fullframe look" also
I know what you mean, mft was able to design their lenses to match the very beloved "full frame" focal lengths but the crop factor is still relevant in my opinion
Some good points very well made
Thanks, Robin, for another informative video. I changed to MFT (do you think if we all started to call it ‘Mirrorless Four Thirds’ the name would stick?) when my E-3 was stolen and realised all the advantages and disadvantages that you describe. The compact form was very important to me so I stuck with it and was ultimately rewarded with the superb OMD EM-1 Mk II. So no regrets there!
So sorry to hear about the E-3. Glad you found the joy of using E-M1 Mark II! Maybe we should start a "Mirrorless Four Thirds" movement! With internet and all, I think it is possible!
I agree and Steven and think it may be possible as well Robin...
Hi all, good vid Robin, we shoot Canon/Nikon/Sony/Olympus/Panasonic/Fuji/Minolta not in that order, we hate the term "full frame" it should perhaps be 35E "As in 35mm Equivalent" we use 35E /aps-h/aps-c/mft etc. Look through your view finder that will tell you what your going to capture. It is all a compromise, what works for you is the right choice.
that “micro” thing just so real， we dont like to be called small
Agreed!
I'm all in on M43. Selling my FF Nikon and loving the lenses, bodies and capabilities of M43 system(s). I think the future is bright and Sigma lenses doing so well may induce Tamron to bring some of their quality as well to compete with Panasonic and Olympus native lenses.