“You don’t make a photograph just with a camera. You bring to the act of photography all the pictures you have seen, the books you have read, the music you have heard, the people you have loved.” ― Ansel Adams
This is my favourite addiction. First i let the title scare me out and then Jimmy strikes with his eleven minutes of relief. Thanks Jimmy, you've made my day, again :)
Thanks Jimmy! In real photography job it's rarely required to set ISO higher 400 especially if you have f/1.2-1.4 prime lenses. If you want bigger dynamic range (up to 16 stops) you can use Ev bracketing and merge RAW files in photo editing program. For portraits in high contrast light Ev bracketing of 3 shots spaced 1 stop of exposure with shatter setting H-series 20 fps works fine on E-M1-II/III and E-M5-III - portrait images merged without ghosting. So that OM-D pro grade cameras provide workarounds to circumvent sensor sensitivity weakness in comparison to FF. The prize for getting more geeky is f/1.2 pro grade lenses more affordable than on FF systems.
Cheers mater. glad you got the points I made. No matter how much ISO I can push, I rarely go pass 1600, 3200 emergency, even at weddings. I use fast primes and that also what I used when I was with Canon. I haven't changed my habit, or workflow.
In the real world, I actually see a lot of m4/3 users. Size/weight is the #1 reason they chose the system. However, most of them were switching from larger 35mm sensors cameras. New users, I usually see buying entry-level DSLRs like the Canon T7 and Nikon D5600. These are affordable and relatively small cameras too. Then there are many that own multiple cameras in all shapes and sizes. One thing we all have in common is the joy of photography.
Well said Rob. You're right that many m4/3 users came from other systems. But attracting the larger mass who enjoys taking pictures but are happy with their cell phones--that's the nut no manufacturer has been able to crack.
Also for me size and silence were the main reason for going with m43 ... 5 to 10 years ago. But today this gap to DSLRs has been narrowed a lot because Olympus and Panasonic had focused on bigger cameras and bigger lenses in recent years and the DSLRs manufacturers had focused on mirrorless and smaller solutions. So especially if you take cameras with a grip like M1 or G9 than there is not major size advantage over fullframe mirrorless solution. And with bigger cameras and lenses the prices also has gone up a lot for m43 especially with M1III, M1X, GH5 and all the PRO lenses. The really small cameras like PM2, PEN-F, GM5 haven't seen any love for updates from the manufacturers. So if I had to start today, I don't think I would go the route with m43 ... because the advantages of the past are mostly gone and in case of Olympus their technology has fallen behind competition. Low res EVF, no 4k60 isn't really acceptable these days for cameras like M1III and M1x around 2000 bucks.
@@stefanwagener At least with telephoto lenses there is still a big difference in price and weight between MFT and full format. Look for something comparable in weight and price to the Olympus 40-150mm 2.8 pro. There is no 75-300mm 2.8. You would have to buy, say, a Canon 70-200mm 2.8 L and the Canon 300m 2.8 L in addition. With telephoto lenses MFT is unbeatable.
@@christianmayrhofer4178 In principle correct but only for very long telephoto lenses and not correct for the given example. The Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 is equivalent to a 80-300 f/5.6 fullframe lens (and not to f/2.8 as you stated) which exists e.g. in form of 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 from Nikon and Canon. The fullframe versions cost only half of what the Olympus version costs. Weight and size are about the same (which is to be expected given that optical physics are about the same). So in the medium tele range still no advantage for m43. It's only on the very long lenses where for fullframe a comparable solution in respect to aperture doesn't exist. E.g. take the Olympus 150-400mm f/4.5 (equivalent to 300-800mm f/9 in fullframe) where you can't find an equivalent zoom for Canon or Nikon. Instead you can get only much brighter f/4 or f/5.6 lenses for fullframe which cost a fortune and are huge and heavy.
@@stefanwagener it is f2.8 though. If you set a FF camera and a mft camera to the same settings, let's say f2.8, Iso200, 1/250th of a second, the exposure for both will be exactly the same. There is no extra mft or aps-c or medium format setting on my sekonic light meter, because it simply doesnt matter in that regard. Only difference is the depth of field. It'll be less shallow at mft. But that usually doesnt matter with telephoto lenses, as you'll get enough background blur anyway.
Wow , Im a mft user Olympus em1 mkiii , and are well happy , came over from Canon high end stuff. I sell occasionally through Alamy , and they have happy customers. Main reason for change was size of equipment , in public locations a full frame camera sticks out and is heavy and bulky, with lenses massive . Travelling Olympus is ideal . Olympus or the OM system also as well as Pro gear , offers lower budget options that still allow for excellent output .
Thanks for the video and thoughts on M43. I switched from a full frame Nikon DSLR to Olympus last Spring. I wanted to go mirrorless but I wanted affordability and quality. I did a lot of research and Olympus fit this criteria the best - it was the IBIS, the smaller form factor, great lenses, the weather proofing and price. What I didn't know at the time was the amazing community of Olympus (OM) shooters, ambassadors, visionaries - best part!! I am a hobbyist but I really want to improve my photography skills and images... plus I have 3 young kids who take up a lot of space (physical and otherwise)... so the EM5m3 is perfect. Keep up the great work!
Jimmy I really like that little smurk you always have. Priceless. Makes me smile everytime and reinforces my decision to go M43 almost 10 years ago, thus putting a smurk on my face. I'm a hobbist photographer and so glad I made the leap when I did. Packing my mft Panasonic GX1 or Olympus Em5 mk 1 around the mountain's has been a breeze compared to some guys I see with their full frames attached to a massive telephoto( I'm convinced they attach their biggest lenses while hiking just for show). My back and neck hurts just looking at it. But to each their own. I have had so many conversations over mft kit and capabilities durning those first few years. The faces ppl would make when they saw and realized what the little camera and lenses were capable of. Was and is priceless. 😉
The thing to remember is that buying the newest high tech cameras, and taking photographs, are two separate hobbies.. I don't have anything against gearheads, but comparative specifications are only even slightly useful if comparing like with like, and thats rarely the case. From a photography point of view, I loved my FF Nikon DSLRs but honestly, there wasn't anything important to me that I could do with them that I can't still do with my EM1 mk2 cameras.. And my EM10 mk2 with the 14-42 EZ lens gives fantastic images and fits easily in my pocket.
Yes, I buy and collect cameras myself, a hobby I must say. So I do have other formats at disposal (mostly film stuff) but M43 is my go to and like you said, I can do pretty much everything with my M43 kit.
Good video Jimmy. Yes portability and small size is important. Here is my back pack hand luggage for flight and photo/video trip to Cyprus tomorrow. Two EM1 mark iii, 60mm macro, 40-150mm and 150-400mm Olympus lenses, 12-35mm Panasonic lens and 24mm Sirui anamorphic lens. Together with two TCs filters, batteries, chargers, leads, headphones and a laptop. Try taking the equivalent equipment with FF in a back pack!!! Doubt I would be able to lift it never mind having enough room in a back pack that easily fits into the overhead locker on the plane. Peace and good will 😊😊
Appreciate the topic and discussion. As someone else commented: the right tool for the job and for many mft fits the bill. I rarely use my G9 in favor of smaller video-centric tools like the Sony 3000 or Ax53 and sometimes the Rx100 m7. Just works out so much better when out on long hikes...smaller and lighter overall than a camera with interchangeable lens for similar results. When wanting nicer output then we use the G9. Difference on RUclips...not noticeable to most. Just watched a comparison of the IPhone 13 Pro to the new Sony A7 iv, and frankly the iPhone held its own in most cases. Again, for purposes of social media often likely the right tool, but doubt you would use on a professional job or for serious photography. Actually considering replacing my G9 with the M5Mkiii as think the smaller size may mean I use more often, but everything works well enough now so hard to justify. MFT will likely continue to have its place, definitely has some advantages for many and in my view is very fun to shoot with, something difficult to say with many other cameras.
Still have an edge? Heck yes! Ten months ago I sold most of my Canon lenses and invested in MFT. Kept my macro’s (100 and 180 L macros, and tilt/shift lenses. Kept the 1Dx and 7D II for those specialty purposes. Sold my teles - 400 2.8 and 800 5.6 and the f2.8 zooms. Even the 11-24 f4 went. While there is variability between individual lenses, it is when outlaying 20 grand for a new system you realize just how much cheaper MFT is - about a third the cost for equivalents. The size and weight differences are huge. Gear that would have filled three Think Tank production cases, now fits into a single back pack. Tripods are smaller, heads are smaller, and importantly, I can now get gear into places that previously were not easy. Smaller cameras and lenses no longer bring out the officious types demanding a permit and media fee. but most importantly. Using the G9 is fun. I love my 1Dx - incredible camera - but I would never call it fun. MFT is simply fun to use. Glad I switched.
Come work with me in mid Africa where the ave temperature is 38 degrees Celsius in a humidity of 120%. The kind of climate that send the new Sony A7 and the new Canon into shit down mode because of overheating censors in a little under 15 min. MFT is as good as the operator. I have been shooting MFT on a GH5 professionally for broadcast and corporate for the last 3 years and to be honest it's bullet proof. It's as good as you want it to be. I shoot native Lumix and Leica lenses and they have never failed me
I was taking pictures at a football match today when a woman asked me which Olympus I had (i had my M5lll & 40-150mm 2.8 with me). She told me she wanted to buy a new DSLM camera and actually wanted something small to replace her older APS-C DSLR and she likes MFT because of the size. In the photoshops and at a photo fair exhibition they tried to talk her out of MFT as well as APS-C because only full-frame is really good, they said. We talked for about an hour and she seemed to find it hard to believe that I was really happy with my photos. I always say that MFT is a lot of fun, especially with telephoto lenses - so small and affordable. Now she is unsettled again ;-). But it's crazy how people are talked into the expensive full-frame.
I bring my G9 everywhere. I often carry on 2 or 3 lenses 12-60 f/2.8-4.0 + 50-200 f/2.8-4.0 with tc14 + 32.5mm f/1.7. Even when hicking in montains. Portability is essential. Good lenses also. I fully enjoy portability, image quality and reliability of G9 and pana leica lenses and really hope MFT has a long furure ahead. There is a market for it. This is the stuff fully corresponding to my needs. Portability is essential for me. Thanks for your video.
Bless the gearheads. If they didn’t buy the latest and greatest, and soon trade it in for the next latest and greatest, then bottom feeders like me would have no used cameras to choose from. I’m always 2 or 3 iterations behind the curve, far enough back that the curve is hardly discernible.
True to that 🤣 I’m even further behind because extra tight budget. My adventure with photography started about year ago. All gear I bought second hand in great condition with low shutter count. First was gx80(I still keep it), which is great little mft. Next I bought omdem10mkii(my favourite camera). And last was Nikon d5300 with kit lens and 35mmf1.8 that I use mainly with tripod at night and occasionally making photos of friends. My both mft cameras use panasonic lenses(20mmf1.7, 25mmf1.8, 45-150mm zoom and 12-32mm pancake). They are cheap but provide good enough quality. Occasionally I’ll put canon fd 50mmf2 on mft if I wanna shoot people. Recently I bought dxo photolab 5 elite for optical and noise correction. All this gear was cheaper than basic ff setup. It’s enough for me. Only reason so far for me for ff body would be adapting vintage lenses because I like them and their rendering.
Let’s not forget great IBIS on my mft cameras which allows me to take photos at night walks in city without need of tripod. Results are good enough once I process raw files through dxo noise reduction.
@@kamilpotato3764 Plus you do not lose depth of field as you would with a 5 stop faster lens opened up to match on an unstabilised platform for the higher stuff. Even an E-Pl10 with an f/4 prime lens with 3 stops is giving the same speed as an f/1.4 on many other cameras on a static target for minimal cost and more usable depth of field coupled with even more from the smaller sensor. This is why I gave up on Fuji for the bodies I could actually afford and the E-PL10 at £370 when I bought it new really stunning value and with a 2.5 year warranty. When you can buy secondhand with a 6 month warranty the Olympus one seems to be the only one making it worth buying new. The menus are a bit emasculated on the entry stuff but the performance is excellent. A pity the menus have been cut back but the Canikon user reviewers regarded the menus unlike any they had used before as a fault and Olympus folded to the criticism.
5 years ago I would have agreed to the mentioned advantages, but today I cannot really agree anymore: - Size, portability ... only yes, if you go with the older cameras like PEN-F, PM2 and with older pancake lenses, but recent development of Olympus and Panasonic has focused on bigger and more expensive M1III, M1X, G9, GH5 and bigger, heavier, rather expensive pro lenses. And mirrorless from Canon and Nikon had come down in size compared to the DSLRs 5 years ago. - Cheaper ... basically same argument as above, their latest iteration is even more expensive than fullframe mirrorless cameras - Reliability ... that's my biggest concern because over the last 8 years most of my Olympus cameras had failures over time: M10 WLAN stopped working after 3 years (very common problem with M10), M5II card door and on/off switch failed (also pretty common problem with M5II), M1II card door rattling, PM2 rear dial to be replaced (also common problem) and the biggest problem had been the occasional corruption of the memory cards inside the camera. The M5II couldn't handle deleting videos inside the camera which lead occasionally to memory card corruption. - IBIS ... yes, that had become my favorite advantage compared to DSLRs which had none at all. But again with the latest fullframe mirrorless generation this gap is mostly closed as well. And if you would argue there are still a stop or two better, maybe, but therefore fullframe also offers 2 stop advantage through the sensor size. So while I still enjoy my Olympus cameras I wouldn't argue that these are advantages. It's definitely a good system ... but doesn't really have an edge any longer like it had 5 years ago.
My Porsche has two seats but costs more than my four seater car but it has qualities. With M4/3 it lens size. If you only do digital prints then 4K is about all you need - massive cropping options from my M1/M10 mk 1. You can get A3 prints, good jpeg engine...M10 with 9-18mm, EZ pancake zoom, 40-150mm with the Lumix Leica 25mm f1.4 makes a great holiday/travel system. M1 with the 12-40mm f2.8 & 40-150mm f2.8 is my landscape system...Put the Lumix Leica 15mm f1.7 or the 25mm f1.4 on GM1 it's a great little street camera
Interesting video to remind people of what m43rds offer but I wish you had mentioned the very important advantage that m43 has regarding the choice of image ratios which most other cameras do not offer
Agree 100%. After trying numerous Canon, Lumix, and Sony bodies, Olympus makes cameras that bring the fun back to photography -comfortable to hold and lightweight, weatherproofing, outstanding IBIS, compact form, pro-grade construction, and beautiful colors.
The cost is a strong talking point. I'm personally shooting with full frame, using the Nikon Z5, but when you consider that that camera costs the same as the Panasonic G9 where I live, then there's definitely something to consider there. I just recommended a friend, who wants to start with serious photography, to invest in MFT, getting a Panasonic Gx85, which even today really is an amazing camera for most. I was almost pulling the trigger on getting a used Olympus OMD EM1 II myself 🙂 I might be a full frame shooter, but I have great love for the MFT system, and it's only a question of time before I'll add a Panasonic or Olympus camera to my collection.
Great summary. I can't even express how much I love my switch to Olympus, there is just nothing that competes for what it does to enhance my enjoyment of photography. The only "drawback" is noise, and I just don't even care. If you think noise is ruining your photo, then your photo wasn't worth taking. A good image is one that tells a story, is "about" something rather than "of" something (to quote another youtuber). Some of my favourite photos were taken on my iPhone of all things...because that's what I had available at the moment. Of course, if the next sensor reduces noise and has 14-bit dynamic range I won't complain...take my wallet!...but in the meantime I will work on perfecting the craft (ie composition) rather than worrying about pixel-perfection.
Well said my friend. I never too bother about noise either. Photos used to be very grainy in my film days, so I am used to these 'texture' on my photos. I think it gives a sense of when the photos was taken, in a very dark place or not... nowadays, too clean a photo makes me think they are not real... may be just me :)
The 12-100 is a tour de force. It is always about the lenses. When the 12mp sensor was seeming long in the tooth the same grumbles existed. When the 16mp sensor appeared it caught up with 20-24mp larger sensors. The same will happen shortly.
Spot on! Gear is so secondary and MFT still offers more advantages than disadvantages compared to so-called "FF" (which we considered "small format" in the film era). Regarding size/weight, I prefer the feel of my G9 to that of the A7 family bodies (too small and not-great ergo), for example. Also, even if you use cheap, plastic, slow lenses (although glass is the second-most important component of a camera system, after the photographer, so this is one area not to cheap-out), they're still larger/heavier for any format larger than MFT. I use my Leica 100-400 (200-800 in FF terms for the uninitiated) all the time. It's a fraction of the size, weight, or cost of any "FF" lens with that reach. If it existed, a comparable 200-800 f/4-6.3 in FF would be huge (requiring a 'pod) and it would cost more than US$20K. As you point out, it's not the camera that makes the shot, and I've made beautiful prints from a Lumix ZS20 (a 2012 vintage, 1/2.3" sensor pocket point-and-shoot) taken at places like Zion National Park (normally large format film country). Bottom line, especially with DxO (I use the complete suite), I can get IQ well beyond the ability of the human eye/visual cortex to discern with my G9 and I can easily carry a full eq FL range from 16-800 just about anywhere. Try that even with APS-C, much less larger format rigs.
I understand your points. I enjoy my M43 for travel very much. Still, it would not hurt to have a meaningful sensor refresh finally to continue to maximize what M43 can do.
I have an em5 i and an em10 ii with 8 filters, 6 batteries, a 12-50mm, 14-45mm, 14-140mm, 12mm, 45-200mm, extra flash, remote, and a 4/3 adapter in a small vintage hard case. All second hand, so I spent less than 3k nz for all of it. The image quality and video is more than enough for me and I take a lot of photos for my job and for fun. I'm sticking with micro 4/3. When em5 iii or em1 ii get 'obsolete' to the general crowd I'll get one cheap! My partner has the older 4/3 e620 with the fantastic 18-180mm and 75-300mm lenses again second hand and she loves them. She also has an ep3 along with the 12-50mm multifunction lense (she likes the macro mode its pretty good for an old lens). We don't see the need to upgrade given the tools we have make very nice images indeed. About the only thing I do miss is the phsse detect auto focus you find on the old e series and em1/later em5 models but I take photos of plants and kids mostly so with a bit of planning its not a big problem to me.
Hi Jimmy. The truth is, which camera do I reach out for first? Is it mySony A7Rii of my Olympus EM1 Mkii. Well, it's the Olympus nearly every time, mainly down to pleasure of use especially with long lenses. I sometimes ask myself why I bought the Sony at all! Never think about this when using any of my Oly cameras................must try and get used to OM System.
I have a fair bit to say on the subject. I was heavily invested in Olympus way back on the standard for thirds and the Olympus E3. And when they switched to micro 4/3 I did not want to reinvest that much money at the time so I continued shooting the E3 for over 10 years. So I agree give a photographer a camera and they can make images. And last year when I finally decided I really should upgrade to something with the shakiness of Olympus sale and stuff I decided micro four thirds wasn't going to be an option since I already discontinued one line that I really liked and was good at using. I also agree full frame is a huge investment and comes with a size that is not always convenient to carry everything you need especially for a location-based photographer as myself. I also feel Fujifilm is producing of more long-term system with their APC size thing and showing that they're continually investing into that. It also does well on taking advantage of size and durability. I'm not sure if it's as good as my Olympus E3 as it lasted for over 10 years of professional shooting before it had a malfunction.
Regarding body size and IBIS. Olympus managed to squeeze IBIS into the E-PM2, which I consider to be the most underrated MFT body. It's almost as small as these GM bodies, has IBIS, had a touch screen already, took a decent electronic viewfinder - the same one that Leica deemed good enough for their M240! Also, look at what Ricoh managed to pull off with the GRIII and GRIIIx, both have IBIS. In an APSC camera body that is smaller than both the E-PM2 and these GM cameras. IT CAN BE DONE.
you perfectly hit the point, there are PRO photographers in need of the most reliable system because their living is based on it, and then there are geeks chasing best parameters, shooting brick walls, backyards and their cats only, having full mounts of "wisdom" on the forums :) I know several professionals, working either for agencies or on their own, some of them with Olympus, some old Canon or Nikon DSLRs ... some of them are even using cheap standard lenses and getting amazing results :)
I shoot M43 and FF for different reasons, mainly print size capability. All i’d say is that anyone who snubs M43 does so at their loss. M43 is breaking into the drone world and many landscape photographers are eagerly buying them up. BTW, Sony makes most of the Drone M43 sensors and 1 inch sensors for that matter. For me M43 is my go to over my FF, it’s just so practical, portable and less ominous when in public, I actually struggle to see the difference in many of my shots between M43 and FF and I shoot mainly in manual mode. I always have a smug grin when I read people hitting on M43 and the photography joy they’re missing out on. Been shooting for longer than i care to remember btw. Another great video, thanks.
V well explained and I agree with you - it would be lovely to have a small, light camera, with whistles and bells, plus the Olympus lenses. So much easier to carry about.
thx again for a great video - and nice of you to mention Pentax Q (it has leafshutter, ND filter, full range of lenses, flash sync at high speeds AND not to mention loads of fun to use) pick one up and try it it will bring you joy.
If MFT's weren't viable, the big 3 wouldn't mention MFT's! Aside from that fact, I think you have the best opening of any vlogger for photo/video. Just excellent work not to mention the chosen song to push it!
I've been look a lot at Micro-Four Thirds lately. I already have the Canon M6 Mark II and a load of lenses, I mostly use the fast primes - but the build quality and lack of any kind of weather resistance holds me back from shooting in some conditions. It would be the perfect system if only their lenses and bodies had some kind of WR. My main priorities are cost, handling, high FPS and build quality. Bokeh/depth of field I don't care too much about. So that rules budget full frame models like the EOS RP out straight away. Sony A6XXX series look to handle very awkwardly. My choices really come down to Fuji X-T2/X-T3 or something like the Olympus E-M5 III. They're very comparable in price.. and for my lens selection I'm after.. the Fuji lenses I would buy all have OIS. Obviously the E-M5 has IBIS..
as most m4/3 users view here, i share your view. portability is key for my street photograohy, mostly done on M5 or M1. i mostly use my ff sony for portrait or real estate contracts. wwith a 20mm a 35 and a 85mm. no way i would walk 3 hours downtown and ruin all candid shots with a ff zoom, lol.
Here's another tiny combination - I have an Olympus E-PM2 camera with an Olympus 14-42 EZ lens. It's so small that I can put it in my pocket when I ride my bicycle and the photos are great.
James Popsys of all people did that in his I’ve switched to Sony video… saying the Sony f/2.5 G lenses are smaller than his (pro grade wide aperture) m4/3 lenses.
@@lonnieharmond9400 All the popular youtubers who talk camera gear are corporate sponsored. At a given time they will promote whoever pays them the most.
Totally agree on the Pro Grade argument,. this is also my Argument all the time. I love Pro Stuff, esp Pro Lenses. If you are locking for Pro Stuff in 35mm its $$$$$. For m4/3 it’s always around 1000 EUR seldom more then 2000 EUR., when 2000 EUR is basically the starting Point for 35mm. Most don’t understand this or are trying arguing with equivalence when thats no the point.
Excellent points made in this vid. Love the breakdown of pro-grade vs. amateur grade when consider cost break downs. I think that will hit home for a lot of professionals and beginners alike. Also love the call out on the fallacy that FF intrinsically enhances photography, makes me think of when Chase Jarvis used a toy lego camera to take amazing photos for RevTv a few years ago.
It’s all about the lenses. I couldn’t care less how small fool frame bodies get, the lenses will always be bigger, heavier, and more expensive for the same aperture. I just shot at dusk the other day with my G9 and 12-35 f2.8, auto ISO often going to ISO 4000 and higher. After processing the raws with DeepPrime in DxO PhotoLab 5, they look beautiful. Even the low light issue is a non-issue now in my opinion.
@@eternaleden3014 yeah, I call it that because the marketing of CaNikony successfully convinced most photographers that a larger, heavier, and more expensive system was not only desirable, but necessary. Even most pros who really should know better. Foolish.
@@joeltunnah sadly but true, you have to own a FF camera nowadays to get the "pro" badge. It is painful to watch how consumers are getting fooled into the expensive and heavy FF systems just to end up taking all the photos with their phones.
@@p.io7 I just saw an ad on this video for a camera store (specializing in credit sales) where a “customer” bragged that he upgraded from APS to FF and now can charge more. Bwah ha ha!
MFT can do everything large format can do for less in money, size and weight. The only advantage full format has over MFT is taking pictures in extremely low light or to be extremely enlarged or cropped, and both is very seldom needed and for both there are usually some technical workarounds. Besides, the camera system is the least important factor in creating great photos. There is nearly no photo you will miss because you brought a MFT instead of a full format camera. It's more likely you miss a photo because of the cumbersome, heavy and large full format gear you're carrying around instead of a MFT system. If I truly need the absolute edge in technical image quality, I use film cameras anyway - mostly medium format, and increasingly often large format. Just not 35mm, it has no longer a significant edge over digital cameras, even MFT.
I have used m43 for ~10yrs, and nowadays I only use my m43 camera (a EM1ii) to digitize film: it stays on a mount and has a macro lens on it all the time. I never take m43 gears with me for travel, as Sony A7C + 40 2.8 G lenses are much smaller and lighter, provide the same field of view and depth of field, and is equally splash proof than EM1 + 20 1.4 pro. I think this example shows that m43 is really not in a good shape… I liked my GM5 + Panasonic 20 lens, but the GM series is discontinued and look at the bulky lenses the two companies have been making recently, including the new 20 1.4…
M4/3 is amazing. I think I have had 1 or 2 pictures out of 10,000 that I wished I had more low light capability. That's about it, not much to complain about thanks the DXO prime.. For more Bokeh or depth of field you need to understand the physics of the sensor. Olympus has lenses that will give you all you need. You just have to learn how they work. in the words of Capt. Kirk " You need to understand how things work on a starship." On a side note the DJI Inspire and now the Mavic 3 us the 4/3 sensor. All the while touting its low light performance and Dynamic range. Giving photographers and videographers the best experience in the drone market. Full Frame shamers you cant have it both ways.
While I agree with everything you said, I'm not sure how many professional still photographers use micro four thirds exclusively. Maybe for wildlife and video, but studio and sport? The E-M1X sells for about half its launch price, which suggests big body small sensor pro cameras are not the way forward.
But there are M43 professionals in all the photography genres that create beautiful professional pictures. Why there aren't more of them you ask? Well you basically answered it. Most humans believe that FF is THE professional grade, thus many professionals (or yet to become one) simply go FF to match the criteria...
The problem with tiny cameras like the GM1 is ergonomics. I bought my first MFT camera, an E-PM1, to see if the IQ was comparable to my Nikon D200. That it was, so I switched to MFT completely. But what I couldn't stand was the tiny body without fingers commensurately tiny. I probably have average male hand size.
I still own a G9 and GX85. But I think price to performance and features is where I believe going full-frame makes sense. Meaning, how can the new M43 camera's price be justified? Example: The new a7VI is under 2500 and you a lot for that.
I looked at both sony and nikon and i think i'd enjoy using the nikon D500 and 200-500 combo. But the weight just puts me off. Both do have some reasonably priced lenses but many are just crazy prices. I think an Em1 iii will probably be my next camera tbh.
In the vain of this video I am contemplating marrying the new 20mm 1.4 to my Em10 Mkii as my go to set up. Reasoning being that if I protect the camera body from the weather I might get out more when it is damp - don’t like getting wet and want to avoid a flip around screen - compromises ha ha
As I see it, the real strength of micro four thirds is nature photography. The smaller sensor gives us greater magnification for macro photography, smaller lenses that, thanks to better IBIS, can be handheld for wildlife photography, and smaller, lighter weight lenses for landscape photography. The downside is that the dynamic range and low light performance simply don't compare favorably with full frame and medium format digital cameras. Full frame cameras will probably always be better at astrophotography for that reason and we will need much brighter supertelephoto lenses and better sensors to be able to hang with the big boys in low light for wildlife photography. The full frame manufacturers (especially Sony) and even Fujifilm have much better AI subject tracking than OMDS and Panasonic too, so that is as much of a problem as the sensor size.
Totally agree, Jimmy. You have to compare apples to apples. I find that Canon's attempts to make their gear smaller by going with f/8 and f/11 zooms laughable. But, with the entire non-m4/3 world dumping on you, it's hard to make headway. You have the 800lb gorilla constantly harping that you need a big sensor to get good photos.
Hi Jimmy, with my physical problems now I'm so pleased that I chose MFT gear. Weight for me is absolutely paramount closely followed by compactness. Thanks to the weight of pancake lenses etc. I can still shoot, else I'd have long since given up, reluctantly, by now. I've never felt in any way at a disadvantage using MFT gear, quite the reverse as it makes picture taking enjoyable, it ticks the boxes for me. If I'm in pain and fatigued then it's certainly not enjoyable and this is directly reflected in my willingness and ability to get out/ stay out and get shots. As you say, it has to be fun, if not then it's no good, it simply doesn't work. It's the best feeling wandering around unencumbered and looking to find things to photograph, All the best, Leigh
Well said, Jimmy. Photography means 'painting with light's. Let's all simply enjoy that irregardless of camera gear. Bet Rembrandt never worried about his paint brushes.
actually Rembrandt would have been extremely careful in his choice of brushes. as a full time artist for over 50 years I can attest to the importance of seeking superior quality brushes and paying for it is never an issue.
Oly/OM and Pany have in recent years made larger gear. I understand why but I would like a return to at least some smaller gear. I do think it is possible to put IBIS in a small body. I use a GX9 that has excellent 5-axis stabilisation. The E-P7 also has 5-axis stabilisation, it is smaller. Lenses... Oly made those f1.2 lenses as big as they could! The f1.8 lenses are the best, value to performance. There are so many great lenses for m43 that don't break the bank and are tiny. I wish OM and Panasonic would make new versions. Or completely new small lenses, perhaps a 9 or 10mm f2, like the 12mm f2?
I have a an OM-D E-M1 Mark II and the images are first rate when the exposure and focus are spot on and the iso is 800 or below. And therein lies the rub. Continuous focusing with my Olympus is unreliable and raising the exposure of the shadows in post renders an unusable file. Matt Granger , using a Nikon Z9, took an image that was four and a half stops under exposed and in post created a good photo. I wish Olympus would answer this challenge.
I have Fuji X100V and Panasonic G80. Fuji is better in shadow recovery and high ISO by far, but part of that seems to exposure metering - on Panasonic, shadows seems always brighter in JPEGs and RAWs processed using defaults. On Fuji it seems a bit harder to recover highlights. So part of noise is from different sensor (although pixel density on cameras is similar, but Panasonic has likely sensor that was used already in 2013), but part of it is different exposure metering. It's hard to describe - you usually need to pull shadows more often when editing RAWs from Fuji, on Panasonic camera does it for you and further shadow recovery is more difficult.
The E-M1 MkII was released nearly 5 years ago though, so perhaps comparing the Z9 with the MkIII or E-M1X would be a fairer fight. Another factor to consider: in my experience, coming from Pentax and (to a lesser extent) Nikon, they do have amazing potential for the recovery of shadow detail. I often underexposed images to protect the highlights, and then could pull out lots of shadow detail later. With Olympus, it was the opposite. It seemed that the Olympus was overexposing by quite a bit (compared to what I was used to coming from Pentax and Nikon), but the headroom in the highlights on the Olympus was amazing. I found I had to fight the urge to dial in negative exposure comp, and just let the Oly "over" expose, and then I could lower the overall exposure in post, keep the shadows about the same, and reclaim the highlights by a few stops with no issues. That said, there's no doubt that the Z9 is a technical marvel, and the most exciting camera I've seen for a couple of years (since the Olympus E-M1 MkIII :) , so hats off to Nikon.
All i want for M43 (Panasonic in particular) is PDAF autofocus for video. 4K 120FPS would be nice as the GH6 seems to offer in 2022, and 8K too (not going to happen anytime soon i guess because of sensor size) but without fixing video autofocus.. No way. There is literally no other reason why i would switch to Sony/Canon/Nikon. Just give me good video autofocus and i would never think about changing systems Panasonic!
If you need something bigger than mft, then you are trying to compensate for something else small 😉 I switched from fullframe pro dslr and mirrorless. Never going back 💪 Canon and Sony still haven't fixed the color handling. The af is also still a bit slower. Still slow still fps shooting. And the image stabilization still can't match. And the pro fullframes can't even be used in whatever angle you want, without the user to role around on the ground or climb mountains.
If you can't see the picture in the first place then it doesn't matter what camera you have .so latest and greatest only turns out to be a statement ( look what I've got )
Nope, and I never said MFT is good at that anywhere in my channel. Though it's great at something else. Things when you want to move quickly. Like anything, small set up is good for agility, if one is moving a lot, like traveling, documentary, landscape. Unless you are a nat geo photographer who has 5 porter team carrying stuff with you, MFT has its place. But like my comments in this video, I am not here to stop FF or sell anyone MFT, only to raise the awareness of platforms instead of people keep bashing something smaller.
This talk is more like an appeal to photographers to return to the basics of the craft. I love shooting with my Fujifilm X-T20 and plan to buy an X-T3 next year. Where I live FF is expensive. I can't justify spending that kind of cash when the equipment I have can produce excellent results for print and web. Invest smarter and enjoy taking pictures.
Micro four thirds pro grade might be cheaper....but I don't agree that it's any better built than a Sony, Fuji, Panasonic (FF) etc at the same price. We honestly would need actual repair and failure rate data before assuming this to be true for any manufacturer. I'm not sure if M43 is even cheaper, especially if we accept the premise that a professional photographer can make anything work. Fuji has a weather sealed F2 35mm equivalent lens for half the price of the Olympus 1.2 17mm. I know that F2 needs more light, but APSC sensors are a bit better with high ISO performance, so in real world use it could be the same. i.e. the Fuji lens is smaller and cheaper, but also weather sealed and (probably) sharp enough to use for most pro work. But I totally agree that you don't need full frame for most photography jobs. If you ignore the lack of the second card slot, I could photograph an entire wedding with a EM10 Mark4. And I know you could too. :) The edge I think lies in IBIS (if IBIS matters to someone) and if you're a nature photographer who covers a lot of ground, I think Olympus still makes the smallest lenses by a large margin in relation to distance/reach. But I don't think that's as common of a need as say, better low light performance or fast autofocus. I think you're 100% right and they should release a tiny camera again. I think Panasonic needs to work on the aesthetic design of their cameras. I think Olympus cameras look much nicer. The Olympus EM1 Mark3 is a shining example of being the most comfortable camera (subjectively) to hold that also (subjectively) looks very nice. The way these cameras look is super important. And I think Olympus should double down on this.... Release the Pen F sequel. Release more 1.4 weather sealed lenses that are compact. Focus on ambassadors who have inspiring work, **take care of them*, surround them with resources, and fold them into your brand. (You're the only person on RUclips I write these epic comments - keep up the great work!)
Cheers Jason for your 'Epic' comment :) I agree in many ways you said that FF lenses are built similar to M43 Pro lenses but I've seen and used some of them but none would be 'better' or 'equal' to M43 Pro lenses build. Canon's L series, Sony's G Master are their respective pro range and they are more comparable in terms of build and quality of finish. I have some Fuji friends who showed me their lenses and yes, they are nice, but somehow, feels a little 'hollow'. Ok, some may prefer the 'lightness' of them but I am used to solid lens feel and I suspect that there are some cost saving somewhere. But not a debate but my view on others lenses. Anyhow, I would love a PEN F sequel too, it would be a shame that the original is a one off.
@@Red35Photography Hey Jimmy, there's a really good chance you're right. My experience is with Olympus and Panasonic gear. The Olympus 1.2 trilogy is about $1500 in Canada. I own them all, but I haven't owned a single Nikon, Canon, or Fujifilm lens in that price range. So you have more experience than I do, that's for sure. :) Did you hear the rumour about the 12mm 1.4 that's been floating around? Just kidding. I just started that rumour now. I'm just hoping it manifests itself into reality. Launching with a Pen F 2, weather-sealed, with a joystick on the back. AND TWO CARD SLOTS so I can comfortably shoot weddings with it. ...let me dream. ;)
For me as a wildlife photographer. We are losing the AF tracking race. You see the FF boys in steep competition with each other pushing the AF tech hard right now. And that is just the reality. I will keep shooting my EM1X really only because my 300mm F4 is so brilliant. Lets hope OM can keep up
yes but the Panasonic GM1 is the smallest with a screen and controls, The A01 needs the app and phone to work and unfortunately, they are no longer supported. I was using the GM1 with my 40-150 2.8 pro and the combo looks wrong but funny haha but it works.
Not sure if you are aware that your vocals are very soft compared to the intro music. According to RUclips's stats, your audio is -11.7 dB below their reference level as used by ads.
The audio issue that I am experiencing does not appear on your other video eg ruclips.net/video/bl_6g9NaIwk/видео.html . As I mentioned previously, the music intro appears to be the right level, but the dialogue is very soft. I am not sure if YT messes with the levels when you upload your video. I used the "stats for nerds" option just to verify the sound play back level. Thanks for your reply.
Jimmy: I think you did not mention the total system weight savings of m43. Only absolute beginners will be swayed by the size & weight of the camera body alone! Also: Who else has a 24-200 equivalent in 35mm FF? No one else but m43 with 12-100 f4 w stab. Who else has HHHR? (Hand Held High Rez) No one else that I know of. Who else has (3) f1.2 prime lenses? Not sure on this one. Who else can match the size & weight of m43 for long telephotos? No one. I think it would have been helpful to (again) point out these facts!
Yes, m43 has an edge over larger formats, it's the size, the weight, and at last, easier maximal and minimal DOF. It's the best tool, there is. If you can't do it with m43, you can't do it.
I think the camera manufacturers don't really know what the customers really want. Especially not in the consumer / hobby segment. When I buy a new camera it MUST be able to do at least ten (10) things better than the old one. I always do this with all technical devices. I regularly attend a large photo get-together. Everyone there who bought a new camera wanted higher frame rates and / or better video, faster autofocus, more dynamic range etc ... When I then ask how often they really use the new / better, the answer is usually sobering. E.g., all of them have 4K video but only two out of 18 make videos, in FHD, because the computer no longer packs. (͡ ° ͜ʖ ͡ °) Sure, there are actually only video producers on yotube, so video is always requested. I asked around which five (5) properties the new camera MUST have. Here is the hit list of the 24 surveyed participants: 1.) Viewfinder 2.) fast autofocus 3.) Ease of use, buttons & wheels 4.) weatherproof, also lenses 5.) high dynamic range 6.) Firmware updates 7.) IBIS 8.) Images per battery charge 9.) Operability, menu 10.) at least 20 megapixels Any video properties ended up in 14th place. Could someone please start a larger / more representative survey?
Yes I think it does, these newer FF and APSC with their lenses are starting to be as large or even as larger and as heavy than their DSLR counterparts.
I did not own a GM1 but instead a GM5. If OMDS or panasonic could produce those tiny camera again at a lower price point. it will be great. but it has to be equip with a flip screen and ease of file transfer. most of the phone maker are losing sales for their products which feature high end camera. (except for iphone users who did not really have a choice). it is time to target this group of consumer who could buy these tiny camera to compliment their phone. whats more, they do not have to dump the camera when the phone becomes laggy or lose support in apps in time to come.
I think we'll always be living in a world where a smaller sensor takes a beating from the 35mm camp. Take the N's that think anything less is just a toy. It just makes it seem like we're continuously having to justify using the m43 sensor size; it's even affected me up until a couple months ago when more content around m43 was released, including by you which ended up solidifying why I love shooting with my Olympus. I recently got the 12-100 f4 PRO lens to take with me on a trip to Scotland and my gosh, the stabilisation of the body PLUS the lens is incredible, 1 second shots of waterfalls handheld with optimal quality. Of course, I'm just an amateur so it really doesn't matter, but in technical aspects of the images that come out of my Oly (I mean things like quality, colour, noise etc) there isn't a massive difference between my E-M1 mk II and 35mm bodies. I've even gone as far as downloading sample RAW images to develop from other brands, and again, not much difference. So does the sensor size and brand (Olympus) still have an edge (for me) ? Absolutely. If I ever get to a level where I can make some money with image content creation, I'd go as far as even dubbing myself a fan boy. Plus, it's the future! Get rid of tripods (unless stacking etc)! Certainly helps with the long mountain hikes. Nice little video, thanks!
I’m not fit as I used to and hiking with crazy dog and ff dslr is not something I enjoy as combination. I got light RP, but Canon is blocking third party light lenses makers and their very limited choice of light RF lenses is so unappealing. On top of it, climate changed back to normal. Rain is regular now, not just once in a month. And chill factor in winter. I can’t see any other choice but freeze proofed m43 cameras and lenses.
Olympus PEN EPL10 has a huge advantage over my Canon, just because of the IBIS. My Canon M200 is just as small, with a bigger sensor, but the footage is way too shaky! Canon digital stabilization is not as good. Sony is even worse.
You can make a pros and cons list, and there are certainly pros and cons to both mft and ff. Physically, more light collection in ff will always have an advantage, however the question is: does the pros of mft system out weigh ff advantage for what you are doing? This is a dependent variable and the only one who can answer that is you! For much of what I do Olympus mft has an advantage, and in some cases, ff doesn't even offer some of the functionality I need, so the old adage goes "pick the right tool for the job".
It’s not more “light collection” for full frame, it’s less magnification when printing or viewing the image on a screen. Micro4/3 has 1/4 of the sensor area, so you need 4x more magnification for equal print size.
I think the fact you need to make a video like this is an indication that M4/3 is losing out to its larger sensor competitors. APSC and so called full frame users aren’t making the same type of videos that I’m aware off. Keep the good work up.
Of course they don't. However, my video is more educational in a deeper level. I am not trying to convince people to switch or pulling people to M43. It's more about awareness. Many compare numbers, spec sheets, price tags but never consider what they really are and why one is more expensive or cheaper to others. Most don't even understand formats. So when some influencers said FF is best, they all think it's the best format ever existed on earth. When they say M43 is dead, they all think the same. Sad but true.
The short answer is definitely yes ... There are lenses on FF which are cheaper and will yield better results on their bodies, such as the 85mm 1.8 from Sigma, Sony, Nikkor Z & Canon RF, which in my opinion are better than the pro Olympus & Nocticron There's also the Zeiss 16-35 F4 for Sony which is very affordable. However, the overall cost of the MFT system is DEFINITELY less than any Fuji or any FF (two Lumix bodies+ 6 lenses in my case)
If you drop a great print in front of someone, they won't be able to tell you what camera and/or lens took the photo. As many have said, being into gear and being into photography are two different hobbies. As long as I'm taking photos on something that works for me, I'm happy.
When OMDS was spun off, I worried that we were basically watching vulture capitalism in action and would soon witness aggressive asset stripping of a brand I had grown up with and loved since the 1970s. I am now (provisionally) reassured that we are seeing genuine recapitalisation of the OM System R&D, and will continue to see cool things emerging. I had been looking with considerable interest at the Nikon Z system -- and will probably keep looking. But then I picked up my trusty E-M1 II, and realised that I am far, far, far from exhausting its possibilities. And for a cost and, importantly, weight (especially when carrying multiple lenses) a fraction of any similarly built FF option, there is no reason for me to give up such a wonderful, versatile system. Indeed, if the new high-end model shows some evolution in sensor performance -- reasonably improved range of video modes, reasonably improved high-ISO performance and, if it's not too much to ask for, a resolution bump to 30MP or so, then I could very happily commit to another generation of m43, regardless of what exciting things happen in Canikon-land.
M43 is certainly losing the size advantage when it comes to primes, the new OM 20mm F1.4 is huge and heavy when compared to Sony's new 40mm and offerings from 3rd parties, although it looks like a lovely lens. When it comes to zooms, not so much, nothing compares to the Olympus 12-200 in size (if not sharpness at the long end unfortunately) in the FF world. However, size is and has never been the main issue for some. The EM1 handles wonderfully, making it small could compromise the camera for some users. FF is theoretically inferior to Medium Format, but you rarely hear this being talked about. If OM systems' new "wow" camera (oh how I wish it would be an improved Pen F) can improve tracking to Sony levels, add some more computational features, build in noise reduction to Deep Prime levels and maintain the ergonomics (perhaps with a slightly higher resolution sensor that is back side illuminated) then M43 will be able to hold its head high well into the future.
@@joeltunnah But with a Sony camera you can raise the ISO two stops and still get a cleaner image than on the OM lens, the DOF is almost the same and both are weather sealed and similarly priced, so a very close comparison can usefully and easily be made. More like comparing a Golden Delicious with a Granny Smith, albeit with the Sony having more controls and less diffraction.
@@LeoSavantt if you raise the FF camera ISO two stops, you’ve just negated any noise advantage of the larger sensor. If you’re going to shoot slow lenses, there’s no point to the expense and extra size/weight of FF cameras.
@@joeltunnah That's not quite true, you do by raising the ISO two (probably actually 3 due to lower native ISO on the Sony) stops get equivalent noise, but the A7C and 40mm F2.5 is a lot lighter than the EM1 20mm F1.4 combo, with better autofocus, some weather sealing and better battery life, although far worse IBIS. The same with Sony's weather sealed 85mm F1.8, which is much lighter (and cheaper) than the Oly 45mm F1.2. The Sony A7c has 20% more pixels, so cropping is superior as well, although neither have particularly good view finders or rear screens. The M43 advantage is not in weight particularly, although IBIS is much better, live composite amazing and subjectively the Oly is much much nicer to use, albeit with inferior image quality. M43 really shines with zooms, the 8-25 F4 and 40-150 F2.8 (plus teleconverter) have no practical equivalents in FF in terms of size.
@@LeoSavantt again as usual, people like you always compare apples to oranges. The EM1 is a completely different kind of camera to an A7C. Better weather sealing, freeze proof, rugged build, better ergonomics, better IBIS, more features, more controls and they’re easier to use, and better color. Have you held an A7C in your hands? Good gravy…🤦🏼♂️ Look I have nothing against Sony, or people who choose that system, but it’s in no way a substitute for micro4/3 in size, weight, or price. Sorry it just isn’t.
“You don’t make a photograph just with a camera. You bring to the act of photography all the pictures you have seen, the books you have read, the music you have heard, the people you have loved.”
― Ansel Adams
This is my favourite addiction.
First i let the title scare me out and then Jimmy strikes with his eleven minutes of relief.
Thanks Jimmy, you've made my day, again :)
Thanks Jimmy! In real photography job it's rarely required to set ISO higher 400 especially if you have f/1.2-1.4 prime lenses. If you want bigger dynamic range (up to 16 stops) you can use Ev bracketing and merge RAW files in photo editing program. For portraits in high contrast light Ev bracketing of 3 shots spaced 1 stop of exposure with shatter setting H-series 20 fps works fine on E-M1-II/III and E-M5-III - portrait images merged without ghosting. So that OM-D pro grade cameras provide workarounds to circumvent sensor sensitivity weakness in comparison to FF. The prize for getting more geeky is f/1.2 pro grade lenses more affordable than on FF systems.
Cheers mater. glad you got the points I made. No matter how much ISO I can push, I rarely go pass 1600, 3200 emergency, even at weddings. I use fast primes and that also what I used when I was with Canon. I haven't changed my habit, or workflow.
In the real world, I actually see a lot of m4/3 users. Size/weight is the #1 reason they chose the system. However, most of them were switching from larger 35mm sensors cameras. New users, I usually see buying entry-level DSLRs like the Canon T7 and Nikon D5600. These are affordable and relatively small cameras too. Then there are many that own multiple cameras in all shapes and sizes. One thing we all have in common is the joy of photography.
Well said Rob. You're right that many m4/3 users came from other systems. But attracting the larger mass who enjoys taking pictures but are happy with their cell phones--that's the nut no manufacturer has been able to crack.
Also for me size and silence were the main reason for going with m43 ... 5 to 10 years ago. But today this gap to DSLRs has been narrowed a lot because Olympus and Panasonic had focused on bigger cameras and bigger lenses in recent years and the DSLRs manufacturers had focused on mirrorless and smaller solutions. So especially if you take cameras with a grip like M1 or G9 than there is not major size advantage over fullframe mirrorless solution. And with bigger cameras and lenses the prices also has gone up a lot for m43 especially with M1III, M1X, GH5 and all the PRO lenses. The really small cameras like PM2, PEN-F, GM5 haven't seen any love for updates from the manufacturers. So if I had to start today, I don't think I would go the route with m43 ... because the advantages of the past are mostly gone and in case of Olympus their technology has fallen behind competition. Low res EVF, no 4k60 isn't really acceptable these days for cameras like M1III and M1x around 2000 bucks.
@@stefanwagener At least with telephoto lenses there is still a big difference in price and weight between MFT and full format. Look for something comparable in weight and price to the Olympus 40-150mm 2.8 pro. There is no 75-300mm 2.8. You would have to buy, say, a Canon 70-200mm 2.8 L and the Canon 300m 2.8 L in addition. With telephoto lenses MFT is unbeatable.
@@christianmayrhofer4178 In principle correct but only for very long telephoto lenses and not correct for the given example. The Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 is equivalent to a 80-300 f/5.6 fullframe lens (and not to f/2.8 as you stated) which exists e.g. in form of 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 from Nikon and Canon. The fullframe versions cost only half of what the Olympus version costs. Weight and size are about the same (which is to be expected given that optical physics are about the same). So in the medium tele range still no advantage for m43. It's only on the very long lenses where for fullframe a comparable solution in respect to aperture doesn't exist. E.g. take the Olympus 150-400mm f/4.5 (equivalent to 300-800mm f/9 in fullframe) where you can't find an equivalent zoom for Canon or Nikon. Instead you can get only much brighter f/4 or f/5.6 lenses for fullframe which cost a fortune and are huge and heavy.
@@stefanwagener it is f2.8 though. If you set a FF camera and a mft camera to the same settings, let's say f2.8, Iso200, 1/250th of a second, the exposure for both will be exactly the same. There is no extra mft or aps-c or medium format setting on my sekonic light meter, because it simply doesnt matter in that regard. Only difference is the depth of field. It'll be less shallow at mft. But that usually doesnt matter with telephoto lenses, as you'll get enough background blur anyway.
Wow , Im a mft user Olympus em1 mkiii , and are well happy , came over from Canon high end stuff. I sell occasionally through Alamy , and they have happy customers.
Main reason for change was size of equipment , in public locations a full frame camera sticks out and is heavy and bulky, with lenses massive . Travelling Olympus is ideal .
Olympus or the OM system also as well as Pro gear , offers lower budget options that still allow for excellent output .
Thanks for the video and thoughts on M43. I switched from a full frame Nikon DSLR to Olympus last Spring. I wanted to go mirrorless but I wanted affordability and quality. I did a lot of research and Olympus fit this criteria the best - it was the IBIS, the smaller form factor, great lenses, the weather proofing and price. What I didn't know at the time was the amazing community of Olympus (OM) shooters, ambassadors, visionaries - best part!! I am a hobbyist but I really want to improve my photography skills and images... plus I have 3 young kids who take up a lot of space (physical and otherwise)... so the EM5m3 is perfect. Keep up the great work!
Jimmy I really like that little smurk you always have. Priceless.
Makes me smile everytime and reinforces my decision to go M43 almost 10 years ago, thus putting a smurk on my face.
I'm a hobbist photographer and so glad I made the leap when I did. Packing my mft Panasonic GX1 or Olympus Em5 mk 1 around the mountain's has been a breeze compared to some guys I see with their full frames attached to a massive telephoto( I'm convinced they attach their biggest lenses while hiking just for show). My back and neck hurts just looking at it.
But to each their own.
I have had so many conversations over mft kit and capabilities durning those first few years. The faces ppl would make when they saw and realized what the little camera and lenses were capable of. Was and is priceless. 😉
The thing to remember is that buying the newest high tech cameras, and taking photographs, are two separate hobbies..
I don't have anything against gearheads, but comparative specifications are only even slightly useful if comparing like with like, and thats rarely the case.
From a photography point of view, I loved my FF Nikon DSLRs but honestly, there wasn't anything important to me that I could do with them that I can't still do with my EM1 mk2 cameras.. And my EM10 mk2 with the 14-42 EZ lens gives fantastic images and fits easily in my pocket.
Yes, I buy and collect cameras myself, a hobby I must say. So I do have other formats at disposal (mostly film stuff) but M43 is my go to and like you said, I can do pretty much everything with my M43 kit.
Good video Jimmy. Yes portability and small size is important. Here is my back pack hand luggage for flight and photo/video trip to Cyprus tomorrow. Two EM1 mark iii, 60mm macro, 40-150mm and 150-400mm Olympus lenses, 12-35mm Panasonic lens and 24mm Sirui anamorphic lens. Together with two TCs filters, batteries, chargers, leads, headphones and a laptop. Try taking the equivalent equipment with FF in a back pack!!! Doubt I would be able to lift it never mind having enough room in a back pack that easily fits into the overhead locker on the plane. Peace and good will 😊😊
Appreciate the topic and discussion. As someone else commented: the right tool for the job and for many mft fits the bill. I rarely use my G9 in favor of smaller video-centric tools like the Sony 3000 or Ax53 and sometimes the Rx100 m7. Just works out so much better when out on long hikes...smaller and lighter overall than a camera with interchangeable lens for similar results. When wanting nicer output then we use the G9. Difference on RUclips...not noticeable to most. Just watched a comparison of the IPhone 13 Pro to the new Sony A7 iv, and frankly the iPhone held its own in most cases. Again, for purposes of social media often likely the right tool, but doubt you would use on a professional job or for serious photography. Actually considering replacing my G9 with the M5Mkiii as think the smaller size may mean I use more often, but everything works well enough now so hard to justify. MFT will likely continue to have its place, definitely has some advantages for many and in my view is very fun to shoot with, something difficult to say with many other cameras.
Still have an edge? Heck yes! Ten months ago I sold most of my Canon lenses and invested in MFT. Kept my macro’s (100 and 180 L macros, and tilt/shift lenses. Kept the 1Dx and 7D II for those specialty purposes. Sold my teles - 400 2.8 and 800 5.6 and the f2.8 zooms. Even the 11-24 f4 went. While there is variability between individual lenses, it is when outlaying 20 grand for a new system you realize just how much cheaper MFT is - about a third the cost for equivalents.
The size and weight differences are huge. Gear that would have filled three Think Tank production cases, now fits into a single back pack. Tripods are smaller, heads are smaller, and importantly, I can now get gear into places that previously were not easy. Smaller cameras and lenses no longer bring out the officious types demanding a permit and media fee.
but most importantly. Using the G9 is fun. I love my 1Dx - incredible camera - but I would never call it fun. MFT is simply fun to use. Glad I switched.
Well said! OMDS should recruit people like you for testimonials.
@@TaipeiGeek I mentioned more than one “edge.” Perhaps you struggle with reading comprehension.
Come work with me in mid Africa where the ave temperature is 38 degrees Celsius in a humidity of 120%. The kind of climate that send the new Sony A7 and the new Canon into shit down mode because of overheating censors in a little under 15 min. MFT is as good as the operator. I have been shooting MFT on a GH5 professionally for broadcast and corporate for the last 3 years and to be honest it's bullet proof. It's as good as you want it to be. I shoot native Lumix and Leica lenses and they have never failed me
I was taking pictures at a football match today when a woman asked me which Olympus I had (i had my M5lll & 40-150mm 2.8 with me). She told me she wanted to buy a new DSLM camera and actually wanted something small to replace her older APS-C DSLR and she likes MFT because of the size. In the photoshops and at a photo fair exhibition they tried to talk her out of MFT as well as APS-C because only full-frame is really good, they said. We talked for about an hour and she seemed to find it hard to believe that I was really happy with my photos. I always say that MFT is a lot of fun, especially with telephoto lenses - so small and affordable. Now she is unsettled again ;-). But it's crazy how people are talked into the expensive full-frame.
I bring my G9 everywhere.
I often carry on 2 or 3 lenses 12-60 f/2.8-4.0 + 50-200 f/2.8-4.0 with tc14 + 32.5mm f/1.7.
Even when hicking in montains.
Portability is essential. Good lenses also.
I fully enjoy portability, image quality and reliability of G9 and pana leica lenses and really hope MFT has a long furure ahead.
There is a market for it.
This is the stuff fully corresponding to my needs. Portability is essential for me.
Thanks for your video.
As a hobbyist I am happily enjoying my used 13 year old Canon 5D mk II and 9 year old OMD OM10 mk II.
Bless the gearheads. If they didn’t buy the latest and greatest, and soon trade it in for the next latest and greatest, then bottom feeders like me would have no used cameras to choose from. I’m always 2 or 3 iterations behind the curve, far enough back that the curve is hardly discernible.
True to that 🤣 I’m even further behind because extra tight budget. My adventure with photography started about year ago. All gear I bought second hand in great condition with low shutter count. First was gx80(I still keep it), which is great little mft. Next I bought omdem10mkii(my favourite camera). And last was Nikon d5300 with kit lens and 35mmf1.8 that I use mainly with tripod at night and occasionally making photos of friends. My both mft cameras use panasonic lenses(20mmf1.7, 25mmf1.8, 45-150mm zoom and 12-32mm pancake). They are cheap but provide good enough quality. Occasionally I’ll put canon fd 50mmf2 on mft if I wanna shoot people. Recently I bought dxo photolab 5 elite for optical and noise correction. All this gear was cheaper than basic ff setup. It’s enough for me. Only reason so far for me for ff body would be adapting vintage lenses because I like them and their rendering.
Let’s not forget great IBIS on my mft cameras which allows me to take photos at night walks in city without need of tripod. Results are good enough once I process raw files through dxo noise reduction.
True, we all need the early adopters to help bring down the prices for the rest of us. 😄
Best comment ever
@@kamilpotato3764 Plus you do not lose depth of field as you would with a 5 stop faster lens opened up to match on an unstabilised platform for the higher stuff. Even an E-Pl10 with an f/4 prime lens with 3 stops is giving the same speed as an f/1.4 on many other cameras on a static target for minimal cost and more usable depth of field coupled with even more from the smaller sensor. This is why I gave up on Fuji for the bodies I could actually afford and the E-PL10 at £370 when I bought it new really stunning value and with a 2.5 year warranty. When you can buy secondhand with a 6 month warranty the Olympus one seems to be the only one making it worth buying new. The menus are a bit emasculated on the entry stuff but the performance is excellent. A pity the menus have been cut back but the Canikon user reviewers regarded the menus unlike any they had used before as a fault and Olympus folded to the criticism.
5 years ago I would have agreed to the mentioned advantages, but today I cannot really agree anymore:
- Size, portability ... only yes, if you go with the older cameras like PEN-F, PM2 and with older pancake lenses, but recent development of Olympus and Panasonic has focused on bigger and more expensive M1III, M1X, G9, GH5 and bigger, heavier, rather expensive pro lenses. And mirrorless from Canon and Nikon had come down in size compared to the DSLRs 5 years ago.
- Cheaper ... basically same argument as above, their latest iteration is even more expensive than fullframe mirrorless cameras
- Reliability ... that's my biggest concern because over the last 8 years most of my Olympus cameras had failures over time: M10 WLAN stopped working after 3 years (very common problem with M10), M5II card door and on/off switch failed (also pretty common problem with M5II), M1II card door rattling, PM2 rear dial to be replaced (also common problem) and the biggest problem had been the occasional corruption of the memory cards inside the camera. The M5II couldn't handle deleting videos inside the camera which lead occasionally to memory card corruption.
- IBIS ... yes, that had become my favorite advantage compared to DSLRs which had none at all. But again with the latest fullframe mirrorless generation this gap is mostly closed as well. And if you would argue there are still a stop or two better, maybe, but therefore fullframe also offers 2 stop advantage through the sensor size.
So while I still enjoy my Olympus cameras I wouldn't argue that these are advantages. It's definitely a good system ... but doesn't really have an edge any longer like it had 5 years ago.
My Porsche has two seats but costs more than my four seater car but it has qualities. With M4/3 it lens size. If you only do digital prints then 4K is about all you need - massive cropping options from my M1/M10 mk 1. You can get A3 prints, good jpeg engine...M10 with 9-18mm, EZ pancake zoom, 40-150mm with the Lumix Leica 25mm f1.4 makes a great holiday/travel system. M1 with the 12-40mm f2.8 & 40-150mm f2.8 is my landscape system...Put the Lumix Leica 15mm f1.7 or the 25mm f1.4 on GM1 it's a great little street camera
Interesting video to remind people of what m43rds offer but I wish you had mentioned the very important advantage that m43 has regarding the choice of image ratios which most other cameras do not offer
Thanks mate, yes of course.
Agree 100%. After trying numerous Canon, Lumix, and Sony bodies, Olympus makes cameras that bring the fun back to photography -comfortable to hold and lightweight, weatherproofing, outstanding IBIS, compact form, pro-grade construction, and beautiful colors.
The cost is a strong talking point. I'm personally shooting with full frame, using the Nikon Z5, but when you consider that that camera costs the same as the Panasonic G9 where I live, then there's definitely something to consider there.
I just recommended a friend, who wants to start with serious photography, to invest in MFT, getting a Panasonic Gx85, which even today really is an amazing camera for most. I was almost pulling the trigger on getting a used Olympus OMD EM1 II myself 🙂
I might be a full frame shooter, but I have great love for the MFT system, and it's only a question of time before I'll add a Panasonic or Olympus camera to my collection.
Great summary. I can't even express how much I love my switch to Olympus, there is just nothing that competes for what it does to enhance my enjoyment of photography. The only "drawback" is noise, and I just don't even care. If you think noise is ruining your photo, then your photo wasn't worth taking. A good image is one that tells a story, is "about" something rather than "of" something (to quote another youtuber). Some of my favourite photos were taken on my iPhone of all things...because that's what I had available at the moment.
Of course, if the next sensor reduces noise and has 14-bit dynamic range I won't complain...take my wallet!...but in the meantime I will work on perfecting the craft (ie composition) rather than worrying about pixel-perfection.
Well said my friend. I never too bother about noise either. Photos used to be very grainy in my film days, so I am used to these 'texture' on my photos. I think it gives a sense of when the photos was taken, in a very dark place or not... nowadays, too clean a photo makes me think they are not real... may be just me :)
The 12-100 is a tour de force. It is always about the lenses. When the 12mp sensor was seeming long in the tooth the same grumbles existed. When the 16mp sensor appeared it caught up with 20-24mp larger sensors. The same will happen shortly.
Let's hope that a new MFT sensor comes along. Long overdue!
Spot on! Gear is so secondary and MFT still offers more advantages than disadvantages compared to so-called "FF" (which we considered "small format" in the film era). Regarding size/weight, I prefer the feel of my G9 to that of the A7 family bodies (too small and not-great ergo), for example. Also, even if you use cheap, plastic, slow lenses (although glass is the second-most important component of a camera system, after the photographer, so this is one area not to cheap-out), they're still larger/heavier for any format larger than MFT. I use my Leica 100-400 (200-800 in FF terms for the uninitiated) all the time. It's a fraction of the size, weight, or cost of any "FF" lens with that reach. If it existed, a comparable 200-800 f/4-6.3 in FF would be huge (requiring a 'pod) and it would cost more than US$20K. As you point out, it's not the camera that makes the shot, and I've made beautiful prints from a Lumix ZS20 (a 2012 vintage, 1/2.3" sensor pocket point-and-shoot) taken at places like Zion National Park (normally large format film country). Bottom line, especially with DxO (I use the complete suite), I can get IQ well beyond the ability of the human eye/visual cortex to discern with my G9 and I can easily carry a full eq FL range from 16-800 just about anywhere. Try that even with APS-C, much less larger format rigs.
I understand your points. I enjoy my M43 for travel very much. Still, it would not hurt to have a meaningful sensor refresh finally to continue to maximize what M43 can do.
Jimmy, I can’t agree more with you! Great video!
Cheers mate.
I have an em5 i and an em10 ii with 8 filters, 6 batteries, a 12-50mm, 14-45mm, 14-140mm, 12mm, 45-200mm, extra flash, remote, and a 4/3 adapter in a small vintage hard case. All second hand, so I spent less than 3k nz for all of it. The image quality and video is more than enough for me and I take a lot of photos for my job and for fun. I'm sticking with micro 4/3. When em5 iii or em1 ii get 'obsolete' to the general crowd I'll get one cheap!
My partner has the older 4/3 e620 with the fantastic 18-180mm and 75-300mm lenses again second hand and she loves them. She also has an ep3 along with the 12-50mm multifunction lense (she likes the macro mode its pretty good for an old lens).
We don't see the need to upgrade given the tools we have make very nice images indeed.
About the only thing I do miss is the phsse detect auto focus you find on the old e series and em1/later em5 models but I take photos of plants and kids mostly so with a bit of planning its not a big problem to me.
Hi Jimmy. The truth is, which camera do I reach out for first? Is it mySony A7Rii of my Olympus EM1 Mkii. Well, it's the Olympus nearly every time, mainly down to pleasure of use especially with long lenses. I sometimes ask myself why I bought the Sony at all! Never think about this when using any of my Oly cameras................must try and get used to OM System.
Love the GM1.
I have a fair bit to say on the subject. I was heavily invested in Olympus way back on the standard for thirds and the Olympus E3. And when they switched to micro 4/3 I did not want to reinvest that much money at the time so I continued shooting the E3 for over 10 years. So I agree give a photographer a camera and they can make images. And last year when I finally decided I really should upgrade to something with the shakiness of Olympus sale and stuff I decided micro four thirds wasn't going to be an option since I already discontinued one line that I really liked and was good at using. I also agree full frame is a huge investment and comes with a size that is not always convenient to carry everything you need especially for a location-based photographer as myself. I also feel Fujifilm is producing of more long-term system with their APC size thing and showing that they're continually investing into that. It also does well on taking advantage of size and durability. I'm not sure if it's as good as my Olympus E3 as it lasted for over 10 years of professional shooting before it had a malfunction.
Regarding body size and IBIS. Olympus managed to squeeze IBIS into the E-PM2, which I consider to be the most underrated MFT body. It's almost as small as these GM bodies, has IBIS, had a touch screen already, took a decent electronic viewfinder - the same one that Leica deemed good enough for their M240!
Also, look at what Ricoh managed to pull off with the GRIII and GRIIIx, both have IBIS. In an APSC camera body that is smaller than both the E-PM2 and these GM cameras.
IT CAN BE DONE.
you perfectly hit the point, there are PRO photographers in need of the most reliable system because their living is based on it, and then there are geeks chasing best parameters, shooting brick walls, backyards and their cats only, having full mounts of "wisdom" on the forums :) I know several professionals, working either for agencies or on their own, some of them with Olympus, some old Canon or Nikon DSLRs ... some of them are even using cheap standard lenses and getting amazing results :)
I shoot M43 and FF for different reasons, mainly print size capability. All i’d say is that anyone who snubs M43 does so at their loss. M43 is breaking into the drone world and many landscape photographers are eagerly buying them up. BTW, Sony makes most of the Drone M43 sensors and 1 inch sensors for that matter. For me M43 is my go to over my FF, it’s just so practical, portable and less ominous when in public, I actually struggle to see the difference in many of my shots between M43 and FF and I shoot mainly in manual mode. I always have a smug grin when I read people hitting on M43 and the photography joy they’re missing out on. Been shooting for longer than i care to remember btw. Another great video, thanks.
V well explained and I agree with you - it would be lovely to have a small, light camera, with whistles and bells, plus the Olympus lenses. So much easier to carry about.
Great video Jimmy. It was fun to watch it and it is hard not to agree with you.
thx again for a great video - and nice of you to mention Pentax Q (it has leafshutter, ND filter, full range of lenses, flash sync at high speeds AND not to mention loads of fun to use) pick one up and try it it will bring you joy.
If MFT's weren't viable, the big 3 wouldn't mention MFT's! Aside from that fact, I think you have the best opening of any vlogger for photo/video. Just excellent work not to mention the chosen song to push it!
I've been look a lot at Micro-Four Thirds lately.
I already have the Canon M6 Mark II and a load of lenses, I mostly use the fast primes - but the build quality and lack of any kind of weather resistance holds me back from shooting in some conditions. It would be the perfect system if only their lenses and bodies had some kind of WR.
My main priorities are cost, handling, high FPS and build quality. Bokeh/depth of field I don't care too much about. So that rules budget full frame models like the EOS RP out straight away. Sony A6XXX series look to handle very awkwardly.
My choices really come down to Fuji X-T2/X-T3 or something like the Olympus E-M5 III. They're very comparable in price.. and for my lens selection I'm after.. the Fuji lenses I would buy all have OIS. Obviously the E-M5 has IBIS..
as most m4/3 users view here, i share your view. portability is key for my street photograohy, mostly done on M5 or M1. i mostly use my ff sony for portrait or real estate contracts. wwith a 20mm a 35 and a 85mm. no way i would walk 3 hours downtown and ruin all candid shots with a ff zoom, lol.
Here's another tiny combination - I have an Olympus E-PM2 camera with an Olympus 14-42 EZ lens. It's so small that I can put it in my pocket when I ride my bicycle and the photos are great.
Hi Jimmy thx for another informative video hope you doing well keep them videos coming tc
Another thing they like to do is compare entry level FF lenses to Oly pro lenses for price and weight.
James Popsys of all people did that in his I’ve switched to Sony video… saying the Sony f/2.5 G lenses are smaller than his (pro grade wide aperture) m4/3 lenses.
@@joeltunnah I have quit watching Popeye because of that switch. He was hard to watch anyway.
@@lonnieharmond9400 All the popular youtubers who talk camera gear are corporate sponsored. At a given time they will promote whoever pays them the most.
Thanks! Very sensible and down to basics.
Just hope that OM system can make a m4/3 mirrorless camera similar to ZV-1 or ZV-E10.
Totally agree on the Pro Grade argument,. this is also my Argument all the time. I love Pro Stuff, esp Pro Lenses. If you are locking for Pro Stuff in 35mm its $$$$$. For m4/3 it’s always around 1000 EUR seldom more then 2000 EUR., when 2000 EUR is basically the starting Point for 35mm. Most don’t understand this or are trying arguing with equivalence when thats no the point.
Excellent points made in this vid. Love the breakdown of pro-grade vs. amateur grade when consider cost break downs. I think that will hit home for a lot of professionals and beginners alike. Also love the call out on the fallacy that FF intrinsically enhances photography, makes me think of when Chase Jarvis used a toy lego camera to take amazing photos for RevTv a few years ago.
It’s all about the lenses. I couldn’t care less how small fool frame bodies get, the lenses will always be bigger, heavier, and more expensive for the same aperture.
I just shot at dusk the other day with my G9 and 12-35 f2.8, auto ISO often going to ISO 4000 and higher. After processing the raws with DeepPrime in DxO PhotoLab 5, they look beautiful. Even the low light issue is a non-issue now in my opinion.
DXO raw noise reduction is godsend
Fool frame. Lol i got to make a shirt on this and send it to my brother. He uses canon, i Olympus. Constantly trying to get me to switch lol
@@eternaleden3014 yeah, I call it that because the marketing of CaNikony successfully convinced most photographers that a larger, heavier, and more expensive system was not only desirable, but necessary. Even most pros who really should know better. Foolish.
@@joeltunnah sadly but true, you have to own a FF camera nowadays to get the "pro" badge. It is painful to watch how consumers are getting fooled into the expensive and heavy FF systems just to end up taking all the photos with their phones.
@@p.io7 I just saw an ad on this video for a camera store (specializing in credit sales) where a “customer” bragged that he upgraded from APS to FF and now can charge more. Bwah ha ha!
MFT can do everything large format can do for less in money, size and weight. The only advantage full format has over MFT is taking pictures in extremely low light or to be extremely enlarged or cropped, and both is very seldom needed and for both there are usually some technical workarounds. Besides, the camera system is the least important factor in creating great photos. There is nearly no photo you will miss because you brought a MFT instead of a full format camera. It's more likely you miss a photo because of the cumbersome, heavy and large full format gear you're carrying around instead of a MFT system.
If I truly need the absolute edge in technical image quality, I use film cameras anyway - mostly medium format, and increasingly often large format. Just not 35mm, it has no longer a significant edge over digital cameras, even MFT.
I have used m43 for ~10yrs, and nowadays I only use my m43 camera (a EM1ii) to digitize film: it stays on a mount and has a macro lens on it all the time. I never take m43 gears with me for travel, as Sony A7C + 40 2.8 G lenses are much smaller and lighter, provide the same field of view and depth of field, and is equally splash proof than EM1 + 20 1.4 pro. I think this example shows that m43 is really not in a good shape… I liked my GM5 + Panasonic 20 lens, but the GM series is discontinued and look at the bulky lenses the two companies have been making recently, including the new 20 1.4…
And in the example I gave above, the Sony set is actually slightly cheaper…
M4/3 is amazing. I think I have had 1 or 2 pictures out of 10,000 that I wished I had more low light capability. That's about it, not much to complain about thanks the DXO prime.. For more Bokeh or depth of field you need to understand the physics of the sensor. Olympus has lenses that will give you all you need. You just have to learn how they work. in the words of Capt. Kirk " You need to understand how things work on a starship." On a side note the DJI Inspire and now the Mavic 3 us the 4/3 sensor. All the while touting its low light performance and Dynamic range. Giving photographers and videographers the best experience in the drone market. Full Frame shamers you cant have it both ways.
I know, the new Mavic 3 looks awesome, but so does the price tag hahaha... I may get it to complete my M43 collection :)
@@Red35Photography crazy price you can get the inspire for that.
Kudos for the Kirk quote.
While I agree with everything you said, I'm not sure how many professional still photographers use micro four thirds exclusively. Maybe for wildlife and video, but studio and sport? The E-M1X sells for about half its launch price, which suggests big body small sensor pro cameras are not the way forward.
But there are M43 professionals in all the photography genres that create beautiful professional pictures. Why there aren't more of them you ask? Well you basically answered it. Most humans believe that FF is THE professional grade, thus many professionals (or yet to become one) simply go FF to match the criteria...
The problem with tiny cameras like the GM1 is ergonomics. I bought my first MFT camera, an E-PM1, to see if the IQ was comparable to my Nikon D200. That it was, so I switched to MFT completely. But what I couldn't stand was the tiny body without fingers commensurately tiny. I probably have average male hand size.
Another well thought out vid Jimmy.
I still own a G9 and GX85. But I think price to performance and features is where I believe going full-frame makes sense. Meaning, how can the new M43 camera's price be justified? Example: The new a7VI is under 2500 and you a lot for that.
I looked at both sony and nikon and i think i'd enjoy using the nikon D500 and 200-500 combo.
But the weight just puts me off.
Both do have some reasonably priced lenses but many are just crazy prices.
I think an Em1 iii will probably be my next camera tbh.
Compared to an 8x10 field camera, a full frame digital is a compromise.
In the vain of this video I am contemplating marrying the new 20mm 1.4 to my Em10 Mkii as my go to set up. Reasoning being that if I protect the camera body from the weather I might get out more when it is damp - don’t like getting wet and want to avoid a flip around screen - compromises ha ha
As I see it, the real strength of micro four thirds is nature photography. The smaller sensor gives us greater magnification for macro photography, smaller lenses that, thanks to better IBIS, can be handheld for wildlife photography, and smaller, lighter weight lenses for landscape photography. The downside is that the dynamic range and low light performance simply don't compare favorably with full frame and medium format digital cameras. Full frame cameras will probably always be better at astrophotography for that reason and we will need much brighter supertelephoto lenses and better sensors to be able to hang with the big boys in low light for wildlife photography. The full frame manufacturers (especially Sony) and even Fujifilm have much better AI subject tracking than OMDS and Panasonic too, so that is as much of a problem as the sensor size.
Totally agree, Jimmy. You have to compare apples to apples. I find that Canon's attempts to make their gear smaller by going with f/8 and f/11 zooms laughable. But, with the entire non-m4/3 world dumping on you, it's hard to make headway. You have the 800lb gorilla constantly harping that you need a big sensor to get good photos.
Hi Jimmy, with my physical problems now I'm so pleased that I chose MFT gear. Weight for me is absolutely paramount closely followed by compactness. Thanks to the weight of pancake lenses etc. I can still shoot, else I'd have long since given up, reluctantly, by now. I've never felt in any way at a disadvantage using MFT gear, quite the reverse as it makes picture taking enjoyable, it ticks the boxes for me. If I'm in pain and fatigued then it's certainly not enjoyable and this is directly reflected in my willingness and ability to get out/ stay out and get shots. As you say, it has to be fun, if not then it's no good, it simply doesn't work. It's the best feeling wandering around unencumbered and looking to find things to photograph, All the best, Leigh
It seems that comparing and buying gear can be fun too... ;)
Well said, Jimmy. Photography means 'painting with light's. Let's all simply enjoy that irregardless of camera gear. Bet Rembrandt never worried about his paint brushes.
actually Rembrandt would have been extremely careful in his choice of brushes. as a full time artist for over 50 years I can attest to the importance of seeking superior quality brushes and paying for it is never an issue.
Rembrandt would choose a brush that he feels is right. Quality of course, it's very personal, as it's the extension of their creativity.
Oly/OM and Pany have in recent years made larger gear. I understand why but I would like a return to at least some smaller gear. I do think it is possible to put IBIS in a small body. I use a GX9 that has excellent 5-axis stabilisation. The E-P7 also has 5-axis stabilisation, it is smaller.
Lenses... Oly made those f1.2 lenses as big as they could! The f1.8 lenses are the best, value to performance. There are so many great lenses for m43 that don't break the bank and are tiny. I wish OM and Panasonic would make new versions. Or completely new small lenses, perhaps a 9 or 10mm f2, like the 12mm f2?
Terrific video
I have a an OM-D E-M1 Mark II and the images are first rate when the exposure and focus are spot on and the iso is 800 or below. And therein lies the rub. Continuous focusing with my Olympus is unreliable and raising the exposure of the shadows in post renders an unusable file. Matt Granger , using a Nikon Z9, took an image that was four and a half stops under exposed and in post created a good photo. I wish Olympus would answer this challenge.
I have Fuji X100V and Panasonic G80. Fuji is better in shadow recovery and high ISO by far, but part of that seems to exposure metering - on Panasonic, shadows seems always brighter in JPEGs and RAWs processed using defaults. On Fuji it seems a bit harder to recover highlights. So part of noise is from different sensor (although pixel density on cameras is similar, but Panasonic has likely sensor that was used already in 2013), but part of it is different exposure metering. It's hard to describe - you usually need to pull shadows more often when editing RAWs from Fuji, on Panasonic camera does it for you and further shadow recovery is more difficult.
The E-M1 MkII was released nearly 5 years ago though, so perhaps comparing the Z9 with the MkIII or E-M1X would be a fairer fight.
Another factor to consider: in my experience, coming from Pentax and (to a lesser extent) Nikon, they do have amazing potential for the recovery of shadow detail. I often underexposed images to protect the highlights, and then could pull out lots of shadow detail later. With Olympus, it was the opposite. It seemed that the Olympus was overexposing by quite a bit (compared to what I was used to coming from Pentax and Nikon), but the headroom in the highlights on the Olympus was amazing. I found I had to fight the urge to dial in negative exposure comp, and just let the Oly "over" expose, and then I could lower the overall exposure in post, keep the shadows about the same, and reclaim the highlights by a few stops with no issues.
That said, there's no doubt that the Z9 is a technical marvel, and the most exciting camera I've seen for a couple of years (since the Olympus E-M1 MkIII :) , so hats off to Nikon.
Yes they do.👍
All i want for M43 (Panasonic in particular) is PDAF autofocus for video. 4K 120FPS would be nice as the GH6 seems to offer in 2022, and 8K too (not going to happen anytime soon i guess because of sensor size) but without fixing video autofocus.. No way. There is literally no other reason why i would switch to Sony/Canon/Nikon. Just give me good video autofocus and i would never think about changing systems Panasonic!
If you need something bigger than mft, then you are trying to compensate for something else small 😉
I switched from fullframe pro dslr and mirrorless. Never going back 💪
Canon and Sony still haven't fixed the color handling. The af is also still a bit slower. Still slow still fps shooting. And the image stabilization still can't match. And the pro fullframes can't even be used in whatever angle you want, without the user to role around on the ground or climb mountains.
Why is it always m4/3 versus "full frame"?
APSC can offer most of the advantages of both at a good price.
If you can't see the picture in the first place then it doesn't matter what camera you have .so latest and greatest only turns out to be a statement ( look what I've got )
Who manufactures the image sensors and image processors for M43?
I guess Sony 🤣
I shoot sports with a couple of Canon 1dx's and 400/2.8 or 600/4.0 for 20 plus years. Ive never seen anyone using a MFT camera to shoot sports.
Nope, and I never said MFT is good at that anywhere in my channel. Though it's great at something else. Things when you want to move quickly. Like anything, small set up is good for agility, if one is moving a lot, like traveling, documentary, landscape. Unless you are a nat geo photographer who has 5 porter team carrying stuff with you, MFT has its place. But like my comments in this video, I am not here to stop FF or sell anyone MFT, only to raise the awareness of platforms instead of people keep bashing something smaller.
This talk is more like an appeal to photographers to return to the basics of the craft. I love shooting with my Fujifilm X-T20 and plan to buy an X-T3 next year. Where I live FF is expensive. I can't justify spending that kind of cash when the equipment I have can produce excellent results for print and web. Invest smarter and enjoy taking pictures.
Isn't the edge getting bigger, not smaller? As sensors get better, M43 keeps closing the gap.
There"s already a pocket size cameras bigger than that Panasonic: the Ricoh GR series...
“Words of Wisdom Lloyd, Words of Wisdom”
Micro four thirds pro grade might be cheaper....but I don't agree that it's any better built than a Sony, Fuji, Panasonic (FF) etc at the same price. We honestly would need actual repair and failure rate data before assuming this to be true for any manufacturer.
I'm not sure if M43 is even cheaper, especially if we accept the premise that a professional photographer can make anything work. Fuji has a weather sealed F2 35mm equivalent lens for half the price of the Olympus 1.2 17mm. I know that F2 needs more light, but APSC sensors are a bit better with high ISO performance, so in real world use it could be the same. i.e. the Fuji lens is smaller and cheaper, but also weather sealed and (probably) sharp enough to use for most pro work.
But I totally agree that you don't need full frame for most photography jobs. If you ignore the lack of the second card slot, I could photograph an entire wedding with a EM10 Mark4. And I know you could too. :)
The edge I think lies in IBIS (if IBIS matters to someone) and if you're a nature photographer who covers a lot of ground, I think Olympus still makes the smallest lenses by a large margin in relation to distance/reach. But I don't think that's as common of a need as say, better low light performance or fast autofocus.
I think you're 100% right and they should release a tiny camera again. I think Panasonic needs to work on the aesthetic design of their cameras. I think Olympus cameras look much nicer.
The Olympus EM1 Mark3 is a shining example of being the most comfortable camera (subjectively) to hold that also (subjectively) looks very nice. The way these cameras look is super important. And I think Olympus should double down on this....
Release the Pen F sequel. Release more 1.4 weather sealed lenses that are compact. Focus on ambassadors who have inspiring work, **take care of them*, surround them with resources, and fold them into your brand.
(You're the only person on RUclips I write these epic comments - keep up the great work!)
Cheers Jason for your 'Epic' comment :) I agree in many ways you said that FF lenses are built similar to M43 Pro lenses but I've seen and used some of them but none would be 'better' or 'equal' to M43 Pro lenses build. Canon's L series, Sony's G Master are their respective pro range and they are more comparable in terms of build and quality of finish. I have some Fuji friends who showed me their lenses and yes, they are nice, but somehow, feels a little 'hollow'. Ok, some may prefer the 'lightness' of them but I am used to solid lens feel and I suspect that there are some cost saving somewhere. But not a debate but my view on others lenses. Anyhow, I would love a PEN F sequel too, it would be a shame that the original is a one off.
@@Red35Photography Hey Jimmy, there's a really good chance you're right. My experience is with Olympus and Panasonic gear. The Olympus 1.2 trilogy is about $1500 in Canada. I own them all, but I haven't owned a single Nikon, Canon, or Fujifilm lens in that price range. So you have more experience than I do, that's for sure. :)
Did you hear the rumour about the 12mm 1.4 that's been floating around? Just kidding. I just started that rumour now. I'm just hoping it manifests itself into reality. Launching with a Pen F 2, weather-sealed, with a joystick on the back. AND TWO CARD SLOTS so I can comfortably shoot weddings with it.
...let me dream. ;)
For me as a wildlife photographer. We are losing the AF tracking race. You see the FF boys in steep competition with each other pushing the AF tech hard right now. And that is just the reality. I will keep shooting my EM1X really only because my 300mm F4 is so brilliant. Lets hope OM can keep up
It's over. Everyone needs to stop the denial. I sold my M43 system last week. RIP M43.
I rekon the Olympus Air A01 was the smallest m4/3s camera :)
yes but the Panasonic GM1 is the smallest with a screen and controls, The A01 needs the app and phone to work and unfortunately, they are no longer supported. I was using the GM1 with my 40-150 2.8 pro and the combo looks wrong but funny haha but it works.
@@Red35Photography forgot bout that one :)
Not sure if you are aware that your vocals are very soft compared to the intro music. According to RUclips's stats, your audio is -11.7 dB below their reference level as used by ads.
Strange though in my edit, it's about right, stressing it upward will clip the audio. I can try to make it louder to see in future videos, thanks.
The audio issue that I am experiencing does not appear on your other video eg ruclips.net/video/bl_6g9NaIwk/видео.html . As I mentioned previously, the music intro appears to be the right level, but the dialogue is very soft. I am not sure if YT messes with the levels when you upload your video. I used the "stats for nerds" option just to verify the sound play back level. Thanks for your reply.
Jimmy: I think you did not mention the total system weight savings of m43.
Only absolute beginners will be swayed by the size & weight of the camera body alone!
Also: Who else has a 24-200 equivalent in 35mm FF? No one else but m43 with 12-100 f4 w stab.
Who else has HHHR? (Hand Held High Rez) No one else that I know of.
Who else has (3) f1.2 prime lenses? Not sure on this one.
Who else can match the size & weight of m43 for long telephotos? No one.
I think it would have been helpful to (again) point out these facts!
Yes, m43 has an edge over larger formats, it's the size, the weight, and at last, easier maximal and minimal DOF. It's the best tool, there is. If you can't do it with m43, you can't do it.
By the way, I bought a beast last week, a Mamiya 7 with the 43 mm.
Shit, heeeeere we go again......
👍🏾
I think the camera manufacturers don't really know what the customers really want. Especially not in the consumer / hobby segment.
When I buy a new camera it MUST be able to do at least ten (10) things better than the old one. I always do this with all technical devices.
I regularly attend a large photo get-together. Everyone there who bought a new camera wanted higher frame rates and / or better video, faster autofocus, more dynamic range etc ... When I then ask how often they really use the new / better, the answer is usually sobering.
E.g., all of them have 4K video but only two out of 18 make videos, in FHD, because the computer no longer packs. (͡ ° ͜ʖ ͡ °)
Sure, there are actually only video producers on yotube, so video is always requested.
I asked around which five (5) properties the new camera MUST have.
Here is the hit list of the 24 surveyed participants:
1.) Viewfinder
2.) fast autofocus
3.) Ease of use, buttons & wheels
4.) weatherproof, also lenses
5.) high dynamic range
6.) Firmware updates
7.) IBIS
8.) Images per battery charge
9.) Operability, menu
10.) at least 20 megapixels
Any video properties ended up in 14th place.
Could someone please start a larger / more representative survey?
Yes I think it does, these newer FF and APSC with their lenses are starting to be as large or even as larger and as heavy than their DSLR counterparts.
That’s because the Nikon Z and Canon RF mounts are actually medium format diameter. It’s ridiculous.
You clearly haven’t held a FF mirrorless. Examples that are as large, larger or heavier than an equivalent DSLR.
I did not own a GM1 but instead a GM5. If OMDS or panasonic could produce those tiny camera again at a lower price point. it will be great. but it has to be equip with a flip screen and ease of file transfer. most of the phone maker are losing sales for their products which feature high end camera. (except for iphone users who did not really have a choice). it is time to target this group of consumer who could buy these tiny camera to compliment their phone. whats more, they do not have to dump the camera when the phone becomes laggy or lose support in apps in time to come.
3 legged thing? You've got good taste.
I think we'll always be living in a world where a smaller sensor takes a beating from the 35mm camp. Take the N's that think anything less is just a toy.
It just makes it seem like we're continuously having to justify using the m43 sensor size; it's even affected me up until a couple months ago when more content around m43 was released, including by you which ended up solidifying why I love shooting with my Olympus.
I recently got the 12-100 f4 PRO lens to take with me on a trip to Scotland and my gosh, the stabilisation of the body PLUS the lens is incredible, 1 second shots of waterfalls handheld with optimal quality. Of course, I'm just an amateur so it really doesn't matter, but in technical aspects of the images that come out of my Oly (I mean things like quality, colour, noise etc) there isn't a massive difference between my E-M1 mk II and 35mm bodies. I've even gone as far as downloading sample RAW images to develop from other brands, and again, not much difference.
So does the sensor size and brand (Olympus) still have an edge (for me) ? Absolutely. If I ever get to a level where I can make some money with image content creation, I'd go as far as even dubbing myself a fan boy. Plus, it's the future! Get rid of tripods (unless stacking etc)! Certainly helps with the long mountain hikes.
Nice little video, thanks!
I’m not fit as I used to and hiking with crazy dog and ff dslr is not something I enjoy as combination. I got light RP, but Canon is blocking third party light lenses makers and their very limited choice of light RF lenses is so unappealing. On top of it, climate changed back to normal. Rain is regular now, not just once in a month. And chill factor in winter. I can’t see any other choice but freeze proofed m43 cameras and lenses.
135/35mm/FF is a small format, it's not medium format...
Olympus PEN EPL10 has a huge advantage over my Canon, just because of the IBIS. My Canon M200 is just as small, with a bigger sensor, but the footage is way too shaky! Canon digital stabilization is not as good. Sony is even worse.
You can make a pros and cons list, and there are certainly pros and cons to both mft and ff. Physically, more light collection in ff will always have an advantage, however the question is: does the pros of mft system out weigh ff advantage for what you are doing? This is a dependent variable and the only one who can answer that is you! For much of what I do Olympus mft has an advantage, and in some cases, ff doesn't even offer some of the functionality I need, so the old adage goes "pick the right tool for the job".
It’s not more “light collection” for full frame, it’s less magnification when printing or viewing the image on a screen. Micro4/3 has 1/4 of the sensor area, so you need 4x more magnification for equal print size.
tech reviews who don't even go out and shoot destroyed the artform of photography
Unfortunately tech reviews are base on what's given to them from the marketing people. Most online reviews barely use the cameras they were given.
I think the fact you need to make a video like this is an indication that M4/3 is losing out to its larger sensor competitors. APSC and so called full frame users aren’t making the same type of videos that I’m aware off. Keep the good work up.
They will be once medium format becomes affordable. 35mm was always considered a miniature format back in the film days.
Of course they don't. However, my video is more educational in a deeper level. I am not trying to convince people to switch or pulling people to M43. It's more about awareness. Many compare numbers, spec sheets, price tags but never consider what they really are and why one is more expensive or cheaper to others. Most don't even understand formats. So when some influencers said FF is best, they all think it's the best format ever existed on earth. When they say M43 is dead, they all think the same. Sad but true.
The short answer is definitely yes ...
There are lenses on FF which are cheaper and will yield better results on their bodies, such as the 85mm 1.8 from Sigma, Sony, Nikkor Z & Canon RF, which in my opinion are better than the pro Olympus & Nocticron
There's also the Zeiss 16-35 F4 for Sony which is very affordable.
However, the overall cost of the MFT system is DEFINITELY less than any Fuji or any FF (two Lumix bodies+ 6 lenses in my case)
If you drop a great print in front of someone, they won't be able to tell you what camera and/or lens took the photo. As many have said, being into gear and being into photography are two different hobbies. As long as I'm taking photos on something that works for me, I'm happy.
When OMDS was spun off, I worried that we were basically watching vulture capitalism in action and would soon witness aggressive asset stripping of a brand I had grown up with and loved since the 1970s. I am now (provisionally) reassured that we are seeing genuine recapitalisation of the OM System R&D, and will continue to see cool things emerging.
I had been looking with considerable interest at the Nikon Z system -- and will probably keep looking. But then I picked up my trusty E-M1 II, and realised that I am far, far, far from exhausting its possibilities. And for a cost and, importantly, weight (especially when carrying multiple lenses) a fraction of any similarly built FF option, there is no reason for me to give up such a wonderful, versatile system. Indeed, if the new high-end model shows some evolution in sensor performance -- reasonably improved range of video modes, reasonably improved high-ISO performance and, if it's not too much to ask for, a resolution bump to 30MP or so, then I could very happily commit to another generation of m43, regardless of what exciting things happen in Canikon-land.
M43 is certainly losing the size advantage when it comes to primes, the new OM 20mm F1.4 is huge and heavy when compared to Sony's new 40mm and offerings from 3rd parties, although it looks like a lovely lens. When it comes to zooms, not so much, nothing compares to the Olympus 12-200 in size (if not sharpness at the long end unfortunately) in the FF world. However, size is and has never been the main issue for some. The EM1 handles wonderfully, making it small could compromise the camera for some users. FF is theoretically inferior to Medium Format, but you rarely hear this being talked about. If OM systems' new "wow" camera (oh how I wish it would be an improved Pen F) can improve tracking to Sony levels, add some more computational features, build in noise reduction to Deep Prime levels and maintain the ergonomics (perhaps with a slightly higher resolution sensor that is back side illuminated) then M43 will be able to hold its head high well into the future.
Uh… what? Sony’s 40mm f2.5 is almost 2 stops slower. Please don’t compare apples to oranges.
@@joeltunnah But with a Sony camera you can raise the ISO two stops and still get a cleaner image than on the OM lens, the DOF is almost the same and both are weather sealed and similarly priced, so a very close comparison can usefully and easily be made. More like comparing a Golden Delicious with a Granny Smith, albeit with the Sony having more controls and less diffraction.
@@LeoSavantt if you raise the FF camera ISO two stops, you’ve just negated any noise advantage of the larger sensor. If you’re going to shoot slow lenses, there’s no point to the expense and extra size/weight of FF cameras.
@@joeltunnah That's not quite true, you do by raising the ISO two (probably actually 3 due to lower native ISO on the Sony) stops get equivalent noise, but the A7C and 40mm F2.5 is a lot lighter than the EM1 20mm F1.4 combo, with better autofocus, some weather sealing and better battery life, although far worse IBIS. The same with Sony's weather sealed 85mm F1.8, which is much lighter (and cheaper) than the Oly 45mm F1.2. The Sony A7c has 20% more pixels, so cropping is superior as well, although neither have particularly good view finders or rear screens. The M43 advantage is not in weight particularly, although IBIS is much better, live composite amazing and subjectively the Oly is much much nicer to use, albeit with inferior image quality. M43 really shines with zooms, the 8-25 F4 and 40-150 F2.8 (plus teleconverter) have no practical equivalents in FF in terms of size.
@@LeoSavantt again as usual, people like you always compare apples to oranges. The EM1 is a completely different kind of camera to an A7C. Better weather sealing, freeze proof, rugged build, better ergonomics, better IBIS, more features, more controls and they’re easier to use, and better color.
Have you held an A7C in your hands? Good gravy…🤦🏼♂️
Look I have nothing against Sony, or people who choose that system, but it’s in no way a substitute for micro4/3 in size, weight, or price. Sorry it just isn’t.