I've owned many cameras over the years, (Nikon D750, Sony A7R II, Canon 5D, Fuji XT2 to name a few) and currently have the Panasonic G9 and GX9. I've never once personally felt full frame has given me any better photographs than using my G9 or GX9. I can definitely agree unless you specifically need a camera for low light or need a bokeh monster, investing in better glass in your current setup is a much smarter move. The benefits for me with a m43 setup is purely the size and weight advantage it gives me when out all day with a camera.
Thanks for sharing! Some of the latest m43 cameras when paired with really good glass gives you excellent image quality, almost indistinguishable from full frame. Whether it's good enough is up to you to decide.
G'day mate. FF user, but just too big to walk around town with. Sold the X100V. Just wasn't what I needed. Seriously considering the GX9. Would like to ask how the viewfinder is, and how's the focus/refocus? Thanks, mate.
I have used the following cameras over the years: Canon T2i(EOS 550D), Nikon D3100, Nikon D3400, Nikon D500, Panasonic G9, Olympus E-M1 mk ii, Fujifilm X-T3, Fujifilm X-T4, Sony A7Riii, Canon R6, Canon R5, and finally Panasonic G9 again. The more experience I got in photography in general and in what I wanted to do in specific, the more I realized that micro 4/3 was a solid choice and easier on both my back and my wallet. If I was shooting mostly family/portraits, street, and/or landscape, I think I could be using anything, probably still that old Canon. As someone who shoots a lot of wildlife, the ability to have the reach of the Pana/Leica 100-400 in that small package was a big reason I came back.
I have a broken back, but I have a lot of fun with my m43 cameras. A friend of mine wanted me to film him with his full frame system which I did. But after just t minutes or so, his camera started feeling like a cinder block and it caused a tremendous amount of pain. I have been getting good results from my m43 Panasonic cameras, so if I make any change at all, it will be to get another m43 camera. I
I also sold my GX9 and bought a bigger camera but I missed the simplicity and compact size of the GX9. I realized that the little GX9 was just fun, a joy to use and in the end I missed using it so much I went out and bought another.
The new OM-1 is the perfect camera for me. With the right lenses, especially f1.2 pro and telefoto you can enough shallow dof. For my taste at least and I mostly need a lot of dof with lanscape and macro photos.
OMG! This is like what's been going on in my head for the last two years- just more logical. Thumbs up. I spun out of control about 8 years ago when I sold my Em5 mk1 and the pro zoom. I've been paying the psychic price ever since.
Yeah I've been through this transition as well, unfortunately when owing a crop system it is inevitable to wander what a full frame system can add to your photography. And that itching doesn't go away...not until you buy into the system and try it for yourself. That being said I bought a full frame system, used it for 2 years and sold it. Luckily I didn't sell my M43 system wich I continue to use. Weight and size should not be underestimated especially when lots of traveling is foreseen.
Went through the same thing..jumped ship to Nikon Z with assortment of quality lenses but ended up selling all of it and loving the m43 again..owning a FF system was more of a burden somehow and I was shooting much less
Good insights! I have an e-m1 II, GX85 and a bunch of canon full frame gear, and my dilemma is that the e-m1 is better 90% of the time, but occasionally the 5d mark 4 takes a magical photo that the olympus cannot match. If i had to choose one camera, it would be the olympus, with the 1.8 primes. They are superb
Thanks for this video; we have all considered your journey. I recently traded-in a Panasonic G9 and bought an Olympus EM5 Mark III. Both are great cameras, but the Olympus Em5 is much smaller and allows me to travel with a smaller kit that meets my needs. I have considered an alternative FF camera and when I add up the costs and size of the required kit, I decided the difference is not worth what I would give up. There are no bad cameras made today but finding the right camera system takes time. Thanks for sharing.
I was a MFT back when it was new (GH1 and GH2). I then abandoned it and went Canon and eventually Sony. About a year ago I sold most of my Canon gear and got back into MFT. I am so very glad I never sold my MFT lenses. I still have a couple of Sony and Canon cameras, and both Sony and Canon lenses. I am finding that I am not using them. The Panasonic G9 is a joy to use, feels great in the hand, but more importantly, the features on the G9 are better, and the incredible stabilization means I can get sharp photographs at night where the Sony's only get a streaky mess. RUclips reviewers tend to over-hype the full frame camera capabilities and over-sell the MFT limitations. What matters to me is do I get the photographs and video I need in the conditions I work in, and for me MFT delivers the goods. Oh, and I always recommend holding on to old MFT lenses - you never know when you might need them again, and when you do, those old lenses at the back of the cupboard will be worth their weight in gold. I did add to the collection. I did get the Sigma trio and do like them, but the two new lenses that I have found most useful are the 12-35mm 2.8 and 35-100 2.8. I also bought the Laowa 7.5mm f2 and that lens has been brilliant. This year I am looking at selling my last Canon cameras and the Canon 24mm f1.4 to help fund getting the GH6 and the Laowa 6mm T2.1 I have kept my Sony A7S II and manual Zeiss lenses for the full frame "look" and the non E-mount Zeiss lenses can all be adapted to MFT so are dual use. The Sony camera, however is frustrating due to its very limited video features and stabilization is a big issue for me, but I am not sorry the Sony camera is there to use sometimes. The Canons, however, are just dead weight to me and they will go. I am keeping my Canon tilt/shift, 100mm macro, 135 f2, and the 180mm macro for adapting to both Sony and MFT.
Thank you, thank you for the most even handed comparison of MFT & FF I've seen since the late David Thorpe passed [high praise]. Your conclusion reinforced my commitment to MFT despite the many negative critics on YT.
I've been a long time subscriber of his, and his passing was a great loss to the MFT community. Getting mentioned in the same sentence with him is by itself an honor. The problem with with MFT vs FF is that for most people, they only get to experience one side of it. Hopefully my video helps people realise for themselves what it is they are looking for, whether that's MFT or FF.
I always push my camera to where I could benefit from full frame, but when I got the OM-1 all the other cameras felt like slow to focus dinosaurs (A7iv and R iva). I also bought an X-H2 when I had a lens in service and found I still cant get into jpg recipes. Sold out of fuji and sony now and am trying to be happy with what I have and just try to get out more. But you dont have to have brand loyalty, its ok to just have a tool that does only one job perfectly. If you stay with all one brand and then try to buy the flagship models, the prices are there to punish you.
Thanks me too I use PenF for 7 years also consider A7C. But really no light telephoto lens other than the 3 light primes 24 40 50. The other thing which hinders me is the size of EVF on A7C it’s too small to use. Even smaller than PenF.
I wouldn't say that A7 is a good representative of what is beyond m43 though. It has comparable dynamic range to G9, but without the autofocus capability that is arguably sony's best feature.
I’m currently using MFT and APS-C Cameras professionally for video and photography. I’m working professionally with images since 1996 and used a lot of Cameras! MFT is the most fun system to use and I use it 90% of the time. I will probably buy the FF S5ii to be the B Cam for video work, but the GH6 will continue to be my first option for video and the OM-1 my personal Camera.
This is so timely for me, thanks for some great musings with your experience. I've been in the Canon camp for so long, ive sold all my crop stuff but held onto my EF lenses and my ancient 1Dmkiii (lol at people complaining mirrorless FF is heavy). I bought a EM5 when they first came out and fell in love with micro 4/3 for Macro and Tele work because OF the deeper depth of field. The FF itch never went away and I finally got one in a Canon RP where i can use all my old lenses. I hate it. This sounds really dumb, but it is almost too easy to take a picture, and almost impossible to screw something up, its just so clinical and takes such great clear pics that you really have to try hard to get it wrong. FF isn't all its made out to be, and 99% of our photos are just getting posted to lossy social media anyway so all arguments of dynamic range, blah blah are out the window. Micro 4/3 for me is so much more fun to shoot with the compact lenses and body, and I find myself chucking the olympus in the bag when i head out and the canon stays at home. Thanks again for a great video.
Great video, love the comparisons. I just bought a GX9 with the kit and a pancake lens, looking forward to getting to know it. I had a Nikon D80, but I think it bit may have bit the dust and need to take it into the shop.
GX9 with a pancake lens would be a great travel camera - or maybe it's better to say that it is a 'take anywhere with you' camera. That's how the photos meaningful to you get captured.
I have both systems, FF and M43. I recently got rid of Fuji because I don't see the point and I concluded there is a HUGE marketing campaign on RUclips by content creator to push the system with hidden advertisements. I bought a Canon RP because I inherited a 5Dmkll and had quite a few L lenses and I also like a lot to shoot vintage 35mm lenses. I can say M43 has some problems in poor light (but IBIS does miracles) and shooting at high ISO in general, but DxO denoise can, again, do miracles Not a big deal: I can't take good pictures with both system eit a bit of care. I prefer FF for portraits: even with the same depth of field it has some sort of 3D pop. For everything else I really enjoy my M43, a GX9 and a Pen F because of the size of the lenses. Images are the same and on M43 are often sharper because my Olympus lenses are all very good. This is the point for me: lenses takes images, not sensors: you can compensate your sensor limitation with skill and knowledge, but bad glasses take bad pictures, or at least it is not always possible compensate in post. In my experience average M43 lenses are noticeably better then FF in quality and much cheaper: several times cheaper. There are not REALLY bad lenses in M43 but there is plenty in FF. For landscape and street photography I actually prefer M43, because you keep a decent DoF without crippling your light gathering ability or introducing much diffraction. I also came to the conclusion that the newest top of the line models (which I tried) actually bring very little improvement for the money if you know how to expose. The kind of model you pick up has been built for a certain use and for sports and nature a Canon R5 will not give you the same results you can get from an R3, as a Z7 will not come close to a Z9, or a PenF come close to a OM1. Pick the right tool for the use: do not bring a sledge hammer to hold a picture to the wall: you "could" do that somehow, but it won't be a pleasent experience. Your current camera is most probably much better then you and amazing images on national Geographic and the Times magazine were taken with old DSLR with few Megapixels: the pictures taken 15 years ago can be taken today with the same equipment so do not over-idealize what the last new model will do for you: GAS is bad for everyone except camera salesmen.
Thanks for sharing :) Would you believe that GAS just refuses to go away?! It's not a gear problem, it's a me problem! Amazing images can be captured with any modern camera. I do have to say, looking back at my images from m43 and comparing it with full frame, I actually do notice an improvement in dynamic range. The highlights just have better detail with a pleasing softness to it. It's hard to explain. It could just be because I've been shooting more underexposed nowadays, which I wouldn't want to do with m43 because of the noise in the shadows when you bring it back up.
Nice video, I liked your statement, "... hey, you do you". My favorite camera experience, or love, was a Leica M4 with 50mm back in the 1970's. I miss the simplicity of ASA 400 Tri-X, f4 aperture, 1/60 - 1/250 shutter speed, focus. Click. :-)
I am a GX9 fan and have enjoyed your videos, including this one. I will stick to my trusty GX9 and 7 lenses for now because my wife has the G9 and we share lenses. My favorite lens i the Olympus 75 (150 35eq) and the Nocticron. Good luck with your new camera. I look forward to more honest videos from you. Keep up the good work. /AS
I miss the form factor of the GX9 and lenses a lot! Sooner or later, the amazing sensor tech that we’ve been seeing will trickle down to an EM5/GX9 style body. When that happens, I think I’m gonna go back 😂
I had luck with the shutter count of my em1ii. Bought it on mpb and it was in kinda beat up condition. Had a large ding on the bottom. When i got it it had less than 2k shutter actuations.
I shoot GX9 and fit 5 lenses easily and cover a full range (except ultra wide - new Leica 9mm looks great!) … I also have my main camera which is my Sony a7 which I use several high quality prime (manual) lenses with but at most can only carry 3. Having the IBIS, size, conversion factor and portability of the mft system is what makes me use this hybrid approach which provides ultimate flexibility. I cannot live without either.
M43 is such a good platform to explore and play around with new lenses. I’m glad I started out there. It’s the only reason that I now know I only want a 35mm and 85mm, which is the only reason why my full frame setup is a viable one in terms of size and weight.
I have found this clip while waiting my 14-140mm and 12-35mm lenes ... but it is not a mistake of me as I also have a full frame and an aps-c camera.. it is like having all things in preparation of every situation...
I shoot film full frame and love it. I also shoot Fuji X-Pro 2, X-T4, EM-1 Mk2 and the original EM5. I prefer to shoot film but if I had only one camera it would be the EM1. Fuji and Olympus will always be in my kit. Film would be Cannon and Olympus.
Thanks for the video. It was very helpful. I ditched by GX1 2018 and I have been missing it since then. I been researching a bit and a GX9 seems like the right choice for me since I'm hiking a lot and weight and size really matters. The last doubt I had was killed by this video. Congrats to your bargain ebay buy :)
Thanks again for such an honest review of upgrading from mft to ff. I'm in a similar position right now, having a Lumix G9, and a GX8, with some great Leica lenses, but thinking that a Sony Full frame might help in those rare (for me) low light situations and for fast moving subjects. I know it would, but these are rare, and with such good denoise and sharpening post processing software around (for less than the price of a good used lens), you've persuaded me to stay with mft, well, for now anyway😊.
It's a great little camera and I do miss it. I see myself moving back to micro four thirds one day! I sure hope they dont stop innovating in that space (even if it means just meeting industry/competitor standards) For lighting, honestly I used what my tiny room offered! It has two sets of halogen style LED lamps. What I did was opened one and turned off the order. That way my face gets lit up, but the darker unlit background offers contrast. It helps that the windows are behind me as well so the lights coming from outside become bokeh balls. Unfortunately, I can utilise this setup at night. I think that covers the fundamental ideas for typical youtuber-y dramatic lighting 1. lighting for your face 2. dark background 3. soft points of light sources in the background.
qwm jml Yeah m43 is actually great for videos. Innovation is always welcome The lighting works very well. And that room actually looks huge ! it’s a nice room anyways with a nice view. The look of the A7mkiii is lovely. What are your settings ? Modified standard profile or something else ?
Hank you for sharing your expirience. I enjoyed watching this and the previous video. I am not a pro and I would like to buy a camera to make photo and video to my family and little child. I am in doubt between x-s20, x-s10, gx9 ans a6600. At the moment x-s20 is leading, but not sure. For me it is important portability too. Do you think x-s20 is a good choice in my case, or do you still advice gx9? Thanks so much
I'm happy to hear that! Hope it was helpful in some way. Personally, for family photos and video, the camera should have good stabilization (for those panning shots and running kids), good autofocus with face detection, and affordable prime lenses (for indoors and beautiful portraits). All of your choices excel in at least one of these - GX9 for excellent stabilisation and affordability of both camera and lens; Sony APS-C for autofocus and choices of lenses. As for the fuji, it's good but not the best for all three criteria. Honestly, you'd be happy with any one. Just pick one that has the least compromises with a set budget that includes choices of lenses. The GX9 is a fun camera to bring around, its portable, easy to use and very affordable system with the ONLY downside to me being the accessibility of shallow depth of field. Sony has amazing autofocus and great selection of lenses but you have to be a bit pickier since its not as cheap. While there are cheap choices of lenses, image quality and autofocus performance will take a hit. Fuji is good all around, especially with the latest models. You have to be quite selective with the lenses as well but it will produce excellent images with great colors straight out of camera. I think your choices of lenses will be the decisive factor here. If you are going for one camera one PRIME lens setup, any one of those will serve you well (sony edges it out for me for AF and shallow DOF). If its one camera one ZOOM lens setup, I'd go with panasonic or olympus and get a constant f/2.8 zoom. If it were one camera multiple lens setup, micro four thirds wins again in price and portability (assuming you'd want to have it all with you at all times). Just know that with any system, there will be compromises, you just have to decide which compromises you can tolerate. I went with Sony full frame to get its excellent and very handy autofocus capabilities as well as shallow depth of field and high dynamic range for heavy editing (personal taste), but I sorely miss the portability, compactness and stabilization. It's still tolerable though so I am sticking with it.
@@QawiemJamil thank you so much for such exhaustive answer, a lot appreciated. Please may I ask you to explain me better what is the issue with shallow depth of the field? Not sure I know what it means. The main reason why I am more oriented with fuji is because the jpg color, without taking a lot time with the processing. Does gx9 has good color? Furthermore do you think portability of Aspc is do bad? I was thinking to take a sigma 18-50 f2.8 and a primary lens; Maybe the pancake xf 27mm f2. 8, which is very portable. I am afraid 4/3 is not to great with photos indoor and low light vs Aspc. What do you suggest? Thank you so much again 🙏
@@Franceyou Happy to help! Depth of field (DOF) refers to the "blurry background" effect that a lot of people desire in their photos, including myself. This effect is achievable when the lens is set to large aperture values (or equivalently small f-numbers). To a certain extent, it also depends on the size of the sensor, focal length and distance between the camera and subject in focus. The reason I mentioned that is because it is 'easier' to get that blurry background effect the larger your sensor size is. Gerald undone made a video on this in which he explained it quite well - you should check it out. If excellent color and straight out of camera images is a priority (meaning that you don't want to edit your photos on the computer), then fuji is a great choice. Color reproduction on panasonic and sony is nothing to write home about. It's just ok but fuji colors are beautiful. However, for further clarification, by shooting in RAW mode and then editing your photos on the computer, fuji colors are achievable with any camera or system but it definitely requires a bit of effort on your part as the editor. In terms of portability, I would say APS-C is generally closer to full frame than it is to micro four thirds when considering both the camera body and lens. However, that is not to say there aren't compact lenses available for APS-C. In fact, the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 is fairly compact and a great choice of lens. You can refer to camerasize.com to help you visualize differences in size. There's a neat feature where you can compare any camera+lens size with any other. When talking about image quality, I understand your concern. At equivalent ISO values, the fuji will beat out panasonic hands-down in terms of dynamic range and noise performance. However, with the affordability of fast prime and zoom lenses ranging from f/2.8 to f/1.4 for the micro four thirds system, you will rarely ever shoot at high ISO values anyway so it arguably not much of a concern. With that said, APS-C is still better in this regards. It performs closer to full frame cameras. Having said all that, I think the fuji system will serve you well, especially if you don't care to edit your photos and videos. The fujifilm simulations is an awesome feature. The XS line is fairly affordable with great features, and there are more than enough choices for fast and compact lenses. As a final thought, just know that if ever you decide to play around with really long focal lengths of 100mm and above, the lens sizes on APS-C will be massive compared to the ones you can get on micro four thirds - but this might be a moot point for you.
I shoot weddings with the Olympus OMD E-M1ii it does the job fine. Use DXO PhotoLab or DXO PureRaw for noise reduction. If you need more bokeh use Luminar. I might buy a full frame camera at some point but I'm keeping my M43 gear. It's not worth selling it I won't even get that much for it.
There are several to choose from if you google ‘sony shutter count’ and they all work pretty much the same way. I happened to use apotelyt.com for no particular reason except it’s the one I saw and clicked on. tools.science.si looks like an easy and no-fluff type of website you might want to check out
Very good analysis. I am considering the same move. The weight is in the lenses. Fast full-frame lenses are heavy. Sony has a set of small primes but slower. One thing I am concerned about is whether or not the image quality of m43 is good enough to sell in the fine art arena. At the lower end it may not matter, but at the higher end the detail available from higher resolution and greater dynamic range is noticeable when compared side by side or by the trained eye,. Thanks for your excellent analysis that included a set of parameters and their impact on a potential decision.
Color is the same for all cameras if you shoot in RAW and edit your pictures yourself. The new OM1 is the best camera I've owned, expensive? Yes, but much cheaper than other high end cameras. It's a fabulous camera and whit olympus pro lenses a dream.
True, but even when editing RAW, it is nice to have the in-camera color options available to you to choose from (in lightroom for example). Some of them are just really nice. It'd be awesome if it's something you can download and add into lightroom, but the ones I've found are so expensive... Looking forward for the OM5 or even OM10 with the new sensor. I think could be a potential home run!
Mft needs some more user skill I find, full frame gives you more leaway / room for error. High iso is ok on my em5iii, but color shifts and significant drop in dr means that I must nail exposure and whitebalance in Raw. Same goes for shallow depth of field. Its possible, but you must know how to do it. Counterwise mft forces me to look more at the composition because of this limitation and improved my photography. All in all I definitely think full frame has image quality advantages, especially in color fidelity at high iso, but its like a 25% improvement for me.
Well said! I mentioned in one of my previous videos that one of the caveats to getting the best out of a micro four thirds camera is nailing exposure, which considering the huge selection of cheap prime lenses in that system, really isn't that difficult. I think it's a productive form of limitation, that really rewards you for learning in detail. Those kinds of hobbies are the best kinds in my opinion!
Yes, but only to a certain extent... but the reasons become much more specific and consequently harder to justify. For example, my a7iii has the older AF system. Even though it hardly ever lets me down, I would like to try/have the newer AF system. This makes me want the a7iv, or even better would be a7c mark ii if that ever happens.
For the most part, the E-M1II, Fuji XS10, Lumix G9, GH5II, and Sony a6600 are so close in comparison, it basically comes down to feature set, ergonomics, and price. I am of the frame of mind that cameras today hardly lack for anything, rather people do… Full Frame dominates perception, but everything else is realistically subjective… …
Couldn't have said it better myself! It's difficult to find a truly bad camera nowadays, but it is equally difficult to find a great value camera because value is so subjective. The fact that a lot of people are not even sure of what they truly want only adds to the problem.
And here I am, in 2023, trying to sell my A7III and A7IV and all of my lenses to MFT. Lumix G9 especially...Hahaha.. And about the softness, it's because A7III had an AA Filter to minimize AA of course. And that makes the image looks softer.
Every system has its perks that's for sure. I actually traded my a7iii for an a7c a few months ago. I've paired it with a 35mm and 75mm f/1.8. It's a nice and compact system to carry around. I've been enjoying it a lot. The number one thing I miss since moving away from MFT is stabilization especially for video. Oh that's right! I forgot about the AA filter.
@@QawiemJamil Can you help me, how the A7C stacks up against the LumixGX9? Not about the technology comparison but how the camera makes the photography process fun and simple, does the A7C gives you that? I'm willing to let go of the A7III and A7IV, but there's one of my favorite lenses on the e-mount that I don't want to let go of. So A7C is one of my choice, for a nice compact setup, so I hope I can shoot photo every day.. Thank you.
@@fauzanazhima I enjoy using my A7C very much, but not more than my GX9. This is because I enjoyed how the MFT system gave me easy access to wide up to super telephoto focal lengths while still keeping the size very compact. I also enjoyed the excellent stabilization, which made it easy for me to take videos without needing to edit. Also, the GX9 is just better designed and very easy to handle and operate. This is not the case for the A7C but you learn how to work with it eventually by customising the buttons and quick access menu to your liking. I barely had to change anything on my GX9 - everything made sense and was within reach. Also, with my A7c, I am only willing to bring with me a maximum of two compact prime lenses, or one zoom lens at any one time. With that said, I would not consider trading my A7C for a GX9 because I am not willing to give up on the dynamic range, noise performance and autofocus performance, all of which are more important to me right now.
@@QawiemJamil Thank you very much for your sincere and detailed answer, as you said, seeing “whatever I need right now” gave me confidence to just sell may camera and go with MFT. I missed taking photo and video everywhere I go, and right now I mostly don’t do it because the needs to “babysit” my A7iv because of the pricetag and also the bulkiness. Maybe what I need will change again in the future I don’t know, but if that happens I hope A7CII is already out.. Thanks again. 🙏🏻
Sounds like one of those kinky gotta try it blat least once before I die camera system changes. Lol In all seriousness it was a mistake for you to even have considered getting into a FF sensor system. I think you knew what you were getting into but just couldn't resist wanting to try it to see the difference. Truth is most people who upgrade have hardly outgrown their existing cameras. Everyone loves to shell out the advice you did, which is if the current camera is serving you well and hasn't hindered your creativity and growth don't upgrade. Yet they ALL say this after the fact that they themselves have upgraded, and I think such videos are more therapeutic than anything. I recently switched systems from Fourthirds sensors to FF, with the Sony Alpha 7R Mark V. I have genuinely outgrown the camera many, many years ago. I shot at 10MP with the Olympus E-3 for 15 years, and I can tell you while I absolutely adore the camera and it's wonderful lenses, it was heavy, with ISO quality maxing out at 3200 (with heavy noise) and IBIS that was in its infancy. It's a technological dinosaur compared to the a7RV. But I don't plan to sell it or any of my lenses. I will likelu still shoot with it, if for any reason shits and giggles.
you seem like a methodical guy. i think going sony was a good idea. i was pretty good with a g9 and also even a gx85 (that only has 16mp) for photos, although i thought i wouldnt be. however, if doing video, sony has considerable advantages. bigger dynamic range and excellent tracking in video (at least on zv-e10, a6400 and a7c - regarding your set budget) are very nice additions to have. it's almost impossible to get a good image on mft on family scenes with movement indoors (you have to increase f stop to 10-14 to get everything in focus, since you cant rely on tracking or it will ruin the video, and so you now have to crank the iso sometimes to 6400, which really looks bad on the image - u could drop the shutterspeed to 25 instead of 50, but then it doesnt look filmic on fast movement and you still have to up the iso). in general, filming a family scene with movement is hard, because of the unreliable focusing (i dont see how one could do it manually successfully, with sudden unpredictable moves of the "actors"). neither em1ii, nor em1iii, nor xs10 have reliable af (i hear xs10 and fuji in general are pretty bad with this) in video. dynamic range i think is inferior on olympus (not sure about om1, but i imagine it too) to even a6400, if not even a6300, which was released in 2016... also, olympus doesnt have a proper log file (again, not sure if om1's log is better, now that it has 10bit). another downside on olympus (this time, even on om1) is that sharpness only goes down to "-2", and that is very visible when you try to get a filmic softer look - you hardly can do it. until om1, olympus didnt have zebras, so exposure on video was quite unreliable. i'm not very keen on a7iii, mainly because it doesnt track and the processor seems doesnt support it (won't ever get it as an update). a7c does it very good.
You've touched on several good points here! Thanks for sharing. Micro four thirds sensors in a side-by-side comparison with a full frame sensor (or even a really good APS-C sensor like Fuji's) have that cropped sensor look (sharp, digital and less dynamic range) so in terms of pure image quality, I'm enjoying my sony a7iii. The sony a7c would have been nicer, but given the price I got it at, it was an absolute bargain and I gain entry into the sony e-mount system. However, there is one major(-ish) downside to moving to full frame that I have come to realise after using it for 5 months now, and it has to do with the lenses. In the M43 system, it is very easy to find affordable, fast lenses that are optically excellent! In the full-frame universe, it is not. You've really got to fork out the big bucks if you want an optically excellent fast lens. For everyday photography, issues involving chromatic aberration, longitudinal chromatic aberration, vignette, coma, and plane of focus, are things that are manageable. But I'm into astrophotography as well, which is absurdly demanding when it comes to lens performance. I'm getting what I paid for I guess. At this point in time, considering the popularity and price of the a7c, the better AF performance doesn't justify it for me because it's already pretty darn good on the a7iii. I still want it though, but I would have to sell my a7iii at a good price to reduce that price gap.
After your twenty minutes video I ask myself: so what did this guy decide? Where is he going from here? Did he regret? Sort of unclear... In the comments you do sort of seem to regret, maybe. You say you are doing a PhD, will you will need a clear conclusion at the end of all the work there. But your video leaves some of us a bit unclear (?).
Luckily this isn't my phd thesis! The uncertainty that you've interpreted is exactly what I feel about this whole experience. It's pure honestly from my end. What I shared were the context, my decisions, and feelings about it - which you seem to have captured accurately that I am sort of indifferent about the whole transition. This is exactly what I wanted to communicate! I am finally convinced that full frame is not unquestionably better that micro four thirds. If you have gear acquisition syndrome, this might be something worth hearing. I think that a lot of small sensor users, just like me, have a 'big sensor' itch that is hard to scratch. I'm lucky enough to have experienced this and find out that it's no big deal - and I don't have to worry about missing out on full frame glory ever again. Which means if I do move back to micro four thirds for whatever reason, I'll be ok with it! If it means anything to you, my definite answer is that no, I don't regret moving to full frame. But the more precise answer is no, I don't regret purchasing the a7iii. Would I be happier if I just stuck with micro four thirds - I honestly don't know. The a7iii satisfies all my photography needs. At least I now know that full frame is not something I have to preserve as my must-have camera spec.
@@QawiemJamil Use the Sony for portrait, scenic and low light shooting, and buy a Lumix GX-9 or OM camera for street photography. All bases covered. If starting totally fresh, I do wonder if Fujifilm ticks all the boxes -- maybe so. Alas, if a person cannot master APS-C and MFT formats, they likely need not venture into FF cameras. Really, the MFT ratio of 4:3 works well on the street, as well as, the great deepness of view, even at f2.8 to f4, one never worries about getting a whole story, front to back. Contrast detect, using single area of focus, on most MFT lenses is fast and accurate. For portraits and scenics, that Sony FF sensor sure can help bring up the shadows, and there is simply more to play with --- even most APS-C give you more to play with -- less worry about getting it wrong. Canon metering system is pretty good, as is the JPG out of camera, with the only lacking element being less dynamic range. Low light ISO performance is OK. If a person has a particular use, more often used, then buy the system for that use. Or just buy lightly into another system to bridge the gap. No need to be all in. I use many different cameras, but would not recommend doing so, as at times your brain will explode trying to remember the differences in which you are holding at the time. :o Take care, Loren Schwiderski ( my site will update on or before 15th )
Too much bokeh… Try the gx85. For the price used, you get the 90% of gx9 experience for half price. Then you’ll need again the 15 mm 1,7 and 25mm 1,4. But no way from your previous prices. Bottom line, you can have both systems.
haha perhaps! I've tried but I haven't found a topic to discuss that hasn't been touched on by every camera youtuber. I will when I find something that is worth saying
@@QawiemJamil thanx for sharing.. I like the speed of your words👍 i dont like at all the fast speaking youtubers its not natural to speak without think🤬 Kindest Regards, apsc, mft, ff user
I've owned many cameras over the years, (Nikon D750, Sony A7R II, Canon 5D, Fuji XT2 to name a few) and currently have the Panasonic G9 and GX9. I've never once personally felt full frame has given me any better photographs than using my G9 or GX9. I can definitely agree unless you specifically need a camera for low light or need a bokeh monster, investing in better glass in your current setup is a much smarter move. The benefits for me with a m43 setup is purely the size and weight advantage it gives me when out all day with a camera.
Thanks for sharing! Some of the latest m43 cameras when paired with really good glass gives you excellent image quality, almost indistinguishable from full frame. Whether it's good enough is up to you to decide.
G'day mate. FF user, but just too big to walk around town with. Sold the X100V. Just wasn't what I needed. Seriously considering the GX9. Would like to ask how the viewfinder is, and how's the focus/refocus? Thanks, mate.
Hi fellows,is gx9 good for begineer as well..
What if i intend to have low light shooting also..
Shld i consider other option.
I have used the following cameras over the years: Canon T2i(EOS 550D), Nikon D3100, Nikon D3400, Nikon D500, Panasonic G9, Olympus E-M1 mk ii, Fujifilm X-T3, Fujifilm X-T4, Sony A7Riii, Canon R6, Canon R5, and finally Panasonic G9 again. The more experience I got in photography in general and in what I wanted to do in specific, the more I realized that micro 4/3 was a solid choice and easier on both my back and my wallet.
If I was shooting mostly family/portraits, street, and/or landscape, I think I could be using anything, probably still that old Canon. As someone who shoots a lot of wildlife, the ability to have the reach of the Pana/Leica 100-400 in that small package was a big reason I came back.
Your Sony A7C + Samyang 35/1.8 + Samyang 75/ 1.8 would be super light.
I have a broken back, but I have a lot of fun with my m43 cameras. A friend of mine wanted me to film him with his full frame system which I did. But after just t minutes or so, his camera started feeling like a cinder block and it caused a tremendous amount of pain. I have been getting good results from my m43 Panasonic cameras, so if I make any change at all, it will be to get another m43 camera. I
I also sold my GX9 and bought a bigger camera but I missed the simplicity and compact size of the GX9. I realized that the little GX9 was just fun, a joy to use and in the end I missed using it so much I went out and bought another.
The new OM-1 is the perfect camera for me. With the right lenses, especially f1.2 pro and telefoto you can enough shallow dof. For my taste at least and I mostly need a lot of dof with lanscape and macro photos.
OMG! This is like what's been going on in my head for the last two years- just more logical. Thumbs up. I spun out of control about 8 years ago when I sold my Em5 mk1 and the pro zoom. I've been paying the psychic price ever since.
If I had a bit more money, I'd probably do the same!
Yeah I've been through this transition as well, unfortunately when owing a crop system it is inevitable to wander what a full frame system can add to your photography. And that itching doesn't go away...not until you buy into the system and try it for yourself. That being said I bought a full frame system, used it for 2 years and sold it. Luckily I didn't sell my M43 system wich I continue to use. Weight and size should not be underestimated especially when lots of traveling is foreseen.
Went through the same thing..jumped ship to Nikon Z with assortment of quality lenses but ended up selling all of it and loving the m43 again..owning a FF system was more of a burden somehow and I was shooting much less
My itch went away with DXO PhotoLab and DXO PureRaw for noise reduction and Luminar for adding more bokeh with A.I.
Good insights! I have an e-m1 II, GX85 and a bunch of canon full frame gear, and my dilemma is that the e-m1 is better 90% of the time, but occasionally the 5d mark 4 takes a magical photo that the olympus cannot match. If i had to choose one camera, it would be the olympus, with the 1.8 primes. They are superb
Thanks for this video; we have all considered your journey.
I recently traded-in a Panasonic G9 and bought an Olympus EM5 Mark III. Both are great cameras, but the Olympus Em5 is much smaller and allows me to travel with a smaller kit that meets my needs. I have considered an alternative FF camera and when I add up the costs and size of the required kit, I decided the difference is not worth what I would give up. There are no bad cameras made today but finding the right camera system takes time. Thanks for sharing.
I was a MFT back when it was new (GH1 and GH2). I then abandoned it and went Canon and eventually Sony. About a year ago I sold most of my Canon gear and got back into MFT. I am so very glad I never sold my MFT lenses. I still have a couple of Sony and Canon cameras, and both Sony and Canon lenses. I am finding that I am not using them. The Panasonic G9 is a joy to use, feels great in the hand, but more importantly, the features on the G9 are better, and the incredible stabilization means I can get sharp photographs at night where the Sony's only get a streaky mess. RUclips reviewers tend to over-hype the full frame camera capabilities and over-sell the MFT limitations. What matters to me is do I get the photographs and video I need in the conditions I work in, and for me MFT delivers the goods.
Oh, and I always recommend holding on to old MFT lenses - you never know when you might need them again, and when you do, those old lenses at the back of the cupboard will be worth their weight in gold. I did add to the collection. I did get the Sigma trio and do like them, but the two new lenses that I have found most useful are the 12-35mm 2.8 and 35-100 2.8. I also bought the Laowa 7.5mm f2 and that lens has been brilliant. This year I am looking at selling my last Canon cameras and the Canon 24mm f1.4 to help fund getting the GH6 and the Laowa 6mm T2.1
I have kept my Sony A7S II and manual Zeiss lenses for the full frame "look" and the non E-mount Zeiss lenses can all be adapted to MFT so are dual use. The Sony camera, however is frustrating due to its very limited video features and stabilization is a big issue for me, but I am not sorry the Sony camera is there to use sometimes. The Canons, however, are just dead weight to me and they will go. I am keeping my Canon tilt/shift, 100mm macro, 135 f2, and the 180mm macro for adapting to both Sony and MFT.
I miss this IBIS on my GX9 - it wasn't even industry leading but it was awesome!
Thank you, thank you for the most even handed comparison of MFT & FF I've seen since the late David Thorpe passed [high praise]. Your conclusion reinforced my commitment to MFT despite the many negative critics on YT.
I've been a long time subscriber of his, and his passing was a great loss to the MFT community. Getting mentioned in the same sentence with him is by itself an honor.
The problem with with MFT vs FF is that for most people, they only get to experience one side of it. Hopefully my video helps people realise for themselves what it is they are looking for, whether that's MFT or FF.
We stand on the shoulders of a giant. I cried when his son posted that last video. I'm crying now.
I used to from full frame, apsc. But for me M43 is the end game. No doubts better for my needs.
I just picked up the new OM-1, so I'm happy as a clam.
Cool. when the OM-1 tech trickles down to an OM-5 or even an OM-10 model, there's a good chance I'll jump back into that system
I always push my camera to where I could benefit from full frame, but when I got the OM-1 all the other cameras felt like slow to focus dinosaurs (A7iv and R iva). I also bought an X-H2 when I had a lens in service and found I still cant get into jpg recipes. Sold out of fuji and sony now and am trying to be happy with what I have and just try to get out more.
But you dont have to have brand loyalty, its ok to just have a tool that does only one job perfectly. If you stay with all one brand and then try to buy the flagship models, the prices are there to punish you.
Thanks me too I use PenF for 7 years also consider A7C. But really no light telephoto lens other than the 3 light primes 24 40 50. The other thing which hinders me is the size of EVF on A7C it’s too small to use. Even smaller than PenF.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I really appreciate it.
I'm toying with the A7 to explore beyond m4/3. Low size and weight are 2 key factors but curiosity is another.
I wouldn't say that A7 is a good representative of what is beyond m43 though. It has comparable dynamic range to G9, but without the autofocus capability that is arguably sony's best feature.
I’m currently using MFT and APS-C Cameras professionally for video and photography. I’m working professionally with images since 1996 and used a lot of Cameras! MFT is the most fun system to use and I use it 90% of the time. I will probably buy the FF S5ii to be the B Cam for video work, but the GH6 will continue to be my first option for video and the OM-1 my personal Camera.
This is so timely for me, thanks for some great musings with your experience. I've been in the Canon camp for so long, ive sold all my crop stuff but held onto my EF lenses and my ancient 1Dmkiii (lol at people complaining mirrorless FF is heavy). I bought a EM5 when they first came out and fell in love with micro 4/3 for Macro and Tele work because OF the deeper depth of field. The FF itch never went away and I finally got one in a Canon RP where i can use all my old lenses. I hate it. This sounds really dumb, but it is almost too easy to take a picture, and almost impossible to screw something up, its just so clinical and takes such great clear pics that you really have to try hard to get it wrong. FF isn't all its made out to be, and 99% of our photos are just getting posted to lossy social media anyway so all arguments of dynamic range, blah blah are out the window. Micro 4/3 for me is so much more fun to shoot with the compact lenses and body, and I find myself chucking the olympus in the bag when i head out and the canon stays at home. Thanks again for a great video.
Great video, love the comparisons. I just bought a GX9 with the kit and a pancake lens, looking forward to getting to know it. I had a Nikon D80, but I think it bit may have bit the dust and need to take it into the shop.
GX9 with a pancake lens would be a great travel camera - or maybe it's better to say that it is a 'take anywhere with you' camera. That's how the photos meaningful to you get captured.
I have both systems, FF and M43. I recently got rid of Fuji because I don't see the point and I concluded there is a HUGE marketing campaign on RUclips by content creator to push the system with hidden advertisements.
I bought a Canon RP because I inherited a 5Dmkll and had quite a few L lenses and I also like a lot to shoot vintage 35mm lenses.
I can say M43 has some problems in poor light (but IBIS does miracles) and shooting at high ISO in general, but DxO denoise can, again, do miracles Not a big deal: I can't take good pictures with both system eit a bit of care.
I prefer FF for portraits: even with the same depth of field it has some sort of 3D pop.
For everything else I really enjoy my M43, a GX9 and a Pen F because of the size of the lenses. Images are the same and on M43 are often sharper because my Olympus lenses are all very good. This is the point for me: lenses takes images, not sensors: you can compensate your sensor limitation with skill and knowledge, but bad glasses take bad pictures, or at least it is not always possible compensate in post.
In my experience average M43 lenses are noticeably better then FF in quality and much cheaper: several times cheaper. There are not REALLY bad lenses in M43 but there is plenty in FF.
For landscape and street photography I actually prefer M43, because you keep a decent DoF without crippling your light gathering ability or introducing much diffraction.
I also came to the conclusion that the newest top of the line models (which I tried) actually bring very little improvement for the money if you know how to expose.
The kind of model you pick up has been built for a certain use and for sports and nature a Canon R5 will not give you the same results you can get from an R3, as a Z7 will not come close to a Z9, or a PenF come close to a OM1.
Pick the right tool for the use: do not bring a sledge hammer to hold a picture to the wall: you "could" do that somehow, but it won't be a pleasent experience.
Your current camera is most probably much better then you and amazing images on national Geographic and the Times magazine were taken with old DSLR with few Megapixels: the pictures taken 15 years ago can be taken today with the same equipment so do not over-idealize what the last new model will do for you: GAS is bad for everyone except camera salesmen.
Thanks for sharing :) Would you believe that GAS just refuses to go away?! It's not a gear problem, it's a me problem! Amazing images can be captured with any modern camera. I do have to say, looking back at my images from m43 and comparing it with full frame, I actually do notice an improvement in dynamic range. The highlights just have better detail with a pleasing softness to it. It's hard to explain. It could just be because I've been shooting more underexposed nowadays, which I wouldn't want to do with m43 because of the noise in the shadows when you bring it back up.
Really enjoyable video and very honest
Nice video, I liked your statement, "... hey, you do you". My favorite camera experience, or love, was a Leica M4 with 50mm back in the 1970's. I miss the simplicity of ASA 400 Tri-X, f4 aperture, 1/60 - 1/250 shutter speed, focus. Click. :-)
Obviously You are a very ...very smart young person.
I simply enjoyed listening to You
I've been thinking about including either Fujifilm or Nikon into my kit, but I absolutely desire the Oly 75mm 1.8.
That would’ve been my next lens if I had stayed
I am a GX9 fan and have enjoyed your videos, including this one. I will stick to my trusty GX9 and 7 lenses for now because my wife has the G9 and we share lenses. My favorite lens i the Olympus 75 (150 35eq) and the Nocticron. Good luck with your new camera. I look forward to more honest videos from you. Keep up the good work. /AS
I miss the form factor of the GX9 and lenses a lot! Sooner or later, the amazing sensor tech that we’ve been seeing will trickle down to an EM5/GX9 style body. When that happens, I think I’m gonna go back 😂
The Nocticron is 😮! Love the way it looks and 1.2 is amazing
I had luck with the shutter count of my em1ii. Bought it on mpb and it was in kinda beat up condition. Had a large ding on the bottom. When i got it it had less than 2k shutter actuations.
amazing find!
I own a Sony A7III but I like the color rendition of my GX85 more
Too much Toneh! The video is gold, an honest opinion and story for all us non professional photo lovers.
Gotta agree with you on that. f/2 would’ve been more than enough. The more I look at it, the more obnoxious it gets 😅
I shoot GX9 and fit 5 lenses easily and cover a full range (except ultra wide - new Leica 9mm looks great!) … I also have my main camera which is my Sony a7 which I use several high quality prime (manual) lenses with but at most can only carry 3. Having the IBIS, size, conversion factor and portability of the mft system is what makes me use this hybrid approach which provides ultimate flexibility. I cannot live without either.
M43 is such a good platform to explore and play around with new lenses. I’m glad I started out there. It’s the only reason that I now know I only want a 35mm and 85mm, which is the only reason why my full frame setup is a viable one in terms of size and weight.
@@QawiemJamil That is so right, the 35, 50, and some 85mm or short zoom are not the size of a bazooka and weigh in at reasonable levels.
I have found this clip while waiting my 14-140mm and 12-35mm lenes ... but it is not a mistake of me as I also have a full frame and an aps-c camera.. it is like having all things in preparation of every situation...
I shoot film full frame and love it. I also shoot Fuji X-Pro 2, X-T4, EM-1 Mk2 and the original EM5. I prefer to shoot film but if I had only one camera it would be the EM1. Fuji and Olympus will always be in my kit. Film would be Cannon and Olympus.
Thanks for the video. It was very helpful. I ditched by GX1 2018 and I have been missing it since then. I been researching a bit and a GX9 seems like the right choice for me since I'm hiking a lot and weight and size really matters. The last doubt I had was killed by this video.
Congrats to your bargain ebay buy :)
Thanks again for such an honest review of upgrading from mft to ff. I'm in a similar position right now, having a Lumix G9, and a GX8, with some great Leica lenses, but thinking that a Sony Full frame might help in those rare (for me) low light situations and for fast moving subjects. I know it would, but these are rare, and with such good denoise and sharpening post processing software around (for less than the price of a good used lens), you've persuaded me to stay with mft, well, for now anyway😊.
Thanks for these videos. You’re one of the reason I got the gx9 😊.
P.S : How are you lighting this scene please ?
It's a great little camera and I do miss it. I see myself moving back to micro four thirds one day! I sure hope they dont stop innovating in that space (even if it means just meeting industry/competitor standards)
For lighting, honestly I used what my tiny room offered! It has two sets of halogen style LED lamps. What I did was opened one and turned off the order. That way my face gets lit up, but the darker unlit background offers contrast. It helps that the windows are behind me as well so the lights coming from outside become bokeh balls. Unfortunately, I can utilise this setup at night. I think that covers the fundamental ideas for typical youtuber-y dramatic lighting 1. lighting for your face 2. dark background 3. soft points of light sources in the background.
qwm jml Yeah m43 is actually great for videos. Innovation is always welcome
The lighting works very well. And that room actually looks huge ! it’s a nice room anyways with a nice view. The look of the A7mkiii is lovely. What are your settings ? Modified standard profile or something else ?
Hank you for sharing your expirience. I enjoyed watching this and the previous video. I am not a pro and I would like to buy a camera to make photo and video to my family and little child. I am in doubt between x-s20, x-s10, gx9 ans a6600. At the moment x-s20 is leading, but not sure. For me it is important portability too. Do you think x-s20 is a good choice in my case, or do you still advice gx9? Thanks so much
I'm happy to hear that! Hope it was helpful in some way. Personally, for family photos and video, the camera should have good stabilization (for those panning shots and running kids), good autofocus with face detection, and affordable prime lenses (for indoors and beautiful portraits). All of your choices excel in at least one of these - GX9 for excellent stabilisation and affordability of both camera and lens; Sony APS-C for autofocus and choices of lenses. As for the fuji, it's good but not the best for all three criteria. Honestly, you'd be happy with any one. Just pick one that has the least compromises with a set budget that includes choices of lenses.
The GX9 is a fun camera to bring around, its portable, easy to use and very affordable system with the ONLY downside to me being the accessibility of shallow depth of field. Sony has amazing autofocus and great selection of lenses but you have to be a bit pickier since its not as cheap. While there are cheap choices of lenses, image quality and autofocus performance will take a hit. Fuji is good all around, especially with the latest models. You have to be quite selective with the lenses as well but it will produce excellent images with great colors straight out of camera.
I think your choices of lenses will be the decisive factor here. If you are going for one camera one PRIME lens setup, any one of those will serve you well (sony edges it out for me for AF and shallow DOF). If its one camera one ZOOM lens setup, I'd go with panasonic or olympus and get a constant f/2.8 zoom. If it were one camera multiple lens setup, micro four thirds wins again in price and portability (assuming you'd want to have it all with you at all times).
Just know that with any system, there will be compromises, you just have to decide which compromises you can tolerate. I went with Sony full frame to get its excellent and very handy autofocus capabilities as well as shallow depth of field and high dynamic range for heavy editing (personal taste), but I sorely miss the portability, compactness and stabilization. It's still tolerable though so I am sticking with it.
@@QawiemJamil thank you so much for such exhaustive answer, a lot appreciated. Please may I ask you to explain me better what is the issue with shallow depth of the field? Not sure I know what it means.
The main reason why I am more oriented with fuji is because the jpg color, without taking a lot time with the processing. Does gx9 has good color? Furthermore do you think portability of Aspc is do bad? I was thinking to take a sigma 18-50 f2.8 and a primary lens; Maybe the pancake xf 27mm f2. 8, which is very portable. I am afraid 4/3 is not to great with photos indoor and low light vs Aspc. What do you suggest? Thank you so much again 🙏
@@Franceyou Happy to help! Depth of field (DOF) refers to the "blurry background" effect that a lot of people desire in their photos, including myself. This effect is achievable when the lens is set to large aperture values (or equivalently small f-numbers). To a certain extent, it also depends on the size of the sensor, focal length and distance between the camera and subject in focus. The reason I mentioned that is because it is 'easier' to get that blurry background effect the larger your sensor size is. Gerald undone made a video on this in which he explained it quite well - you should check it out.
If excellent color and straight out of camera images is a priority (meaning that you don't want to edit your photos on the computer), then fuji is a great choice. Color reproduction on panasonic and sony is nothing to write home about. It's just ok but fuji colors are beautiful. However, for further clarification, by shooting in RAW mode and then editing your photos on the computer, fuji colors are achievable with any camera or system but it definitely requires a bit of effort on your part as the editor.
In terms of portability, I would say APS-C is generally closer to full frame than it is to micro four thirds when considering both the camera body and lens. However, that is not to say there aren't compact lenses available for APS-C. In fact, the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 is fairly compact and a great choice of lens. You can refer to camerasize.com to help you visualize differences in size. There's a neat feature where you can compare any camera+lens size with any other.
When talking about image quality, I understand your concern. At equivalent ISO values, the fuji will beat out panasonic hands-down in terms of dynamic range and noise performance. However, with the affordability of fast prime and zoom lenses ranging from f/2.8 to f/1.4 for the micro four thirds system, you will rarely ever shoot at high ISO values anyway so it arguably not much of a concern. With that said, APS-C is still better in this regards. It performs closer to full frame cameras.
Having said all that, I think the fuji system will serve you well, especially if you don't care to edit your photos and videos. The fujifilm simulations is an awesome feature. The XS line is fairly affordable with great features, and there are more than enough choices for fast and compact lenses.
As a final thought, just know that if ever you decide to play around with really long focal lengths of 100mm and above, the lens sizes on APS-C will be massive compared to the ones you can get on micro four thirds - but this might be a moot point for you.
@@QawiemJamil thanks so much, hoping to see you publish other videos 🙏
I shoot weddings with the Olympus OMD E-M1ii it does the job fine. Use DXO PhotoLab or DXO PureRaw for noise reduction. If you need more bokeh use Luminar.
I might buy a full frame camera at some point but I'm keeping my M43 gear. It's not worth selling it I won't even get that much for it.
Hello from New york City! Which website can import a jpeg and determine the shutter count of the camera? Thanks for the informative video.
There are several to choose from if you google ‘sony shutter count’ and they all work pretty much the same way. I happened to use apotelyt.com for no particular reason except it’s the one I saw and clicked on. tools.science.si looks like an easy and no-fluff type of website you might want to check out
Very good analysis. I am considering the same move. The weight is in the lenses. Fast full-frame lenses are heavy. Sony has a set of small primes but slower. One thing I am concerned about is whether or not the image quality of m43 is good enough to sell in the fine art arena. At the lower end it may not matter, but at the higher end the detail available from higher resolution and greater dynamic range is noticeable when compared side by side or by the trained eye,. Thanks for your excellent analysis that included a set of parameters and their impact on a potential decision.
Color is the same for all cameras if you shoot in RAW and edit your pictures yourself. The new OM1 is the best camera I've owned, expensive? Yes, but much cheaper than other high end cameras. It's a fabulous camera and whit olympus pro lenses a dream.
True, but even when editing RAW, it is nice to have the in-camera color options available to you to choose from (in lightroom for example). Some of them are just really nice. It'd be awesome if it's something you can download and add into lightroom, but the ones I've found are so expensive...
Looking forward for the OM5 or even OM10 with the new sensor. I think could be a potential home run!
Mft needs some more user skill I find, full frame gives you more leaway / room for error. High iso is ok on my em5iii, but color shifts and significant drop in dr means that I must nail exposure and whitebalance in Raw. Same goes for shallow depth of field. Its possible, but you must know how to do it. Counterwise mft forces me to look more at the composition because of this limitation and improved my photography.
All in all I definitely think full frame has image quality advantages, especially in color fidelity at high iso, but its like a 25% improvement for me.
Well said! I mentioned in one of my previous videos that one of the caveats to getting the best out of a micro four thirds camera is nailing exposure, which considering the huge selection of cheap prime lenses in that system, really isn't that difficult. I think it's a productive form of limitation, that really rewards you for learning in detail. Those kinds of hobbies are the best kinds in my opinion!
@@QawiemJamil right, and that explained it why I have so much fun using this system :). I Will check out your other videos
Did ff solve your GAS if speaking about camera bodies only?
Yes, but only to a certain extent... but the reasons become much more specific and consequently harder to justify. For example, my a7iii has the older AF system. Even though it hardly ever lets me down, I would like to try/have the newer AF system. This makes me want the a7iv, or even better would be a7c mark ii if that ever happens.
@@QawiemJamil :D we are just kids always wanting them new toys
For the most part, the E-M1II, Fuji XS10, Lumix G9, GH5II, and Sony a6600 are so close in comparison, it basically comes down to feature set, ergonomics, and price. I am of the frame of mind that cameras today hardly lack for anything, rather people do…
Full Frame dominates perception, but everything else is realistically subjective…
…
Couldn't have said it better myself! It's difficult to find a truly bad camera nowadays, but it is equally difficult to find a great value camera because value is so subjective. The fact that a lot of people are not even sure of what they truly want only adds to the problem.
And here I am, in 2023, trying to sell my A7III and A7IV and all of my lenses to MFT. Lumix G9 especially...Hahaha..
And about the softness, it's because A7III had an AA Filter to minimize AA of course. And that makes the image looks softer.
Every system has its perks that's for sure. I actually traded my a7iii for an a7c a few months ago. I've paired it with a 35mm and 75mm f/1.8. It's a nice and compact system to carry around. I've been enjoying it a lot. The number one thing I miss since moving away from MFT is stabilization especially for video.
Oh that's right! I forgot about the AA filter.
@@QawiemJamil Can you help me, how the A7C stacks up against the LumixGX9? Not about the technology comparison but how the camera makes the photography process fun and simple, does the A7C gives you that?
I'm willing to let go of the A7III and A7IV, but there's one of my favorite lenses on the e-mount that I don't want to let go of. So A7C is one of my choice, for a nice compact setup, so I hope I can shoot photo every day.. Thank you.
@@fauzanazhima I enjoy using my A7C very much, but not more than my GX9. This is because I enjoyed how the MFT system gave me easy access to wide up to super telephoto focal lengths while still keeping the size very compact. I also enjoyed the excellent stabilization, which made it easy for me to take videos without needing to edit. Also, the GX9 is just better designed and very easy to handle and operate. This is not the case for the A7C but you learn how to work with it eventually by customising the buttons and quick access menu to your liking. I barely had to change anything on my GX9 - everything made sense and was within reach. Also, with my A7c, I am only willing to bring with me a maximum of two compact prime lenses, or one zoom lens at any one time. With that said, I would not consider trading my A7C for a GX9 because I am not willing to give up on the dynamic range, noise performance and autofocus performance, all of which are more important to me right now.
@@QawiemJamil Thank you very much for your sincere and detailed answer, as you said, seeing “whatever I need right now” gave me confidence to just sell may camera and go with MFT. I missed taking photo and video everywhere I go, and right now I mostly don’t do it because the needs to “babysit” my A7iv because of the pricetag and also the bulkiness.
Maybe what I need will change again in the future I don’t know, but if that happens I hope A7CII is already out..
Thanks again. 🙏🏻
Sounds like one of those kinky gotta try it blat least once before I die camera system changes. Lol
In all seriousness it was a mistake for you to even have considered getting into a FF sensor system. I think you knew what you were getting into but just couldn't resist wanting to try it to see the difference.
Truth is most people who upgrade have hardly outgrown their existing cameras. Everyone loves to shell out the advice you did, which is if the current camera is serving you well and hasn't hindered your creativity and growth don't upgrade. Yet they ALL say this after the fact that they themselves have upgraded, and I think such videos are more therapeutic than anything.
I recently switched systems from Fourthirds sensors to FF, with the Sony Alpha 7R Mark V. I have genuinely outgrown the camera many, many years ago. I shot at 10MP with the Olympus E-3 for 15 years, and I can tell you while I absolutely adore the camera and it's wonderful lenses, it was heavy, with ISO quality maxing out at 3200 (with heavy noise) and IBIS that was in its infancy. It's a technological dinosaur compared to the a7RV. But I don't plan to sell it or any of my lenses. I will likelu still shoot with it, if for any reason shits and giggles.
you seem like a methodical guy. i think going sony was a good idea.
i was pretty good with a g9 and also even a gx85 (that only has 16mp) for photos, although i thought i wouldnt be.
however, if doing video, sony has considerable advantages. bigger dynamic range and excellent tracking in video (at least on zv-e10, a6400 and a7c - regarding your set budget) are very nice additions to have. it's almost impossible to get a good image on mft on family scenes with movement indoors (you have to increase f stop to 10-14 to get everything in focus, since you cant rely on tracking or it will ruin the video, and so you now have to crank the iso sometimes to 6400, which really looks bad on the image - u could drop the shutterspeed to 25 instead of 50, but then it doesnt look filmic on fast movement and you still have to up the iso).
in general, filming a family scene with movement is hard, because of the unreliable focusing (i dont see how one could do it manually successfully, with sudden unpredictable moves of the "actors").
neither em1ii, nor em1iii, nor xs10 have reliable af (i hear xs10 and fuji in general are pretty bad with this) in video.
dynamic range i think is inferior on olympus (not sure about om1, but i imagine it too) to even a6400, if not even a6300, which was released in 2016...
also, olympus doesnt have a proper log file (again, not sure if om1's log is better, now that it has 10bit).
another downside on olympus (this time, even on om1) is that sharpness only goes down to "-2", and that is very visible when you try to get a filmic softer look - you hardly can do it.
until om1, olympus didnt have zebras, so exposure on video was quite unreliable.
i'm not very keen on a7iii, mainly because it doesnt track and the processor seems doesnt support it (won't ever get it as an update). a7c does it very good.
You've touched on several good points here! Thanks for sharing.
Micro four thirds sensors in a side-by-side comparison with a full frame sensor (or even a really good APS-C sensor like Fuji's) have that cropped sensor look (sharp, digital and less dynamic range) so in terms of pure image quality, I'm enjoying my sony a7iii. The sony a7c would have been nicer, but given the price I got it at, it was an absolute bargain and I gain entry into the sony e-mount system.
However, there is one major(-ish) downside to moving to full frame that I have come to realise after using it for 5 months now, and it has to do with the lenses. In the M43 system, it is very easy to find affordable, fast lenses that are optically excellent! In the full-frame universe, it is not. You've really got to fork out the big bucks if you want an optically excellent fast lens. For everyday photography, issues involving chromatic aberration, longitudinal chromatic aberration, vignette, coma, and plane of focus, are things that are manageable. But I'm into astrophotography as well, which is absurdly demanding when it comes to lens performance. I'm getting what I paid for I guess.
At this point in time, considering the popularity and price of the a7c, the better AF performance doesn't justify it for me because it's already pretty darn good on the a7iii. I still want it though, but I would have to sell my a7iii at a good price to reduce that price gap.
Damn, i guessed 5000.. so close
When you take Sony,maybe you just take a A7iv don't a6000 series,when take fuuji x-s10 better apsc
good point. the A6X00 series of sony cameras need a refresh!
After your twenty minutes video I ask myself: so what did this guy decide? Where is he going from here? Did he regret? Sort of unclear...
In the comments you do sort of seem to regret, maybe.
You say you are doing a PhD, will you will need a clear conclusion at the end of all the work there. But your video leaves some of us a bit unclear (?).
Luckily this isn't my phd thesis! The uncertainty that you've interpreted is exactly what I feel about this whole experience. It's pure honestly from my end. What I shared were the context, my decisions, and feelings about it - which you seem to have captured accurately that I am sort of indifferent about the whole transition. This is exactly what I wanted to communicate!
I am finally convinced that full frame is not unquestionably better that micro four thirds. If you have gear acquisition syndrome, this might be something worth hearing. I think that a lot of small sensor users, just like me, have a 'big sensor' itch that is hard to scratch. I'm lucky enough to have experienced this and find out that it's no big deal - and I don't have to worry about missing out on full frame glory ever again. Which means if I do move back to micro four thirds for whatever reason, I'll be ok with it!
If it means anything to you, my definite answer is that no, I don't regret moving to full frame. But the more precise answer is no, I don't regret purchasing the a7iii. Would I be happier if I just stuck with micro four thirds - I honestly don't know. The a7iii satisfies all my photography needs. At least I now know that full frame is not something I have to preserve as my must-have camera spec.
@@QawiemJamil Use the Sony for portrait, scenic and low light shooting, and buy a Lumix GX-9 or OM camera for street photography. All bases covered. If starting totally fresh, I do wonder if Fujifilm ticks all the boxes -- maybe so. Alas, if a person cannot master APS-C and MFT formats, they likely need not venture into FF cameras. Really, the MFT ratio of 4:3 works well on the street, as well as, the great deepness of view, even at f2.8 to f4, one never worries about getting a whole story, front to back. Contrast detect, using single area of focus, on most MFT lenses is fast and accurate. For portraits and scenics, that Sony FF sensor sure can help bring up the shadows, and there is simply more to play with --- even most APS-C give you more to play with -- less worry about getting it wrong. Canon metering system is pretty good, as is the JPG out of camera, with the only lacking element being less dynamic range. Low light ISO performance is OK. If a person has a particular use, more often used, then buy the system for that use. Or just buy lightly into another system to bridge the gap. No need to be all in. I use many different cameras, but would not recommend doing so, as at times your brain will explode trying to remember the differences in which you are holding at the time. :o Take care, Loren Schwiderski ( my site will update on or before 15th )
Too much bokeh…
Try the gx85. For the price used, you get the 90% of gx9 experience for half price. Then you’ll need again the 15 mm 1,7 and 25mm 1,4. But no way from your previous prices. Bottom line, you can have both systems.
Just use the right tool for the job.
This guy could make more videos after leaving m43. Is that clear? Lol😂
haha perhaps! I've tried but I haven't found a topic to discuss that hasn't been touched on by every camera youtuber. I will when I find something that is worth saying
𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙢𝙤𝙨𝙢
Yes it was a big mistake
Thinking about Sony?....hold your head in shame!
LOL!
A PhD, huh?
I regret ever mentioning it
Vote it down folks!
Maybe get a diction coach? Otherwise have your videos 1.75x sped up...
lol thanks for the advice. Fortunately for you, the power is in your hands. Chapters and video speed is only a click away
@@QawiemJamil thanx for sharing.. I like the speed of your words👍 i dont like at all the fast speaking youtubers its not natural to speak without think🤬
Kindest Regards,
apsc, mft, ff user
OMG is your PhD in " BORING PEOPLE" are we there yet zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz