Is NOW the perfect time to go Micro 4/3?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 вер 2024
- With new Micro 4/3 cameras being released, is now the time to make the jump? Let's find out...
🖥️ MY PORTFOLIO:
www.joshuapeg.com
Use this link to get a FREE MONTH'S access to the music I use:
👉 share.epidemic... 👈
(Using this link supports this channel too 😁)
If you want to see my thought process behind my photos, FOLLOW ME on social media 👇
"@thejoshuapeg" - Наука та технологія
@9:15 I’m not sure you’re correct about aperture. Yes, F2.8 on a 2x crop gives you the depth of field of 5.6 equivalent. But you still get the same light to the sensor as 2.8.
You get the same light per square inch. But ff gets 4x more light because it's four times larger
@@video-carl
In other words you get the same light, but the image circle on a FF lens is bigger than a m4/3 lens.
People do not understand when you say 4x more light, they think its 4 times brighter, which its not, its just 4 times bigger image circle thats output at the back of the lens.
@@SMGJohn that's right; at the same focal length a ff sensor will collect 4x more light across a 4x bigger image; same light at any spot. m43 will collect ¼ of the light but across ¼ of the image size of ff.
@@video-carl A full frame sensor is only 2x larger not 4x larger.
@@kevinfairbairn7922ff is twice as long and twice as wide. It would take four m43 sensors to cover a ff sensor.
Proud user of LUMIX MFT cameras since 2008. Never looked back.
You hit the nail on the head. I spend all year wondering if I need full frame, one week in Ogwen Valley and I’m like “nope” m43 make sense when you walk with your camera gear. Love the channel mate.
You said it! I was all full frame, then tried MFT, now I only have one FF, but I don't use it as much, not as fun!
Having that lens is great for your "walkabout" photography. The range will give you a ton of creative options.
I have a lumix gx80 with the 12-60 and 45-150 which covers all i need as a walk about camera and it fits in a very small sling bag and the quality of the images are very good when edited in affinity photo
Appreciate your "down to earth" videos. Keep them coming!
I went from APS-C to full frame to MFT. I bought my first MFT camera in 2015 but I never stopped using full frame. I absolutely love my OM System/Olympus kit and it excels in long focal lengths and light weight, but it does have its drawbacks. They are generally noisier and really not great in low light. It's not terrible, but it can't compare with a full frame camera, and I do a lot of blue hour photography. I use the MFT kit for travel and the full frame kit for local shoots, which does include cityscapes, landscapes, and other commercial type of shoots. I think that's a good split of duties, as it were, doing what each camera system does best. I don't foresee giving up either system anytime soon. In fact, I just upgraded from a DSLR to a mirrorless full frame.
I do think that MFT has kind of reached its megapixel limits, which is why the Olympus/OM System top-end cameras have been stuck at 20mp for years. The megapixel count is not important for its own sake, but it does give some leeway for cropping when you can't physically move closer to the subject.
I left full frame for MFT a year ago. My main body is the Panasonic G9, the first version. From 2017. It offers so much more than the Z5 I had. Same price, so much better.
Seriously, people put way too much emphasis on the sensor size.
I agree with you. I've had a G9 since 2018. Still so feature packed and well built. I have also a G9ii bought at a $500 trade in bonus discount last January. I get the FF itch every so often but in good light no more is needed.
- Huge DOF(awesome for streets and landscape)
- Possibly best battery capacity. The battery on my OM1 mrk II lasts for days.
- Price for what you get. Bought my OM1 mrk II used for 450usd. Beat the one if you can!
- Len's possibilities. Small primes for peanut money.
- Build quality. Both Olympus and Panasonic.
Recently purchased the G9ii and so far no complaints. I think what isn't mentioned often enough is the handling. Most intuitive and fun camera I have ever used (also love the LUT features)
And after a recent trip to Amsterdam.... That humidity and heat was no joke.
I use MFT since 2013 and i love it! Bought it, because i have small hands and the lower weight. The rest of my equipment is heavy enough to carry around😂, i use a 12-60 lens, a 12 wideangle and a 45-200 telezoom from Panasonic lumix.
I JUST bought a new (to me) APSC DSLR, I did not need to see this video right now haha. Love it though, great video per usual :) Also, that first pic of the path was amazing.
APS-C is great
If you stick with MFT may I suggest that you get a Panasonic 200mm Prime lens. It is astonishingly pin-sharp at f2.8. I got mine second hand from MPB.
All my lenses are Panasonic like my camera because I'm too scared to buy any Olympus glass because I don't know if it will play nicely with my Panasonic bodies. However I do have my beady eye on an Olympus 300mm Prime lens, but I won't get one till somebody can let me know if the lens and body will work together.
I'm here in Tasmania, so I understand how a 25~30deg day can be uncomfortable. Not only am I acclimatised to lower temps (it's 12 right now ands I'm inside in a singlet), the heat produced at lower temps in higher and lower latitudes is entirely different. I understand it as being largely to do with the much thinner atmospheric protection. Because, like the oceans which heap up at the equator due to centrifugal force, so does the atmosphere. We are both at about 30% of equatorial atmospheric cover, so more direct sunlight and uv etc.
You're going to be the owner of a 4/3 camera is my prediction. Henry Turner has settled on it too because he does a lot of mountains. Seems like a real solution for hiking to me.
Cost. Bulk. Weight. Weather sealing. The combined reasons I use MFT (Oly bodies & glass)
Literally just got a used om system OM1, incredible price and I'm having a blast with it for my first MFT
The EM1.2 or EM1.3 are better. Still.
@@formermpc10 meh im quite happy with this for the price
Hmm, yeah I think you are wrong about apertures. A M43 lens with an aperture of f/2.8 will, for any given scene, have the same shutter speed and ISO as a full frame f/2.8. It will have a greater depth of field, but for landscape and most wildlife that’s an advantage!
If you liked the LUMIX try an Om Systems Om-1 - a properly pro camera in a package smaller than a Nikon Z6, for example.
Re:blurry backgrounds, yes you need to start using f/1.8 or f/1.4 lenses to get a large effect, but while on FF f/1.4 lenses are large heavy and expensive, on M43 they are small light and cheap!
I run with both and use M43 for travel and concerts where size and weight are the driving factors. You can assemble a second hand body and a full set of lenses for about the same as a decent single zoom for FF.
m4/3 is a blessing to digital photography. Used gear super cheap. and the new gear is still relevant .
My goto landscape/general setup is currently the G9ii with the 3 PL F/2.8-4 zooms + the 1.4TC. It's been great for landscape and the IQ is definitely a step up from my og G9. What I'm really hoping for next from m43 is a good updated small/medium sized body (no, the OM5 rebadging doesn't count). I still use my GX8 and GM1 and honestly like them more than the G9ii, except when IQ matters, and when using the 50-200.
Enjoyed that video, thanks. I've used mostly M43 for 11 years. I've tried Fuji twice and Canon FF but always moved back. You mentioned the compromises but they are all remediable. As you say, bracket for dynamic range (or use the built in ND grad in the latest OMD body), use one of the noise reduction software packages for higher iso noise, etc etc. Being able to carry a body and zooms from 24-800 equivalent in a shoulder bag is superb for an outdoor photographer who's out all day.
Oh, and as you mentioned, I haven't needed to use a tripod for months.
With todays software. Full frame gives NOTHING extra, apart from weight and cost. Arguably ?. Yes.
In my experience in mountain hikes, it is also easier to get a sunburn. May not even seem hot, perhaps less atmosphere to block the rays?? Hope you have a hat somewhere!
You raise some valid points for using m43. It is a popular format for landscape photographers. I could easily see choosing it for its compact form factor.
Awesome video. Great to see common sense info on photography in the real world. Love your content and images 🙌
For me another advantage is using micro 4/3 for travel.
Yeah, point 1 is pretty valid, I took a full frame 5D mark II backpacking in British Columbia with a plastic fantastic and I almost wish I took my 80D or Rebel SL2 (if I still had it). 50mm f/1.8 isn't a large lens but the body is still heavy no matter how you look at it
About once a year I'll toy with the idea of getting an OM-1. I'll also consider getting an XT-5. But, I always find enough reasons not to buy into an Olympus or Fuji system. My full frame cameras and lenses are Sony. But, I wanted a smaller and lighter system for travel. So, I currently use an A7CR with a 16-35 GM II, a 50mm 1.4 GM, and 70-200 G II. Works for me.
Good to avoid the OM-1 series.
@@formermpc10 If someone else wants to shoot Olympus, Fuji, or any other brand, who am I to disagree? Use whatever works for you. As for me, I'm sticking with, Sony,
OM 5 plus 12/45 and 40/150 both F4 or the 14/150 F4/5.6 good combs are you happy with the osprey bag is it the stratos 36 or 34l good video
This is also why I like Canon's APS-C mirrorless. I have a 1.6 crop factor. Not as much weight savings as M43 for lenses, but still significant. I also get better depth of field for landscape than full-frame. The Lumix G95 has my interest. I bit smaller than the G9.
Unfortunately canon don't support their APSC cameras with quality APSC lenses. For them, APSC is just a gateway drug into their FF cameras so APSC is an afterthought
Canon APS-C requires use of third party lenses and while Sigma primes for Canon are small and really good, every other brand makes huge lenses, in fact only Sony makes small compact APS-C lenses, are they are not as good as Leica or Olympus on micro 4/3 system, mark my word on that, way more distortions, flaring issues and overall not as sharp or contrasty. Also Sony uses this silly rangefinder body style which I am not a huge fan of, but you might be, its worth a checkout.
Hint. MFT offers portable camera systems. The UK humidity is the same as you get in hell-holes like Melbourne in Oz
I want to point out, regarding the aperture, you're able to get lenses with more light for MFT than you are for full frame. That's really the only point of comparison between MFT lenses and full frame lenses.
When you stated that the micro 4/3 on a 2.8 let's in less like than a full frame camera that is not exactly correct, because a 4/3 body has a 2x crop factor tw0 thins happen , a 12mm less gives you a angle of view as a 24 mm full frame cameras and the depth of field is equivalent on a 2.8 lens to 5.6, but the exposure of a2.8 lens is not affected, dynamic range is affected due to the Eastern smaller sensor and pixel density as far as camera body size goes Olympus bodies tend to be smaller than the new Panasonic G9 mkII, I Have the Panasonic S5 MKII and by full frame camera is not a big camera but for 4/3 it is on the large side as was the Panasonic G9 . But smaller camera bodies have a drawback, the buttons and dials are smaller and closer together and you have a smaller grip and that makes it harder with large lens. I have many camera systems in my collection 0f cameras that cover full frame, APSC and Micro 4/3 and I enjoy using them all but if I would choose one system from general photography I would go with APSC.
FWTW An over looked Panasonic lens is the 35-100 4-5.6. A tiny lens lens which full frame is an 70-200 granted its not a 2.8, Its also not in that price range can be had £200 Good on MPB. Used it few weeks ago at a graduation for portraits shots.
The bodies are typically smaller - that LUMIX is the exception which proves the rule.
I get lovely blurry backgrounds from M43
Fun fact, crop sensor lenses needs to be much sharper and use higher quality glass then full frame lenses which can use lower quality lenses but they also need to be bigger, so why are full frame lenses more expensive? Well its like you said, its just more material overall needed and of course, more glass.
But full frame lenses are ironically, less sharp then crop sensor glass is, a lot of people say FF glass is superior, have no idea what they are on about, its quite the opposite.
I love my om system ❤
I've a gx9 and G9. I rarely use my full frame and apsc Nikons any more or tripod for that matter, except to keep the composition from moving
The G9ii is tempting but I'm not into birding etc so I can't really justify the upgrade
I shoot M43. But if you have full frame you can just go into crop mode.
So it's kind of a advantage and kind of not depending on how you look at it.
You would need at least 60mp Sony A7r4 for a 2x crop thats as sharp as the Panasonic GH5 or Olympus E-M1 mark II.
unfortunately i still got to take my 2 FF + tripods(and big lenses) up every mountain I go ...koz I shoot lot of low light stuff
The more you do it the more you get in shape, the more you know how to use the straps on your backpack for additional comfort, and you tend to invest in the best backpack out there too(for comfort, back and shoulders)
it's a different game BUT yes would love to switch to lighter weights ....when it happens it happens i guess
I bought the Olympus EM-5mkII back when it was new. Aside from the horrible user interface it’s a great camera, the IBIS is amazing and it takes fantastic pictures, probably more so now that there are so many great post processing option’s available usuch as DxO PureRaw4 or Topaz AI. My mistake was to buy it with the Oly 12-40 f2.8 pro lens. Like you, I carried it on my backpack strap but it was too unwieldy for me.
Talking of carrying, what method do you use? That looks like an Osprey (Stratos?) pack but is that a waist bag too? I’ve thought about doing that but the hip straps on my Osprey have storage pockets that get in the way.
I sold a sony A7R4 sony to buy an olympus OM-1. The sony was massive overkill that gave me nothing over the olympus. BUT a s l o w computer. I print 30x40 inch with the oly.
Panasonic needs to pack some of the newer features into a G80/90 sized body.
How high does the humidity get over there? I live in the middle of the USA, and our weather is all over the place, I think we get just about everything here lol
I just looked up the hottest day here last summer( I remember how hot it was because we went to an air show) and it was 40.5 C with a heat index of about 53 C. It was BRUTAL! I got some good shots or the planes, though!
Re: Dynamic range, surely the closer to the range of the human eye (about 21 stops) the better ?
The display media trail cameras' DR by a long shot. Most prints can't display over 6-7 stops. Most displays can't display over 8 stops. The best HDR displays can just about display 10-11 stops.
Your eyes adjust dynamic range all the time, the real DR of the human eye is actually more like 6 to 8 stops, but your eyes adjust in such an Incredible quick time, also the ISO performance of a human eye is something like 400 LOL, but our brains are just excellent at noise reduction.
Our eyes are quite flawed overall, but our brains are fantastic computers that make a good image, thats not to say smartphones can do the same, obviously there is a limitation of physics a smaller sensors cannot overcome, only a big sensor can overcome, but a 1-inch sensor with appropriate software, could theoretically achieve a perfect human vision.
when you say they have to double the aperture : that only applies to the depth of field. Not the aperture
I love everything about M43 except the aperture. With wildlife, I need as much light as I can get and I can only decrease shutter speed so much before the animal is blurry from movement. If someone is going to solve this, my money is on Olympus!
You need F4 or F2.8 lenses which are typically better built and cheaper than FF F5.6 lenses. If you want faster than that on FF then prepare to sell your brand new car!
Well I mean you are in luck, Olympus 75mm F1.8 which has a field of view of 150mm in full frame terms. There is nothing longer at that speed to my knowledge, you could slap a 135mm F2 Canon lens I suppose, wont be as sharp though!
What is the problem with aperture? The doubling effect is just depth of field not light gathering. An f/4 mFT long telephoto will let you set same shutter speed and iSO as an f/4 full frame.
@@StuartAnderton
You do not double aperture, the aperture is the same, the only thing that changes in a lens for crop sensor is the field of view.
25mm m4/3 lens will have same field of view as a 50mm lens of a full frame, but the same bokeh as a 25mm full frame lens.
@@SMGJohn If you say a 25mm M43 lens is the equivalent of a 50mm FF lens, then I think it’s important to know that a 25mm f/1.8 will not have the same depth of field as a 50mm f/1.8 - it will instead match a 50mm f/2.5 because DoF varies with focal length as well as aperture. Optically it is a 25mm lens, with the same DoF as a FF 25mm would have
Thank you for the video. I use MFT for general photography and I love the system. I am fortunate enough to own an f1.2 45mm lens, which I use for portraits. I can assure you that the bokeh from this lens is more than sufficient.
In my totally biased opinion, an OM-1 Mkii would be a better choice for you than the G9 Mkii.
I've used m43 for more than a decade. I no longer recommend it for serious photographers.
Please stop spreading fallacies. F2.8 is aperture to focal length it has absolutely nothing to do with any sensor size. In fact, F2.8 is the reason an MFT lens is smaller than an FF lens. Light particles or waves aren't big, so what's this nonsense you need large pixels? Do your light particles wear gumboots?
The fallacies you wasted your breath on have absolutely nothing to do with image quality.
Why is there the denial that the most popular cameras, mobile phones, are popular as the images they produce are liked by billions of people?
You hinted at the problem with Full Frame with a reference to Leica, an excellent product if you don't want to show where the subject of a photograph was.
A camera with interchangeable lenses can produce photographs a mobile phone would struggle to produce, that doesn't mean those photographs are any better.
The alternative would be everyone would choose to use even larger formats than Full Frame.
So cut out this comparison, not as good as nonsense, please.
If you get Sony full frame camera with Tamron 20-40mm 2.8 and 50-400mm 4.5 - 6.3, then the whole package to carry is quite light. You can crop full frame 61MP down M43 equivalent. M43 does not really give you weight saving. You can go from full frame to M43 but not the other way.
60 MP divided by 4= 15MP
61MP sensors have their own disadvantages. At the high a MP count you throw away the FF low light advantage and also gain slower readout times, burst rates and massive file sizes.
@@JoeMaranophotography
Also they are prone to micro-jitter which causes reduction in sharpness, the Sony A7r4 and r5 do have IBIS but its only effective to like 1/20th of a stop, which is WAY worse than Olympus or Panasonic which can do 1 second handheld exposures.
@@JoeMaranophotography That's not true, larger pixels do not give better lowlight capabilities the sensor size is the main factor. Richard Butler debunked this like 5 years ago, when comparing a 12mp and a 45mp full frame sensor you get similar amounts of noise. You'll only se a difference at the pixel level 1:1 but that is not how anyone views images.
@FlappySock Why does the GH5s have less megapixels and the Sony A7S series? Because it's better for low light
Just too expensive for m4/3.
Another channel that delete comments 🤦♂️
I was already to go M4/3 until the bodies swelled up to full frame size and weight thereby leaving ASPC as the better option