People need to look at m43 as the 16mm of the digital videography world. People are still shooting great stuff on 16mm celluloid and they’re choosing it for certain reasons. The same can be said for the m43 format.
This was a great video - also enjoyed seeing a bit of photography on your channel, and thank you for sharing the photos and your experience! 🎉 One thing that really fits with marrying lenses: for wildlife photographers, there is something nice about having lighter and smaller lenses on the longest focal length lenses. You still will need a tripod. You're still going to be carrying a heavy tube. But the Panasonic 100-300mm takes decent pictures for hobbyists at a relatively affordable price (used). The other side is arguably true: the Sigma 18-35mm is heavy and large, but if I really need photos in low, uncontrolled lighting, it's been excellent with the Viltrox EF-M2 and functions like as ~12-50 f/1.2. Likewise for adapting full frame Canon EF lenses to get a f/0.9 with autofocus using my Metabones XL (decent fun for some used gear) If I wanted to marry a lens system that I could use for low light indoor photography and outdoor birding, on camera bodies ranging in size from my G100 w/ 9mm f/1.7 all the way to my G9ii with the Sigma, Canon, or native Leica lenses, I can't imagine a more versatile mount. I think you mentioned versatility in your other video as well, but thought this comment could be an interesting POV for you to understand your viewers and why they watch your content. As well as another take for anyone reading the comments. Appreciate both of you for the hard work you put into managing a YT channel alongside your business and thanks once more for sharing your experiences!
I know I really focus on Video a lot in this channel because that’s what I do for work and that’s what I’m most comfortable talking about but I really do love photography even if it is mostly just for fun and a hobby. It’s such a difficult decision and I’m really glad that I did go ahead and invest in both systems but for me I still really feel like I’m picking micro 4/3 over full frame for most things! It’s not that MFT IS small. It isn’t. It’s that it CAN be small and pro and everything in between.
Given that I now have some lovely back problems, the entire kit weight plays a big role as to why I don't change to FF format. Might be fun to pick one up for astrophotography or other really low light shooting... but much like a drone, it would be an occasional use thing and stay in the car most days. Edit- also what a lot of us are hoping for the future of m43 is a return to smaller bodies! Please give us a GX8ii or GM5ii !!!!!!!
For sure the back pain is real! I actually after 12hr shoot days will do some massage guns, then I use my gyms hydrobeds at least 4-5 times a weel, get regularly adjusted, plus slowly incoporating yoga 😅
@@MatthewDangyou I have inoperable and shot discs in both lower and upper back, and si joints going out too. I now have to stretch before even going to bed, it's just silly. 20 years in the military is great to be able to retire in your early 40s, but it was not kind to my body.
I think people often say “dynamic range” when they mean “shadow recovery”. The absolute numbers of stops of DR are pretty close, but you definitely see a difference in shadow recovery when you have to underexpose the foreground to preserve highlights in a backlit scene.
Really glad I clicked this, great video guys. I wanna weigh in, I have a GH5 and a S5IIX and I use them both pretty regularly. I wish I had a bigger lens selection but I am just getting started trying to make money with my cameras. I watch Mathew quite a bit because of how much Lumix stuff he does. Anyway I would have said that full frame was better if it were a couple of years ago but idk now. I have gotten some really cool pictures and videos on my GH5 and I really enjoy it. I love the S5IIX too, it's amazing but it's almost too good if that makes sense? like I nail every pic and it's always perfect (crazy complaint right) The micro 4/3's just has more character sometimes. The lenses are stupid cheap. I have not paid over $100 for any of the lenses except for a Sirui Cine lens I bought. But and this is a big BUT for what the GH7 costs and for what a S5IIX costs I would pick the S5IIX every time. I would never pay that much for a micro 4/3rds camera. Like my mind would never let me do that. I will prob hang on to the ole GH5 for a long time. It still holds up today and prob will for a while but I am gonna retire it soon as a b cam and go with either the OG S5 or another S5IIX for a b-cam or if Lumix comes out with another non S9 FF cam I may get that if I can afford it and use the S5IIX for a B cam. I just want the continuity of the lenses and even though there is hardly any work I have to do tho make my 2 current cameras match they sometimes don't in low light and some there are other circumstances too. I just want a easy work flow. There is enough stuff thats a headache I don't need matching camera to be another one. Thanks for the vid, it was really good! I think the M4/3 video looked great but I do think Mathew's actual Pics were an edge better. :)
@@MatthewDangyou ha, love those full frame sensors man. Love your content too. Thanks for teaching me how to have a better channel myself. Both of you!
The OM Systems OM-1ii has 14-bit raw now. And comes closer to full frame high ISO and dynamic. And if you use DXO PureRaw for stills you get very close of the best full frame. But full frame will be better with DXO PureRaw also.
Interesting conversation, the point of future lens development is what has recently pushed me a little more towards the idea of jumping towards FF with the L-Mount Alliance. Something tells we'll get good news next week in that regard ;)
I wanted to go a little past the standard conversations of why a full frame sensors could be "better" and I think we did with stuff like this! MFT is nearly complete. The Full Frame stuff could just be getting started.
@@RhettThompsonFilm they absolutely can, they're all similar tools for similar purposes. A truck isn't better than a sedan, but it is better than a sedan to some people. Likewise, if you only eat spaghetti for every meal you probably use a fork but maybe chopsticks would be a better fit even if the popular narrative doesn't agree. I enjoyed the video btw, you put out good content! I was just thinking "out loud" on the keyboard.
@@zachbenson9548 haha I understand completely! And it is a great question because I don’t think this topic is as important or as relevant as some think but it is fun to chat about! Mostly as a thought experiment.
@@RhettThompsonFilm I've shot FF, APS-C and MFT... I've never seen the final product and thought it would look better on a different sensor size. However, I have thought I'd rather have a different system at the moment because of all the other things that go along with it. I'd rather not haul lumber with a sedan but it doesn't mean I can't make it work once in a while!
I have followed one hiking/nature youtuber who used earlier MFT GH6 and now uses S5mk2 full frame. The videos with GH6 was noisy and most evening videos has hard clipped highlights and bad colors. Now with full frame his videos are nice and clean. The difference even in daylight is easily visible. It seems that it is easier to have good quality with full frame.
@@vesku2676 if the difference during the daytime is that apparent then I have to assume there was some major user error going on. During bright light conditions and properly exposed it should be incredibly hard to tell between full frame and micro 4/3 especially after youtube compression although at night I’m sure the difference is literally night and day
I think if someone owns mft, from a photography perspective, the case where ff would be “better” is in the high resolution cameras while using wide angles. For supertelephoto, getting 800mm at f6.3 light gathering in ff is not cheap or easy. I think that’s what keeps me in, the idea of not being able to afford or replace a lens in a certain focal lenght, or not be able to carry more than 2 lenses on a photowalk.
I think the ff lowlight thing is a little overblown. Unless you're shooting at 1.2 or 1.4 for an entire wedding or portrait shoot, bokeh really doesn't matter. Most shooters want to get more than an eyelash in focus. Also, speed lights exist.
Clients don't care about M43 or full frame. Go look at Nick Ghionis he shoots Olympus and was a ambassador. He's also Jerry Ghionis who is a Nikon ambassador.
When you have more than one person you can't have shallow DOF, where the ears and nose are out of focus, as someone will move their head out of focus. Shallow DOF only works on one person and then you have the 75mm F1.8m you can get just the eyes in focus...FF has nice compression, 50-150mm f2.8 can do that but camera to subject distance is laaaaarge
This right here is s great demonstration why the S9 is such a disappointment. The lack of a EVF is such a letdown. Dude squinting every second trying to get see the screen 😅
Yeah I got blue eyes, glasses, and astigmatism plus looking directly into the sun😂 But in all honesty the lack of an evf only bothered me at first, now I got completely use to it
In fact, full frame is superior to MFT in highlights, not in low light, i.e. in recovering shadows, and therefore you can get better results with MFT in low light. The ISO equivalent of MFT to full frame is multiplied by 4, so you don't have to increase the ISO, what you have to do is overexpose. (The noise problem in MFT comes from underexposure) and it is advisable to use faster lenses since you have the advantage of not having such a short depth of field and getting more light. Regarding MFT lenses, in most cases you can get all or almost all the sharpness at full aperture, and in full frame you have to close 1 or 2 steps of the diagram in many lenses, i.e., the concept of less depth of field falls apart. Something they don't mention regarding ISO is that the more you increase the ISO, the more dynamic range you lose, and therefore the concept of greater dynamic range in full frame falls apart, i.e., you can get more dynamic range in MFT. I must mention that the biggest advantage in mft is the stabilizer to get more light, more dynamic range and more stable and sharper images because you can lower the shutter speed more and therefore get more light without losing image quality. In conclusion, you can get the same or better results in low light conditions in mft since everything is in favor of the smaller sensor but most people don't know how to use it and compare it in the same conditions as full frame.
Ummm in low light full frame wins hands down. Check out my review of the GH7 vs S5iiX. Same exact settings the image breaks apart so much faster for video. Sure for photos you can get similar results but that is different than video. In video full frame is king with the exact same settings the image quality is far superior
Highlights still blow at around +3 stops above middle grey on both formats, and full frame is capable of being overexposed as well as m43, so you can either blow your highlights or preserve them and recover shadows. For shadow recovery, full frame wins easily.
I'm only halfway through your video but it is helping me. I saved for a couple of years to go to Scotland and paid for a tour of the Highlands to do photography. Unfortunately, someone close to me took risks and gave me COVID when I was in Scotland. Getting sick and returning home early instead of going to the Highlands messed with my desire to get out there. Since August, I have read or watched little about photography because I felt broken. Watching your video makes me want to go with my cameras again. I shoot with Fuji, Panasonic MFT, and Nikon which makes me appreciate the open conversation about sensor tech.
Fun video guys, well done. I am one of the weirdos who love using both FF and M43! 📸 Great stuff, Rhett.
At this point, we’re gonna have to get you on the show! I feel like a photo walk and talk would be a ton of fun if we are ever in the same hemisphere!
Amen!
me too!
You aren't a weirdo, I do same ass thing... I even throw APS-C into the mix lol ya... I am a super loser.
Cool video guys! I’m still mostly sticking to m43, because it’s the right tool for the job 90% of the time
Love this!! The poor biker though at 1:04 😂
Bro, I noticed when I was editing and was so tempted to zoom in on him!
I hope he knows we are sorry if he ever somehow sees this video!
the collab🔥
10:38 “what sensor is it on the inside?” … “listen, we don’t……” (walks away)
I appreciate the comedic bits 😄
@@dreamsandvideos fight or flight man. Matthew puts me on the spot? I run.
HAHAHHA
People need to look at m43 as the 16mm of the digital videography world. People are still shooting great stuff on 16mm celluloid and they’re choosing it for certain reasons. The same can be said for the m43 format.
This was a great video - also enjoyed seeing a bit of photography on your channel, and thank you for sharing the photos and your experience! 🎉
One thing that really fits with marrying lenses: for wildlife photographers, there is something nice about having lighter and smaller lenses on the longest focal length lenses. You still will need a tripod. You're still going to be carrying a heavy tube. But the Panasonic 100-300mm takes decent pictures for hobbyists at a relatively affordable price (used).
The other side is arguably true: the Sigma 18-35mm is heavy and large, but if I really need photos in low, uncontrolled lighting, it's been excellent with the Viltrox EF-M2 and functions like as ~12-50 f/1.2. Likewise for adapting full frame Canon EF lenses to get a f/0.9 with autofocus using my Metabones XL (decent fun for some used gear)
If I wanted to marry a lens system that I could use for low light indoor photography and outdoor birding, on camera bodies ranging in size from my G100 w/ 9mm f/1.7 all the way to my G9ii with the Sigma, Canon, or native Leica lenses, I can't imagine a more versatile mount. I think you mentioned versatility in your other video as well, but thought this comment could be an interesting POV for you to understand your viewers and why they watch your content. As well as another take for anyone reading the comments. Appreciate both of you for the hard work you put into managing a YT channel alongside your business and thanks once more for sharing your experiences!
I know I really focus on Video a lot in this channel because that’s what I do for work and that’s what I’m most comfortable talking about but I really do love photography even if it is mostly just for fun and a hobby.
It’s such a difficult decision and I’m really glad that I did go ahead and invest in both systems but for me I still really feel like I’m picking micro 4/3 over full frame for most things!
It’s not that MFT IS small. It isn’t. It’s that it CAN be small and pro and everything in between.
Given that I now have some lovely back problems, the entire kit weight plays a big role as to why I don't change to FF format. Might be fun to pick one up for astrophotography or other really low light shooting... but much like a drone, it would be an occasional use thing and stay in the car most days. Edit- also what a lot of us are hoping for the future of m43 is a return to smaller bodies! Please give us a GX8ii or GM5ii !!!!!!!
For sure the back pain is real! I actually after 12hr shoot days will do some massage guns, then I use my gyms hydrobeds at least 4-5 times a weel, get regularly adjusted, plus slowly incoporating yoga 😅
@@MatthewDangyou I have inoperable and shot discs in both lower and upper back, and si joints going out too. I now have to stretch before even going to bed, it's just silly. 20 years in the military is great to be able to retire in your early 40s, but it was not kind to my body.
I think people often say “dynamic range” when they mean “shadow recovery”. The absolute numbers of stops of DR are pretty close, but you definitely see a difference in shadow recovery when you have to underexpose the foreground to preserve highlights in a backlit scene.
Really glad I clicked this, great video guys. I wanna weigh in, I have a GH5 and a S5IIX and I use them both pretty regularly. I wish I had a bigger lens selection but I am just getting started trying to make money with my cameras. I watch Mathew quite a bit because of how much Lumix stuff he does. Anyway I would have said that full frame was better if it were a couple of years ago but idk now. I have gotten some really cool pictures and videos on my GH5 and I really enjoy it. I love the S5IIX too, it's amazing but it's almost too good if that makes sense? like I nail every pic and it's always perfect (crazy complaint right) The micro 4/3's just has more character sometimes. The lenses are stupid cheap. I have not paid over $100 for any of the lenses except for a Sirui Cine lens I bought. But and this is a big BUT for what the GH7 costs and for what a S5IIX costs I would pick the S5IIX every time. I would never pay that much for a micro 4/3rds camera. Like my mind would never let me do that. I will prob hang on to the ole GH5 for a long time. It still holds up today and prob will for a while but I am gonna retire it soon as a b cam and go with either the OG S5 or another S5IIX for a b-cam or if Lumix comes out with another non S9 FF cam I may get that if I can afford it and use the S5IIX for a B cam. I just want the continuity of the lenses and even though there is hardly any work I have to do tho make my 2 current cameras match they sometimes don't in low light and some there are other circumstances too. I just want a easy work flow. There is enough stuff thats a headache I don't need matching camera to be another one.
Thanks for the vid, it was really good! I think the M4/3 video looked great but I do think Mathew's actual Pics were an edge better. :)
I like the ending of this comment😉
@@MatthewDangyou ha, love those full frame sensors man. Love your content too. Thanks for teaching me how to have a better channel myself. Both of you!
The OM Systems OM-1ii has 14-bit raw now. And comes closer to full frame high ISO and dynamic.
And if you use DXO PureRaw for stills you get very close of the best full frame. But full frame will be better with DXO PureRaw also.
Interesting conversation, the point of future lens development is what has recently pushed me a little more towards the idea of jumping towards FF with the L-Mount Alliance. Something tells we'll get good news next week in that regard ;)
I wanted to go a little past the standard conversations of why a full frame sensors could be "better" and I think we did with stuff like this! MFT is nearly complete. The Full Frame stuff could just be getting started.
This feels like comparing a truck to a sedan or a fork to chopsticks.
I don’t disagree, but is there any reason those things can’t be compared?
@@RhettThompsonFilm they absolutely can, they're all similar tools for similar purposes. A truck isn't better than a sedan, but it is better than a sedan to some people. Likewise, if you only eat spaghetti for every meal you probably use a fork but maybe chopsticks would be a better fit even if the popular narrative doesn't agree. I enjoyed the video btw, you put out good content! I was just thinking "out loud" on the keyboard.
@@zachbenson9548 haha I understand completely! And it is a great question because I don’t think this topic is as important or as relevant as some think but it is fun to chat about! Mostly as a thought experiment.
@@RhettThompsonFilm I've shot FF, APS-C and MFT... I've never seen the final product and thought it would look better on a different sensor size. However, I have thought I'd rather have a different system at the moment because of all the other things that go along with it. I'd rather not haul lumber with a sedan but it doesn't mean I can't make it work once in a while!
I have followed one hiking/nature youtuber who used earlier MFT GH6 and now uses S5mk2 full frame. The videos with GH6 was noisy and most evening videos has hard clipped highlights and bad colors. Now with full frame his videos are nice and clean. The difference even in daylight is easily visible. It seems that it is easier to have good quality with full frame.
@@vesku2676 if the difference during the daytime is that apparent then I have to assume there was some major user error going on. During bright light conditions and properly exposed it should be incredibly hard to tell between full frame and micro 4/3 especially after youtube compression although at night I’m sure the difference is literally night and day
I am wondering the same thing. Maybe his workflow breaks gh6 video easier.
@@vesku2676 the image can definitely be a bit brittle depending on color grade I’ve found. Or maybe you just have a better eye than me haha
I am watching with 77 inch oled at 4-5 ft distance.
I think if someone owns mft, from a photography perspective, the case where ff would be “better” is in the high resolution cameras while using wide angles. For supertelephoto, getting 800mm at f6.3 light gathering in ff is not cheap or easy. I think that’s what keeps me in, the idea of not being able to afford or replace a lens in a certain focal lenght, or not be able to carry more than 2 lenses on a photowalk.
Some pros don't use full frame, some pros use Medium format.
My friend has sony A74 full frame. Yesterday he bought a GH6 because of cheap price. I am curious to hear his comments MFT vs full frame.
@@vesku2676 definitely very different tools, but I have a feeling they will both serve a purpose’
I think the ff lowlight thing is a little overblown. Unless you're shooting at 1.2 or 1.4 for an entire wedding or portrait shoot, bokeh really doesn't matter. Most shooters want to get more than an eyelash in focus. Also, speed lights exist.
Every day the hope to see a comparison of Gh6 vs G9II vs GH7 in color is getting smaller and smaller(
I was at a horror event last night in the paid photographer, which was an micro 4/3 user
Clients don't care about M43 or full frame.
Go look at Nick Ghionis he shoots Olympus and was a ambassador. He's also Jerry Ghionis who is a Nikon ambassador.
When you have more than one person you can't have shallow DOF, where the ears and nose are out of focus, as someone will move their head out of focus. Shallow DOF only works on one person and then you have the 75mm F1.8m you can get just the eyes in focus...FF has nice compression, 50-150mm f2.8 can do that but camera to subject distance is laaaaarge
This right here is s great demonstration why the S9 is such a disappointment. The lack of a EVF is such a letdown. Dude squinting every second trying to get see the screen 😅
@@AllCarsUnited I think it was mostly us walking directly into the sunrise! Plus his photos look as good as mine so 🤷♀️
Yeah I got blue eyes, glasses, and astigmatism plus looking directly into the sun😂 But in all honesty the lack of an evf only bothered me at first, now I got completely use to it
@MatthewDangyou I don’t ever use my EVF tbh.
@@RhettThompsonFilm I rarely use mine either prob once in a year
In fact, full frame is superior to MFT in highlights, not in low light, i.e. in recovering shadows, and therefore you can get better results with MFT in low light. The ISO equivalent of MFT to full frame is multiplied by 4, so you don't have to increase the ISO, what you have to do is overexpose. (The noise problem in MFT comes from underexposure) and it is advisable to use faster lenses since you have the advantage of not having such a short depth of field and getting more light. Regarding MFT lenses, in most cases you can get all or almost all the sharpness at full aperture, and in full frame you have to close 1 or 2 steps of the diagram in many lenses, i.e., the concept of less depth of field falls apart. Something they don't mention regarding ISO is that the more you increase the ISO, the more dynamic range you lose, and therefore the concept of greater dynamic range in full frame falls apart, i.e., you can get more dynamic range in MFT. I must mention that the biggest advantage in mft is the stabilizer to get more light, more dynamic range and more stable and sharper images because you can lower the shutter speed more and therefore get more light without losing image quality. In conclusion, you can get the same or better results in low light conditions in mft since everything is in favor of the smaller sensor but most people don't know how to use it and compare it in the same conditions as full frame.
Ummm in low light full frame wins hands down. Check out my review of the GH7 vs S5iiX. Same exact settings the image breaks apart so much faster for video. Sure for photos you can get similar results but that is different than video. In video full frame is king with the exact same settings the image quality is far superior
Highlights still blow at around +3 stops above middle grey on both formats, and full frame is capable of being overexposed as well as m43, so you can either blow your highlights or preserve them and recover shadows. For shadow recovery, full frame wins easily.
I'm only halfway through your video but it is helping me. I saved for a couple of years to go to Scotland and paid for a tour of the Highlands to do photography. Unfortunately, someone close to me took risks and gave me COVID when I was in Scotland. Getting sick and returning home early instead of going to the Highlands messed with my desire to get out there. Since August, I have read or watched little about photography because I felt broken. Watching your video makes me want to go with my cameras again. I shoot with Fuji, Panasonic MFT, and Nikon which makes me appreciate the open conversation about sensor tech.
I disagree
@@Filmwhatmatters anything specific?