Micro Four Thirds vs APS-C Crop Sensor Comparison
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2017
- Micro Four Thirds vs APS-C Crop Sensors Comparison
Sony A6500 - amzn.to/2kIEWzp
Sony A6300 - amzn.to/2F2pKbz
Panasonic G85 - amzn.to/2n834wx
Panasonic G9 - amzn.to/2EE07Ku
More videos:
Panasonic G9 vs Sony A6500 - Hybrid Shooting Comparison
bit.ly/g9vsa6500
Panasonic G9 Review - The Hybrid Shooting Beast
bit.ly/panasonicg9
Sony A6500 vs. Panasonic G85 / G80 / G81 + samples 4K
bit.ly/a6500vsg85
5 Reasons Why I Keep Sony A6500
bit.ly/a6500reasons
Panasonic G85 / G80 / G81 review after 6 months of using 4K
bit.ly/panasonicg85review
Nikon D5500 Review After 1 year of using + samples 2017 4K
bit.ly/nikond5500review
Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art review with Sony A6500 + Samples
bit.ly/sigma1835mm - Наука та технологія
**Products in this video**
Sony A6500 - goo.gl/YX9rNA
Panasonic G85 - goo.gl/ysWWt1
Nikon D5500 - goo.gl/Y7sPG9
Nikon D5600 - goo.gl/KZJh9x
Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art - goo.gl/v4n6WK
Sigma MC-11 Adapter - goo.gl/gTLw8L
Sony E PZ 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 OSS - goo.gl/NqZBro
Panasonic Lumix G VARIO 12-60MM F3.5-5.6 ASPH - goo.gl/G85kPh
Panasonic Lumix G VVARIO 7-14mm F4 ASPH - goo.gl/BLGnTD
Nikon Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED - goo.gl/JjeBJy
Nikon AF-S DX Micro-NIKKOR 40mm f/2.8G - goo.gl/mSBqv2
Please note, that these are are affiliate links.
Dude, your videos are amazing. So much useful information in this video. I have the Panasonic G7 but I also bought the A6300. I want to have best of both worlds and the A6300 is pretty cheap right now. Thanks!
Thank you, I'm glad that you like my videos. Both have some advantages so it is nice to have both systems.
Thank you for watching!
Really enjoy your videos and find them really informative.
Thank you!
Thanks for this video. It's like you heard me. It's pretty hard to see all the differences in the local store, so that video was a nice comparison. Thanks for that. I love the way, you show and some sort teach your information. Keep up the good work. I really enjoy every video :)
Max
You're welcome, I'm glad that you enjoyed this video.
Thank you for watching!
Very good review and this is exactly why I went with the Sony A7 with its full frame sensor and tiny body. Combined the best of both worlds without any drawbacks
Y have Sigma m4/3, u Think that lens work on Sony e mount?
Finally someone doing proper side-by-side comparisons and knowing the subject they're talking about!
Happily subbed! Now I'll just spend the weekend going through your videos! :)
Thank you, I appreciate your subscription!
Excellent video. Gréât explanations. And the best thing is the lack of fluff and bull. I love technical videos full of technical Information and lacking useless bla-bla-bla. Thanks for such a cool video. I learned a lot, which is what I wanted. Do NOT stop making this kind of videos. I love them.
Thank you! Everything is wonderfully well explained.
You're welcome, thank you for watching!
very good explaination and tips, thanks a lot! Still, I have to make choice for my next purchase, but you gave me clue and a precious lead...
Thank you, I'm glad that it was helpful!
Hi, what is the filter format for the cover of your video picture?
It is heavily edited in Adobe Lightroom.
Is the exposure difference between different sensors really true? I remember reading that at the same numerically exact settings of focal length aperture, shutter speed and iso, you should theoretically get the same level of exposure but with a tighter crop on the m43 compared to aps-c.
Exposure should be the same, but the depth of field and the amount of noise is not the same. Manufacturers also use various ISO scales, so even exposure might not be the same.
@@TheHybridShooter I think your statement at 7:56 confuses the issue because it implies that at f2.8 on 4/3 is equivalent to f4.x on a larger sensor in which it affects the light reaching the sensor. This may not be your intention but it can easily be misinterpreted as such. At f2.8 for 4/3, you will be able to use the same ISO and shutter speed as a full frame sensor at f2.8. The only difference is depth of field because in order to get the same framing of the scene with 4/3, you have to stand farther back from the subject. Difference in noise due to manufacturers using different ISO scales is a separate issue, not related to sensor size difference. Any noise differences that remain are attributable to technology differences between the sensors and not their crop factor.
@@yohan2437 It was my intention, light gathering is affected by the sensor size of course. As explained above, you will only get the same exposure because ISO compensated for light gathering capabilities. The amount of noise will be completely different on full frame and M43 with the same settings. That much noise difference definitely can't be caused by sensor technology. That can make a difference of 1/4 EV, but not 2+ EV difference between the full frame and M43. The difference in noise is simply caused by larger area, where full frame sensor can gather light of the same intensity at given aperture.
@@TheHybridShooter A simple example can prove this false. Take a picture with a full frame camera and lock the ISO, aperture, and shutter speed. Now move the camera back so that the original scene now covers only a small section of the frame the size of a 4/3 sensor and take the second picture. Crop this second picture so that only the same scene remains as the first picture. By virtue of using the same sensor and settings for both shots, the noise should be identical. Of course the greater number of pixels of the full frame version will allow the noise grain to be less visible if both are viewed at the same size, but this has nothing to do with a difference of light gathering capability.
@@yohan2437 That doesn't prove that anything I wrote is wrong, just the opposite. It has *everything to with the difference in light gathering.* There are two ways how a full frame camera can benefit from larger area where it can gather larger total amount of the light:
1. by making larger pixels and directly achieving better signal to noise ratio
2. by offering more pixels of the same size. In that case, it will benefit from noise compression caused by downsampling when you export the images at given resolution.
Both are direct benefits of larger total amount of light that the full frame camera can gather over the M43.
This video was information input the best 👍 great explanation :)
Thank you!
I can't choose between Lumix GX80 vs Sony a6000. I want to shoot live shows/concerts of rock bands. Which one do you recommend and why?
Which one did u picked
great wrist watch choices!
Thanks, I have also made reviews of those on my second channel: ua-cam.com/channels/ZmvM39ck6z4j20pisIXuFA.html
Thank you for this video! Thanks to your video of a6500 stabilization, I now feel totally fine with not having IBIS in my a6300 since the one in the a6500 is not worth the huge price
How do you feel about the fugi APS-c lenses?
Selection seems to be good, but I have only tested 15-66 F2.8 so far.
the whole argument always falls down to how shallow depth of field you want/need. The shallower, the larger sensor you need.
I shoot full frame and use several f1.4 lenses. They provide some amazing bokeh indeed, but are an absolute pain to focus with. That accurate focus. I mostly shoot between f2/f2.8 with them because of exactly that. Guess what Olympus do f1.2 lenses that depth of fieldwise are f2.4 that is perfect for focusing with the light gathering potential of f1.2 for lowlight. thats a fast lens with a decent/excellent amount of bokeh.
Nunez87 do you really Never need bigger Depths of field? DOF is not the sensor, it depends on aperture, focal length and distance to the object! 35 mm has advantages DOF with wide angle, 18 mm MFT with Tele lenses! Don’t hear the FF fan boys Polin and the other. They hate MFT. Because you get so much for your money and save your back and flightcase?
6:10 is that Indonesian woman painting Batik?
Yes, she is, good catch, I have seen that on my trip in Bali.
Thank your for watching!
I have the Canon EOS-M so it is APS-C but I often use use vintage full frame lenses. My extra addition to this is a focal reducer to have the same focal length as full frame. You have said something that I had thought was true yet many sources online say isn't.
If you had a MFT camera with a FF lens that is marked f/2.0 then with a focal reducer, it is f/2.0 and it is f/2.8 without. Many sources online say those numbers are f/1.4 and f/2.0 respectively and I have long believed them to be incorrect.
Focal reducers are separate topic, it allow the lens to concentrate more light onto the senor so it changes the numbers depending on the magnification of the reducer.
My point was that others are talking nonsense about having an f/1.4 lens and it is now an f/1.0 with a MFT focal reducer and you have explained it as I think it is. For odd M42s like the Helios 44, the focal reducer grabs more of the bokeh swirl effect from the edges.
Technically the aperture is the same regardless of the sensor size, it is a physical dimension, it just needs to be multiplied so that you can estimate what results you can get with such aperture in comparison to full frame, so the lens can be F1.0 but it won't give same results as F1.0 lens on FF.
So, does crop factor only happen when you're using an APS-C lens/FF Lens adapted (no speedboosted) on an m43? Or is that also the case if you're using the m43 kitlens on the M43 body...like a 14-45 m43 lens is actually a 24-90? 'Cause I find it stupid that people think that if you have an M43 and you're using the kitlens of that m43 body, you're not getting the actual focal length measurement. Why would the manufacturers put 14-45 if they're actually 24-90?
Crop is there with every lens. Focal length is just a physical measurement it says nothing about the field of you that you will get.
I watch your videos over and over.... lol.... thank you
Thank you, I appreciate that!
Q:
Can I use the millimeter-numbers in this video for micro four third lenses?
Unfortunately, I don't know what you mean.
@@TheHybridShooter error of mine. Sorry.
great video, learned a lot
Thank you!
Excellent video
6:00 that's me! Say hi!
Hi! Thank you for appearing in the video!
Noise compretion was a good explanation, thank you
You're welcome, thank you for watching!
Good work again. Having both the G85 & an a6300, I'm wondering about whether to keep the G85 or not. The most important advantages, imo, are with the Sony. I might try to switch the G85 for perhaps the Sony 18-105. But both are very good cameras. (Also, I like that the G85 seems to be a bit sharper - as well as smoother - in 1080p. It's only in 4k where Sony takes an advantage in my eyes. In good lighting, that is.)
Depends on whether you need two cameras, if you don't, then there is probably no reason to keep both... unless you want to.
Thank you for watching and commenting!
Honestly, the a6300 is really good, quite a bit better than the G85. And the G85 isn't even smaller.
My most used lens on my Sony are the kit zoom, 50mm 1.8, 28mm 2.8. And Canon 70-200 2.8 for portraits.
The 18-105mm was my favorite, but it'd size was a bit much compared to kit zoom for portability.
Nikk Thompson I love the Sony. What adaptor do you use for the canon lens?
Loose Ends I use the Sigma mc11 on my Sony, and metabones xl for my gh5. The Sigma mc11 and Sony, are a fantastic combination. The 70-200mm l is a horrible video auto focus lens, their 24-70mm is better, and Sigma 18-30 is another horrible video auto focus lens. But they are great for manual video. And for photos the mc11 and Sony are perfect, barely ever a focus hunt or slow focus compared to native. The gh5 and metabones (perhaps because it's a speedbooster) focus hunts non stop and is very slow for photos.
Isn't it a misconception with the whole "Double the f-stop" thing? M43 lenses don't let in less light, it's just measured differently or something
No, it isn't. I have made a video about that: ua-cam.com/video/SvcNY7TcJFo/v-deo.html
You're channel is a wealth of knowledge thank you so much. Panasonic all the way, looking forward to the realease of the Panasonic S1📸 when they hit the stores in the states. If you did a review on the Panasonic S1 can yo link it. I'm subbed and belled on your channel.(+_+)
Thank you, I have only made S1R first impressions video so far, but I will make S1 review soon as well.
your videos is so good, good image and good comparison. but i believe that you'll need a pop filter, too much sibling on your voice. nice work bro, look forward for you new videos.
Thank you, this video is more that one year old, I believe that it is fixed in my new videos.
i hope you dont disagare if i use some second of your video, for 1 video on my channel.
obviusly i give you credits and share the link of your video
Sony a600 or Panasonic g7 for street photography? Witch one?
For street photography I would recommend Panasonic GX80 / GX85
It's literally only between the Sony A6000 & the Panasonic G7 only! I'm getting one this week but having difficulty deciding! Its seems the G7 is mainly used for youtube/video, Theirs many videos on the A6000 auto focus & photography focus in general.... But all I seem to find on the G7 is video for UA-cam... Witch is making me think that the G7 a UA-cam camera & the A6000 is for photography mainly... *I'm not a fanboy👍😊*
well done. Thank you.
You’re welcome, thank you for watching!
You forgot to mention processing.
A smaller sensor is far better for the cpu on board. This means better codex, frame rates and features.
Yes, that is also important, I kind of mentioned it and so section at 8:43
@@TheHybridShooter This video is over a year old. Fast reply man, Great stuff.
Thank you, yes I have also talked about the processing in my newer videos.
Very useful info. But would be nice to see all the numbers you're saying about on the screen.
Thanks, I will keep it in mind.
i really depends, so far the mft is good for the weight and size. currently thinking of the canon mirror less.
Yes, it indeed does, Canon mirrorless has a potential, but at the moment there is a lot that needs to be improved on those cameras IMO and for the price it really needs 4K video.
Thank you for watching and commenting!
yes, i found myself using mft almost all of the time. it is so portable. but there is a lack of affordable ultra wide.
7-14mm ASPH price is coming down, you can get it under 600 dollars / euros, but it is still a lot... ultra wide lenses for mirrorless are difficult to make, so will have to wait for affordable options.
i have a gm5 and it lives in my pocket. now thinking of getting a wide prime.I would be doing a lot more photography than carrying gears.
So if I’m a film maker looking for lower cost shallow dof should I go apsc or mft?
APS-C
Why not talk about using speed booster with m4/3
Same reason why I don't talk about using speedbooster on full frame.
Has anyone tried the Sigma 18 - 35 on the G85?
Are you Matt burling . I've been a fan for a long time
No, I'm not, I honestly don't know who that is.
No this guy sounds like him, but it’s definitely not Matt.
That Sony 6500 camera in the video has a fingerprint on the lens.
And?
So let's say i have a crappy Sony Cybershot with a tiny censor but 24 megapixels. I better reduce the number of megapixels in order to have a less noisy pic?
If you export in lower resolution, the noise is less visible. How many megapixels you need mostly depends on the use of your pictures, for example if you post on Instagram you only need 1 mpix., for 4K video you need 8 mpix. and for large prints you may need even more.
I use all the megapixel that camera can give me for 'better editing' but one day i discovered that with less megapixels i have better crisp images. This is my favorite picture it's 'tiny' y wish i could print it but i can't do it to big. 500px.com/photo/211317733/sonda-buoy-by-christian-coquet?ctx_page=1&from=user&user_id=365699
You should definitely use the highest resolution setting on your camera, because the camera probably cannot downscale the picture as good as Adobe Lightroom for example. You can always downscale the picture in post and as you wrote, high resolution gives you more flexibility.
Yes, i do that all the time. The first target of my photos it's Instagram, but, i'm starting to upload some of it on stock sites and because of my tiny sensor there's noise and them reject some pics because the demand quality, and also i'm so interested on print some pics to give or sale. Even doe, the best solution is to buy at least an APS-C sensor cam or if it's posible a Full Frame (cheap) cam like 6D. Anyway, thanks a lot for your comments, great channel, great content and you got a new subscriber. ¡Cheers! :)
Thank you, I appreciate it, if you only shoot stills, any Nikon APS-C camera with 24 mpix sensor is very good and those are also quite cheap, there is D5500 review on this chanel.
Not sure if I really agree with smaller sensor allows them to build a better IBIS system. Likewise, one can argue that the larger sensor has more weight and it allows better stabilization. Your logic might make sense, but I think the culprit is the way it's engineered. If Sony engineers put more effort into it they'll make it better.
It is body weight that reduce stabilization needs, not sensor weight. External forces such as those from your hands on the body cause an acceleration of the body that is inversely proportional to the weight of the body (this is a simplification in the case of rotation, but assuming equal geometry the bigger and heavier body leads to the same result for rotational forces also). An non-stabilized sensor is rigidly attached to the body and follows its movements and shakes in real time. A stabilized sensor is held by a system of moving surfaces controlled by sensors and software in order to keep the sensor stable in space despite camera shakes. This system effectively moves the sensor relative to the camera, which is their system of reference, and a smaller, lighter sensor is easier for the electromotors to move.
IBIS is very advanced technology based on the scientific fields of Mechatronics, Control Theory and predictive software, some companies are just better at it than others and can overcome inherent weaknesses. However, when assuming equal technology, IBIS in a camera with smaller sensor and bigger body is better than in a camera with smaller body and heavier sensor. The A7III is very impressive in this regard, having good IBIS for a sensor that is so large compared to the body.
IBIS also interacts with the imaging circle projected by the lens and can cooperate or clash with lens stabilization, getting even more complicated... I don't envy the engineers working on that, one intro course on Control Theory was more than enough for me.
Bali
simply nearly all mcro 4/3 lenses are smaller and lighter than APS lenses with similar maximum aperture and angle of view. Very important for travel photography. Of course a micro 4/3 sensors has inferior high ISO performance than an APS-C at the same price range.
That used to be important but nowadays the sensors are so advanced that the average amateur photograph wont realise a difference.
Most micro 4/3 camera bodies used to be sgnificantly smaller and lighter than APS-C ones. But today there is a poor variety of new micro 4/3 camera bodies.
Also the price difference betweem micro 4/3 cameras and lenses and APS-C cameras and lenses isnt significant.
For those interested in raw image files those of micro 4/3 cameras are 12bit while those of APS-C cameras are 14bit.
The micro 4/3 is good step beyond smartphone cameras.
If you are serious with photography avoid APS-C and micro 4/3. Give some money and buy a new small light full frame camera. It will deliver better photos than samrtphonea and micro 4/3 cameras and will satisfy for at least a decade.
Not really, there has hardly been any advancement in terms of ISO performance in the past years, the difference is actually bigger than before because APS-C and larger sensors are more technologically advanced.
Insufficiently small gap between the latest smartphones with almost 1" sensor and M43 is actually one of the main reasons of the downfall of M43.
Full frame for me - except for stealth jobs 😎
Interesting video, but in reality in terms of gathering light, a lens with a aperture of f 1.8 will always gather the same amount of light regardless the sensor, and this is a widely known fact, that's why exposure value with such lens will be quite similar on aps-c or m43, given the same aperture and speed. What aperture does affect is depth of field, a lens with an aperture of f1.8 on aps-c, will actually produce an image with a DOF of F3.5 on m43.
No. It only gathers the same amount of light per given area, not the same total amount of light. Exposure is the same for completely different reason.
All true.But, What I´m missing here in this Video is the Enormous price difference. Sony is waaaay more expensive over all. I know it´s meant to be a APSC vs MTF comparison, but I already saw a feaw of them and everyone is heavily taking Sony in them and dont tell anything about price and menu usability. I have a Sony Nex 6 and also checked out the newer builts a littlebit. Sony is market leader in Technological thermes. But they dont care about there Customers if you ask me. They don´t improve there software, they have by far the worst control of menu and stuff. And what I find the most anoying is that all there Produkts wont realy work together. I mean they dont comunicate. Best example is my infra red (should already say enough) remote control were only 2 of 19 buttons work with the camera, the others doesn´t comunicate with the camera. I have the 18.105mm lens. The lens is freaking out sometimes when I activate the camera, I mean.... I would expect stuff like this from a small and new company thats new in the sector. I will try Panassonic for now. Hope they care more. Time will tell.
This is not direct comparison of those two cameras but of the systems in general, so the price comparison doesn't belong here.
Yes I know that it is comparison of the systems. It is defenitly the case that Sony is the more expensive. At least you have to admit that APSC is the Heavyer Packet.
No, there are A5100, A6000 and A6300 as budget friendly options and regarding APS-C there are also cheap Nikon and Canon DSLRs. On the other hand some of the new MFT cameras are really expensive, so MFT are not generally cheaper anymore.
@@TheHybridShooter Which is better for sit-down videos and vlogs? APS-C or MFT? Please answer.
Hi, what do u think about olympos omd em 10 mark ıı , i want to buy , its look awesome retro tarz, this camera is good ? for portre photo , and view photo ,panoroma photo , sory my english. :S
I personally haven't used OMD-EM10 II but it is similar to other MFT cameras in the price range, overall it is a good camera for stills, image quality is similar to G85 shown in this video.
thx your answer. Have fun day.
If you compare sensors of different sizes, you should provide the same amount of light on both sensors (total light hitting the sensor).
So to compare sensors you should get equivalent lenses or at least make equivalent settings on both cameras + lenses.
Then angle of view and depth of field are identical, also noise levels are similar.
So the difference is not in sensors but in lenses, which can be attached.
Comparing sensors alone makes no sense if you abstract from available lenses.
There is no 12-35mm F1.4 for for M43, so I am indeed comparing sensors AND lenses that are available.
Batik
I don't really find the difference anything to talk about.
When choosing its best to look at what lenses you would like and can afford. I decided M43 had a lens selection i liked and could afford.
Like if you are into wildlife photography, the 300mm pro is fantastic glass and F4 as shutter speed is concerned.
For 600mm apsc you are looking at lenses that are heavier and slower unless the big bucks come out. So the very slight iso advantage is gone then for me.
But canon does have some very reasonable lenses and crazy reach with the 800mm lenses so they do get a win there.
But on the whole i think the image quality difference is over stated. Especially if you are buying the more sensibly priced apsc lenses.
Due to extremely high-pixel density on M43, the image quality advantage of APS-C with lower optical quality requirements is actually more noticeable if you use budget lenses for both systems. Much wider selection of 3rd party E-mount lenses also makes the APS-C system cheaper in a lot of cases.
pls just tell me 200D vs G85 for photography???? 😑😑😑
It is not that simple, it depends on specif situation.
Multiplying the lens F stop to account for crop factor only effects the depth of field, NOT the exposure. For example a 20mm f2.8 lens is just as "fast" on m4/3 as it is on APS-C, on both cameras you will get the same exposure with the same lens settings at the same ISO. What will be different is the depth of field, which will be greater on the m4/3 camera at the same F stop. Your comments on lens selection for low light between the two formats is therefore incorrect (aside from the fact that APS-C may have less noise at lower light with the same ISO settings than m4/3).
No, my comments are correct. Light gathering is affected as well. ISO is set differently on each camera to give you same exposure at given settings, but you will get different amount of noise.
I view anything smaller than full frame as basically cropping the full frame image. Go bigger, not smaller.
Full frame is actually a result of going smaller from film era, back where large format, medium format dominated.......
Micro 4/3 lens are super expensive.. that is why I stay with canon crop sensor cameras, and I can still use it a newer crop sensor like r7
once you have seen that a6500/63000 IQ (downsampled 6K to 4K) of your own footage - you will not be able to unseen it ever again and all the "essential", "additional", "well rounded" features of other cameras will be meaningless if you can not have that IQ back
24x16= 384 18x14=252 384/252= 1.47 47% bigger
If you want 50mm lens in micro for third size sensor you should get 100mm lens .
Is that right.
No, if you want 50mm full frame equivalent on micro four thirds, you need 25mm lens.
"have to multiply aperture" No.
Yes.
@@TheHybridShooter take a photo with the same configuration and crop it on the full frame, the exposition will be the same. Same aperture. A crop is just a crop.
That has been explained million times over...
@@DeepteshLovesTECH Even that is not 100% true because some apsc or m4/3 have better noise reduction and dynamic range than some older FF.
@@DeepteshLovesTECH maybe SOME m4/3 have a bigger body than a xt3 but at least they got a grip, and i dont mind a gh5 to be bigger with better grip for filming stable, also better cooling and video capabilities...
APS-C censor is actually 60% bigger than micro four thirds
No
APS-C has better image quality !! wow I was wondering which was better!
1 inch vs APSC n MFT
I unfortunately don't own 1 inch camera at the moment.
Canon APS-C crop factor is 1.6x
You forgot to talk about the price. MFT cameras are dirt cheap. I got my MFT mirrorless plus kit lens, brand new, for $300+tax. Great for non serious users to play with
No, I didn't forget. This video is very old, situation was quite different back then.
mft sucks. you had to adapt lenses. better yet you lose autofocus or its gonna be clunky. and mft lenses is not the most comfortable universe to play/invested with
Yes. You are in the dark.
Larry A panasonic has many great cheap lenses...