m/43 opinons

>>3031344
They seem to have squeezed an extra stop of dr out of the sensor in the latest sensor generation, not sure if there's a trade off somewhere else, so they look interesting to me...great in good light, then a bit of a compromise at high ISO that you can mitigate with dxo software and fast lenses.

>>3031344
Bad. It's just too much of a compromise and doesn't give much leeway in terms of expanding potential things you can do with it...

>>3031349
Seeing how small and sharp their 100-400 (200-800 equivalent) lenses are at a very small size I'd say is a nice potential

I use Olympus and love it. Wouldn't switch back to a bigger system now. Only thing is I do lots of concert photography and not being able to shoot colour above ISO 3200 is a pain. Lots of people moan about battery life as well but my camera is generally good for 600-700 shots before the battery needs replacing.

File: Olympus-PEN-F-vs-Sony-Alpha-a6500-size-comparison.jpg (50KB, 720x322px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 720x322px

>>3031344

You would be better off with a Sony or even a Fuji unless every gram and millimeter is deathly important.

Even then with Sony and Fuji bodies actually being smaller then most of the good m43 bodies you may be better off with one of them depending on lens choices.

>>3031531
http://cameradecision.com/lenses/compare/Panasonic-Lumix-G-X-Vario-12-35mm-F2.8-ASPH-Power-OIS-vs-Sony-24-70mm-F2.8-ZA-SSM-Carl-Zeiss-Vario-Sonnar-T

Lenses tend to be much smaller, and much cheaper at the same image quality or better when compared to sony "lenses"

>>3031535

Your link is comparing a DSLR lens to a m43.

I assume you meant the G Master 24-70mm f2.8. While the m43 may be smaller, it has nowhere near as good image quality.

>>3031541
>it has nowhere near as good image quality
bullshit. you are either shilling shekels for sony or are an indiscriminate fuck.

I don't think m43 is going to die ever. There's a committed user base behind it and the companies selling it have no intention of stopping. There was a bit of an identity crisis when APS-C (and even that sony FF) cameras started getting real small, but I think the situation has normalized now.

Even though I don't own or plan to buy into the m43 system, I can certainly see the appeal. There are advantages to small sensors that I don't think people realize. The marketing for small sensor cameras always doubled-down on the small size of the cameras, so when APS-C cameras got really small, people assumed small sensor cameras were dead in the water.

Better than Fuji.

Worse than Sony.

I have had an OMD-EM1 and some pro lenses of theirs, and it was okay. Two big hangups though...you couldn't adjust the ISO and aperture without changing modes and the raw files just aren't that good. Sony will eventually kill m43 and Fuji.

>>3031344
gh5, em1ii, gx8, g80.
otherwise better get apsc.
gf9 if you're thinking of getting a rx100.

File: 11965437055_2e8232c9dc_b.jpg (265KB, 1024x770px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1024x770px

The sweet spot for digital cameras.

Go to a smaller format, and you lose the action-catching speed and perfect downsampled 4K wallpaper capabilities.
Go to a bigger format, and you start to pay exponentially more for bigger, heavier bodies and especially lenses, which offer diminishing returns in terms of output quality and speed.

The perfect complement to my 6x7 and 4x5 kits.

>>3031788
but Fuji is better in every way and just as small?

>>3031790
Exponentially more expensive
Not as small as pen bodies + pancakes
Very small increase in quality
Actually slower to use unless you're spending $2,000 on the newest kits

>>3031791
>very small increase in quality
lmao good joke
1 inch sensors are better than M43 sensors.

>>3031797

Fujifag detected. m43 has just as good IQ as Fuji. They're both shit though.

>>3031798
Olympus Jew pretending not to be an Olympus Jew spotted.

>>3031797
There's one really good 20mp 1", but there's no good camera built around it.
Also, having used it, it's very similar in an end print to the 16mp 4/3 sensor.

>>3031762
i feel like this is the fault of olympus for having such an obtuse software and menus, but you can change these rapidly if you map them to one of the function buttons (which I did).

I have a M43 Olympus and I love it. It's small, lightweight, and technically speaking takes good quality photos at as high 1600 ISO. My only real problem with it is lack of lenses, but they're slowly coming around.

M43 are best if you need something lightweight but still on the scale of a proper DSLR.

>>3031815

bruhhh, m4/3 has probably the widest variety of lenses you could ask for.

you know that panasonic lenses will mount on your olympus, right?

>>3031799

Nah, bruh, I'm a sonyfag. A7 master race.

>>3031833

Definitely the strong suit of m43 is their lens lineup. There is literally everything you can imagine and they are affordable.

>>3031788
w2c that wrist strap?

getting dof as if youre shooting at f16 when youre shooting at f8 is pretty neat tho.

>>3031800

Nikon 1 J5 is a nice camera

>>3031885
Bad lens selection, no dual dials, limited buttons, too much menu diving, etc.

File: IMG_3845.jpg (630KB, 800x534px) Image search: [Google]

630KB, 800x534px

dof is a big deal for me. I'm not looking for bokeh but rather subject isolation, with the standard being 35mm. It's hard to get that the smaller the sensor

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 6s Plus
Camera Software	Snapseed 2.15.144832640
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	29 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Pixel Composition	Unknown
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2017:03:02 01:09:53
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	400
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	1.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	800
Image Height	534
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

pentax apsc fixed lens compact whennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn. i want my gr to be weather sealed with the new kp sensor

>>3031935
I can see pentax making another mirrorless aps-c, but not fixed lens

>>3031931
You could shoot film

>>3031958
im just saying that apsc is as small as i go bc thats basically a half frame camera. i guess 110 is actually like m43

>>3031931

Subject isolation with depth of field is low tier my man.

>>3031931
stand further away

File: IMG_5492-768x432.jpg (83KB, 768x432px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 768x432px

>>3031931

To get equivalent depth of field you get lenses just as massive. Not to mention the ridiculous crop factor making to hard to find a good wide angle.

Mirrorless is great, but I think m43 is just not worth the trouble.

>>3031974
Anyone who's chasing shallow depth of field shouldn't even consider small sensors to begin with. It's nice if that system has something that can give you shallow depth of field if you need it, but it's not something you should expect on all lenses, like you can with FF.

Small sensors shine when you want to shoot wide open but still have a deep depth of field.

>>3031981
the point of shooting wide open is for small dof...

>>3031982
No, the point is to let more light in.

>>3031344
Bad, let's break it down really simply.

Every modern sensor outresolves the very best lenses, so lens resolution is the limiting factor to good image quality, the larger the glass the better it deals with imperfections, the larger the sensor, the greater the perceived sharpness. If 2 sensors had equal mp count, the ff pixels would be around 500% larger, so for "equal" sharpness m43 would need a lens that resolves 5 times as much detail.

Unless we invent a new way to make lenses or a new way to make exceptionally high quality glass smaller formats will NEVER catch up to larger ones.

Also, photography is a question of gathering light, the more you can gather at once, the less noise your images have, bigger sensors gather more light, ff has 4 times the surface area of m43.

And finally, subjective image quality, longer lenses have smoother bokeh, bigger sensors use longer lenses, if you don't want your oof areas looking nervous and distracting, go full frame.

No brand faggotry here, just physics.

>>3031991
>the more you can gather at once, the less noise your images have

HOLD IT!

THIS IS 100% TONY NORTHRUP BULLSHIT, I CAN SMELL IT A MILE AWAY.

The reason bigger sensors have less noise is because they have lower pixel density, this means the individual photo sites can be made bigger. This has NOTHING to do with JUST surface area, it's all about pixels PER surface area

>>3031984
then why did you say >wide open but still have deep depth of field

>>3032003
he's not me. I said that because you want more light but you still want deep depth of field.

>>3032002
Ok, so take a sensor with quadruple the resolution, but the same size, for each of those large pixels you get 4 pixels that when you resize will be averaged out and be just as accurate as the larger pixel.

Hence why the a7rii can still outperform the a7sii for low light stills.

You do not view photos at 100% crop, it's important to remember this.

>>3032002
This

Also: what's the point of comparing m43 with full frame? Are we going to compare fiat 500 with a Ferrari, say that the Ferrari is faster and thus the Fiat is shit and nobody should buy it?

And if we're going to make idiotic comparisons, why half-ass it and stop at pleb-tier ff? m43 Will NEVER catch up with medium format
>m43 btfo amirite
>all those street """photographers""" of old not shooting superior 6x7 on the streets of NY and Paris kek

Fucking hell I'm tired of gearfags

>>3032010
Fiat 500 - £7000
Ferrari - from £100k

Gh5 - £1900
Cheapest new m43 - £260
5dc - £300
Cheapest medium format without tiny gimmick sensor - £40k

Does that answer your question?
If not, where are you finding ferraris at 1/6 the price of a fiat 500?

Also
>>3032007 answered
>>3032002

File: kowa-mft-8-5mm.jpg (172KB, 800x574px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 800x574px

>>3031974
>ridiculous crop factor making to hard to find a good wide angle.

That's not true, Kowa makes 8mm lenses (16 mm equivalent) and bot Olympus and Panasonic sell zoom lenses as wide as 9 mm (18 mm equivalent).

By the way, I don't think "crop factor" is an adequate term for M43, since the lenses are designed for the sensor size so there is no "crop" taking place.

File: IMG_3990.jpg (237KB, 1000x644px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1000x644px

>>3031344
I got from APS-C DSLR to M43.

I kinda miss the narrower DOF I could get with the APS-C, but other than that I'm loving this cute pie. I just grow tired of traveling with 2 Kg of gear.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Apple
Camera Model	iPhone 6
Camera Software	Photos 2.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	29 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:10:19 17:25:19
Exposure Time	1/33 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/2.2
Brightness	2.5 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Auto
Focal Length	4.15 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1000
Image Height	644
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3032017
Hot cherry picking, bro.
I don't know why you think that a 12mp FF camera so old that it doesn't even have live view is a comparable choice to a 2017 20mp video specific camera, in terms of price.

If you want to be reasonable, you should compare the 5D wth the g1. The 5D is $400 on KEH right now, the g1 is $80.