Why do you guys hate Micro 4/3? Is it solely "b-but muh

>>3078705
Cool straw, man. I don't hate it, I even think it's nice for being truly compact, unlike meme Sony cameras with DSLR sized lenses on their "compact" bodies.

>>3078705
It's okay for video but far from ideal due to the limitations on the maximum resolvable resolution projecting onto a smaller m4/3 sensor

>>3078705
Sensor is very limiting
Format is dying
Once it is dead all the lenses become worthless
Overpriced
No smaller than sony/fuji cams with proper sensors

There's no reason to use m43 unless you already own it.

>>3078705
Too expensive for what it is, not compact enough for what it is

There are pocketable compacts with APSC sized sensors
If you're gonna get something that you need to carry on a strap or bag anyway, there's no benefit to four thirds

>>3078781
Pretty much this

>>3078776
>Format is dying
But the two best prosumer video brands use it. Maybe not great for stills but as long as it's the go-to for budget film solutions it's going nowhere.

>>3078790
No, sony and red don't use m43.

>>3078705
If the cameras and lenses were 30-50% cheaper it would be fine for what's currently being offered. But they're not. I think the format needs some drastic change, like a new sensor type that can overcome the low light limitations.

>>3078792
>Sony
>implying the A7 has anything on the GH5

>RED
>implying £30k is 'prosumer'

>>3078792
No one uses Sony crop for mission critical small business work. No dual card slots, shitty dimming screens and overheating that still isn't resolved.

And I don't even know why you mentioned RED, and I don't want to know

>>3078797
>>3078796
It's like you've never heard of the fs5/fs7/a9

And yes, the overheating issue was solved with the a6300, are you really whining that the $300 a6000 struggles with 4k video? How does the similarly priced canikon hold up?

Honestly M43 should be the new standard consumer point and shoot sensor size.

>>3078803
Those Sony crops will overheat on a hot day taking PHOTOS, solved my ass.

The a9, which isn't even out yet, is probably the only one suited for pro video work.

>>3078803
>A9
>for video
HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Also the FS5/7 are no better than Canon's video cameras. Too big and expensive for the image you get.

>>3078805
>sonys overheat taking photos

That's just incorrect, I've shot sony mirrorless since the nex 6 came out, owned 3 more sony bodies and never had a thermal issue. The a6000 had issues for about a month after it came out, then a fw update came out to fix the problem.

>>3078808
Good for you, but a modicum of research would show you those issues persisted beyond the "lets just turn off the safeguards so it gets too hot to hold" patch they came up with

>>3078810
All my googlefu shows there's been no issues with stills overheating post update.

You got references?

>>3078795
Organic sensors on the way
>>3078804
But muh zoom


I have on EM5, it's pretty old and been through a lot but built like a tank and there's not a scratch on it. The other day I dropped it and the only part that broke was the strap. Given how light it is, even with an extra grip on it, and especially when you consider how light the lenses are, I wouldn't trade it for anything

>>3078705
the Panasonic G85 and GH4 are the top 3 interchangeable lens cameras you can get for <$1000 right now

prove. me. wrong

>>3079031
>top 3
oops, forgot the GX85

>>3078705
Whenever they saw my camera they used to say "you have a micro 4/3 camera, right?"
It feels they're saying that "you have a micro penis, right?".
Of course "yes" was my answer. That answer was uncomfortable.
That's why I sold my camera.

>>3078781
>Too expensive for what it is, not compact enough for what it is
ding ding ding ding

The cameras are everything about the A6xxx people don't like, except they have none of the advantages. There's no compelling reason to have one.

There's some interesting stuff from Panasonic, though.

If you fused the best of the E-M1 Mark II and the GH5 together for $1500 you'd have a hell of a camera.

>>3078705
peanut sensor.
panasonic magick sensor is nowhere.
get cucked by sony, they didn't even put bsi on it.

>>3078781
jelly of pana tiny 100-400mm

this thread is literally all "muh sensor"

>>3079064
If you fused the best of the D5 and the a9 for $1000 you'd have a heck of a camera.

>>3079137
That price point is unreasonable

GH5 > A7s II

>>3079133
If bmw released a 3 series with a wheezy little 1 litre diesel engine, people would focus on the engine being shit.

Because if the fundamentals are lacking, it's almost pointless to look at the rest.

>>3079297
>it's another car analogy
Can we try something else for once?

>>3078705
I'm still waiting for a GM5 successor with at least 20 megapickles and a tilt screen, then pair it with a 20 1.7 and a 42.5 1.7 and I'm sold. All combined weight would probably be around 410 grams only.

>>3079297
If BMW released a car like that fanboys would probably still defend it the same way Sony fanboys defend anything they put out. \

>don't pay attention to sensor size when "my" company makes a small sensor camera
>don't pay attention to megapixel count, it's irrelevant because the camera I'm shilling doesn't have a lot of megapixels
>etc. etc.

It's all about shilling "your" brand; little else matters here.

M43 is like having a small undercut dick that grows into a perfectly adequate erect dick. For most situations it's more than enough and often preferable to the hassle of an elephant cock, unless you with a buck nasty ho (metaphor for shitty lighting).

Seriously, a LUMIX with the 20mm 1.7 is amazing.

>>3079461
Who are you and why do you have such a problem with car analogies? I've seen someone calling out every car analogy for years on this board. Seriously, you have some weird malfunction.

File: .jpg (59KB, 589x442px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 589x442px

>>3078705
Get a FF DSLR and a 1" superzoom like the RX10III. No need for inbetweensies.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7RM2
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/5.6
ISO Speed Rating	6400
Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Exposure Bias	-0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	70.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto

>>3079473
Get a 645 MF SLR and a M43, no need for inbetweensies.

>>3079493

Get a 10x8 and an iPhone, no need for inbetweensies

>>3079498
Shooting the focusing screen directly with the iPhone, no inbetweensies

>>3078781
>There are pocketable compacts with APSC sized sensors
Aren't all of them fixed lens though? I'm torn between the Ricoh GR and the Panasonic LX100. The former has fixed lens and the latter is four turds.

Is there really no good compromise compact that doesn't cost one billion dollaridoos?

>>3079461
>buying a phone with a processor 1/4 the speed of it's competitors
>buying a TV that only has standard definition

If you massively gimp the key part of anything it turns into a shit product.

>>3079472
>>3079503
That's the first time I've personally called them out. It's not a big deal it just gets kind of stale.

Honestly, fuck analogies. Just say what you want to say without some convoluted metaphor relating cameras to automobiles. "The camera is fundamentally handicapped by a smaller imaging sensor" says enough, there's actually no need to compare it to a hypothetical BMW at all.

>>3079517
He's trying to explain why "muh sensor" isn't just another muh rant, he uses an analogy and you get mad at him.

It would have been exactly the same had he said that first.

>>3079500
cropped m43.
only 12 megapickle.
i suggest rx100iv/v or lx10.
gf9 + kit lens or 20mm is pretty compact.
a5100 + 20mm.

>>3079031
I got a gx85 with a 25mm 1.7, and going to get the 14-140mm 3.5 for a nice compact versatile kit. I wish the grip was a little better though.

File: bsi to stacking.jpg (50KB, 682x378px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 682x378px

M4/3 is stuck at the first step.

Their sensors aren't evolving.
Size + technology is against their favour.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Google
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	682
Image Height	378

>>3078776
Where does this meme even come from? I can name many issues with m43, but with like a dozen cameras in production and a shit ton of lenses, "dying" is certainly not one of them.

>Also implying that APS-C is somehow a "proper" sensor

>>3079608
You'd think all that tech should give Sony a massive advantage over all competition, but somehow it does not.

>>3079611
The A9 is at step 4, so they do benefit from all of that technology.

It's hard work and smart research that got them there. Without it, they would be in trouble.

>>3079499

If this was a brain meme, this would be the highest level.

File: IMG_20160302_194709.jpg (1MB, 2448x3264px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2448x3264px

Shitty picture, but the GM1 is super nice. Body smaller than Sonys compact cameras, with larger sensor. Perfect compliment to larger dslrs without giving up too much quality.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Model	Nexus 4
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Created	2016:03:02 19:47:14
Image Width	2448
Image Height	3264
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
F-Number	f/2.7
Focal Length	4.60 mm
Lens Aperture	f/2.5
White Balance	Auto
Image Width	2448
Image Height	3264
Flash	No Flash
ISO Speed Rating	700
Exposure Time	1/33 sec

>>3079611
why sell cameras when you can just monopolize the sensor market?
the camera are just a side business.

>>3079644
>f3.5-5.6

File: .jpg (95KB, 1024x834px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 1024x834px

>>3079644
Including the lens, the LX10 is faster and more compact that than micro four turds.

>>3079654
Which is why I use the 14mm 2.5, 95% of the time.

>>3079679
<f/5

>>3079679
lx10 f1.4 is still better.
1" bsi sensor is still better with dynamic range.

>>3079679
>still chunkier and worse IQ than LX10
why even bother?

>>3078705
>Why do you guys hate Full Frame? Is it solely "b-but muh size and weight" or is there more to it?

>>3079749
>worse IQ than LX10
what? no.

>>3079610
Cipa reports, anything under full frame has had a massive hit to sales over the last 3 years.

>>3079758
Same reason people that drive around in nonced up ford focus' say Lamborghini's are shit. Lack of finances makes them feel inferior.

>>3079776
worse dr.
noise around the same.

File: IMG_5492-768x432.jpg (80KB, 768x432px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 768x432px

>>3078705

The only reason to carry any camera other than a phone is for depth of field.

M43 has shit depth of field, and is therefore trash.

To get equivalent dof to a real camera, you need to go through tons of trouble.

>>3079885
So the Sony has;
a smaller size
less cost
more sharpness
less noise
smoother bokeh
better EVF & rear screen

Obviously m43 isn't completely redundant...

>>3079885
>this is what bokehfags that cant compose and have never printed larger than 8x10 actually think
>implying hes printed even 4x5

>>3079898

Well m43 has lots of lens options so that is nice.

But Sony has released like 8 lenses a year for the last three and are up to, what? four this year? So that wont be true for lon.

It's not compact enough to justify the smaller sensor compared to an APS-C mirrorless

File: finalzdepth[1].png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

>>3079885
i shit you not guys. few years back when I was shooting lolympus, i made a nice portrait which obviously lacked proper dof, so I traced the people in the picture, recreated the z-pass and simulated a more intense depth of field in photoshop. Took me an hour or so to do it. Fuck.

>>3078790
>But the two best prosumer video brands use it
That's nice for video cucks then, huh?

>>3079928
a lie or you would have posted the photo
keep your fantasies off the board please
https://corybuckley.wordpress.com/ not you

>>3079930
obviously thats not the photo i took as in my post i stated it was a portrait. i just attached something what is a z-depth pass.

>>3079934
Which you had because you were reading abuot z depth passes earlier today, and you wanted to insert your newfound knowledge into conversation in the most cringey way

Post the pic or the above is proven true

>>3079885
6/10 above average trolling

>>3078705
>"b-but muh sensor size" ?

p much only dick waving

>>3079133
>this thread is literally all "muh sensor"

/p/:
1. spend $5k on FF
2. still take shit tier snapshits
3. shitpost to not kys

>>3081111
>go on /p/
>care about other people's gear this much
>give yourself undiagnosed high blood pressure
>never take any photos worth mention
>die at 33

File: .jpg (127KB, 789x900px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 789x900px

M43 has some interesting stuff, like the bayonet lens hood, but why even bother when 1" sensor superzooms do 90% of what M43 does? Are you guys going to cry "muh sensor" again?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T1
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T1 Ver1.10
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	83 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2014-12-04T19:53:43+19:00
Exposure Time	1/180 sec
F-Number	f/9.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	500
Lens Aperture	f/9.0
Brightness	0.9 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	55.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	789
Image Height	900
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3081126
Those compact superzooms are really shit though - even the proper compact ones with minimal zoom like the RD 100 are pretty shit and massively overpriced

>>3081561
>shit
In comparison to what? Fz2000 and Rx10m3 shit all over m43.

>>3078796
>RED DRAGON SUPER DILDO DONKEY DICKS
>pro

>>3078806
>FS5
>Too big
Wow Canon's 1" sensor cinema cam is real small right?

I'm looking forward to the death of the format so I can get a load of neat primes and a body for peanuts.

>>3078776
>Format is dying
Twats like you have been saying this since not long after its conception.

>>3079885
muh bokeh

>>3078705
I find most of the build quality to be lacking

>>3084576
Gh2 with a 20 onit feels better in your hand than a 17yr and 364 day old boobie in your hand, senpai

>>3084576
My only experience is with the gh4, which felt better than Canon. Actually I think the GH line is the only camera I've seen with real weather sealing. I used mine in a downpour with no protection. Wouldn't try that with Canon.

>>3084576
Never handled an Olympus, but Panasonics seem solid af

>>3078776
>Once it is dead all the lenses become worthless

Good

>>3078705
MADE IN CHINA

>>3078804
This

>>3078804
1" is better since p&s is all about zoom.

>>3078705
ITT people think that sensor size will make them better at photography

>>3087874
it will, you dipshit. better image quality = better picture; it's irrefutable

>>3087881
if you suck, you're going to suck no matter what camera you use
with a bigger sensor at least the image quality itself will look nicer

>>3087881
shitthatdidnthappen.txt

File: Снимок экрана 2017-06-02 в 23.03.48.png (294KB, 575x289px) Image search: [Google]

294KB, 575x289px

>>3079858
>noise around the same

>>3087881
>gearfag logic