The size advantage of m4/3

[nathanp]

I've seen a few suggestions that Micro 4/3 offers little or no real size advantage when compared to a low to mid range DSLR. I thought I'd take a couple of quick pictures to compare. Excuse the poor quality, they were take quickly with a P&S.

L-R: EOS 300D (Digital Rebel) with 50mm 1.8, Hexar AF, GF1 with 20mm 1.7

There's a pretty big difference in size but I have to admit that the EVF makes the GF1 a bit more awkward to handle (it has a habit of getting caught up when getting it out of a bag etc).

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I like the size and handling of the EP2 with the EVF. I have handles a half-frame 35, and it really does feel like an Olympus Pen F in my hands. I prefer keeping a Nikkor LTM lens on it, close focus to 18" is nice, the size of the lens suits the camera.

 

[user237428934]

Bought a m43 camera because of the size advantage and sold it because of the image quality disadvantage (in low light).

 

[Frankie]

Now imagine a u4/3 with a built-in EVF but no faux hump.

Or, imagine the just announced Nikon development of a new EVIL type packed with proven D3 goodies and EVF in a RF size package.

 

[seakayaker1]

. . . . . love the size of the GF1 and ability to use it on the street in public setting with little notice.

I have not experienced any problems in low light when using the Gf1. The 20/1.7, 25/1.4 along with a few manual lens work quite well.

The EVF only takes a a few seconds to put on or take off when needed and easy to carry around in its little leather pouch.

For the money the GF1 is a nice little package . . . . .

JMHO

Life is Grand!

Dan
~ 😉

 

[sfaust]

There is a definite size benefit IMO. Anyone that has put the smallest DSLR's next to a GF1 or E-P1/2 would immediately see that. While I wouldn't carry the E-P2/20mm combo in my pocket, it actually fits. Try that with even the smallest DSLR without a lens, let alone with one. Doesn't work!

Its all a tradeoff. If you wanted DSLR quality, you carried a DSLR and suffered with the size. If you wanted compact size, you carried a P&S and suffered the lower quality. The m4/3 provides some middle ground where you can now gain better image quality, yet still carry something much smaller than a DSLR package.

I like the fact that I can shoot higher end images (aesthetics/technical qual) in situations where I wouldn't use a DSLR because it would attract attention, and wouldn't use a P&S because I know the resulting image wouldn't be acceptable to me.

The image below is a perfect example. I shot this the other night in a restaurant. If I only had a P&S I wouldn't even bother knowing the background would be completely in focus and confuse the whole image. But with the 20mm at 1.7 the background falls out of focus and separates the subject nicely. Further, since I wasn't using a DSLR no one paid any attention to us at all. They probably thought she was bored while I was reviewing my vacation images on the LCD. 🙂

To me this is the biggest appeal to this format. I'm shooting in places I normally wouldn't use a DSLR, while getting much better quality from the images than I would with a P&S. Anything they can do to reduce the package, while still increasing image quality is ok with me 🙂

 

[Pickett Wilson]

I love the size of my E-P2. And the image quality is really very good. I wouldn't hesitate to shoot stuff I was going to put into the newspaper with it, for sure. Of course, there are things my 1D Mk IV will do that nothing else will (really high ISO, sports, etc), but I am finding the E-P2 hitting the sweet spot for a carry always, carry anywhere camera. The size is perfect for that. It's a surprisingly good camera.

 

[dfatty]

taking into account lens sizes and the advantage is truly significant. i'm currently on vacation with a canon 5D, 16-35, 35L, 24-105, and 70-300. anyone familiar with those items knows this makes for a pretty huge kit. my wife has similar range coverage with an E-PL1, 9-18, 20/1.7, 14-42, 45-200. her kit is much much smaller, and it's quite possible that all of her kit combined weighs less than the 5D and 1 of my lenses.

yes, the E-PL1 will not necessarily take the same quality shots as the 5D, but on a "non-photography" holiday it is more than sufficient. and for me, at least, i know that any shortcomings in my photos usually are mine, not the equipments. next trip the 5D kit will most likely stay at home.

 

[ReeRay]

This discomfort of hauling around a DSLR kit in Thailands extreme heat and high humidity was the prime cause of my purchase of a GF-1. Coupled with the ability to link my legacy lenses. Best thing I ever done - and at 64 years of age having been "at it" for 55 years I done a lot. I'm shooting more now than ever and getting to locations I wouldn't dream of with a heavy kit. IQ from RAW via Capture One is awesome and high ISO is not an issue when I can shoot as low as 1/15th hand held with the mirror-less marvel. My staple kit is a Contax G2, (I still need to shoot film!) 28,45 and 90mm, GF-1 and 20mm and adapters to fit the G lenses to the GF-1. All in a small bag that weighs nothing. I'm very happy and as an aside I can up-rezz my files and supply 50mb images to my stock libraries without fear of QC failure.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

IMHO, this latest generation of M4/3's cameras is revolutionary. Clearly lots of folks agree.

 

[ReeRay]

Real time/live view is the BIG one for me. Using spot metering to control the histogram and avoid clipping coupled with zoom in for precise focusing makes it all a pleasure to use. The PP is negligible compared to my 5D MKII. Now, if only the GF2 comes with 18mp and a better EVF! Poor mans M9?

 

[Thardy]

IMHO, this latest generation of M4/3's cameras is revolutionary. Clearly lots of folks agree.

I heard that Nikon now agrees. 😉

That photo by sfaust is quite nice. A digital camera with a 40 1.7 lens! I can't wait 'till the next version of the GF or EP comes out. Hopefully it's before my fall vacation.

 

[DNG]

I am really glad that ų/43 can adapt to any lens. I knew I would get one. I wanted to use my 35 and 50 on it.. plus I will have a native 17mm pancake for it too as my "main" lens. (When it comes in).
The footprint is small, even compared to an M.. (Except for the CL/E)

I picked the G1... The EFV is a big plus for me, plus the swivel LCD... could be handy for street use.
Here is a comparison in size....

 

[dws21uk]

I took mine out to a local air show yesterday, wasn't expecting DSLR performance but the little 200mm lens didn't do too bad a job. Focusing was a little hit and miss and it really started to focus hunt when I put a yellow filter on for some b&w shots. But then a 400mm lens on my D700 would have been far to big to bother carrying around, so I got some pictures I otherwise would not have got. Here are a few examples I've done so far.

 

[Pascal]

My old kit:
D700 (x2) (sometimes with battery grip) + Sigma 12-24mm or Nikon 14-24m AFS + Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 AFS + Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 AFS
And a prime for low light and bookeh: Sigma 50mm f1.4 or Cron 50mm f2.0 or Nikon 50mm f1.2 AiS

Sigma DP1 & Sigma DP2s


My new kit:
GH1 + EP2 + 7-14mm f4.0 + 14-140mm + 20mm f1.7
Sigma DP1 and Sigma DP2s

My back is very thankful for the lighter and smaller camera bag. Yes I miss the superb image quality of the FX Nikon and the use of some of the best lenses and the options they provide for, but if you need a kit for light travel, the MFT system is it.