what do you really think of m4/3?

When I want compact, my XM-1 with 27, is perfect and the results are the same as from my XE-2.

 
My next digital will be micro 4:3 because of use of legacy lenses and compact size. My only DSLR has been 4:3, an Olympus E-410. As Frank S. says, a trade off. It is about what checks off the most boxes. I've always valued compact and light weight. In the 70's I had an Olympus Pen F and now I own one again. Just cannot get away from the 4:3 ratio I guess.
 
back alley said:
so tell me...what do you really think of the m4/3 systems?
Click to expand...

I owned a small Panasonic with the Nocticron and I think 17mm Summicron. In the end, never bonded with the "almost square" aspect ratio. And I did not like the DOF penalty compared to even entry level DSLRs.
 
I have Oly cameras, the EM5 Elite and EM5 Mk II. I like a small camera and the quality of images are fine, to me at least. Recently got the Panaleica 25 1.4 and have decide to sell my Panasonic 20mm 1.7 and Sigma 30mm f2. My other fave lens is the Zuiko 12mm f2, probably my main lens. The Zuiko 45mm 1.8 rarely gets used.
I shoot mainly street stuff and the quality of the shots are really good. As for the menus, they are a little busy but I rarely go into them now I have them set how I want.
I have been trying out some legacy lenses too. They give pretty good results. I've used the Jupiter-8 and a Canon Serenar 50 1.8.
As with most discussions here it's a case of each to their own.

Paul
 
i think i need to give it a serious try. my use has been half-hearted, but m43 is really quite good at this point.

i was recently on vacation and hated carrying around apsc size dslr gear. the "best" lens i brought was rarely used because i didn't want to carry it, and i didn't want to walk around with an attention grabbing big lens on the body. so next vacation will probably be m43.

interestingly, most of the other cameras i saw were sony nex, or whatever it is they call it now. in second place were gopros (or something like it) on a stick, which a lot of older folks had. dslrs were rare. i also saw less people taking photos with tablets than i've seen in the past.
 
GaryLH said:
On the lx100 it is maintained even in raw..effective mp remains 12mp no matter what aspect ratio. This is unique to lx family if I remember correctly. On the gx7, off the top..I don't remember the answer since I normally use 4:3 aspect ratio.

Gary
Click to expand...


I have to admit the LX100 is still very interesting. If a trade ever shows up I'll try and swing it in.
It's hard to justify any purchases when I look at my current stable. It's pretty much a filled at every area of need.
Still, the LX100 is the zoom lens "compact" that I would hope to have someday.
Like a Fuji x30 with a big sensor. Truly intriguing :eek:
 
I find myself looking at the bodies semi frequently, they're well specced, and decently priced for the most part, and I start getting all tempted.

For my use, I'd want a smallish body, fast af and approximately a 50mm equivalent lens.

I price up bodies, get all interested, and then look for the lens I'd be after, and then I find myself going "these aren't really that much cheaper than stuff for the APSC/FF bodies I have" and I've talked myself out of it.

I think there's a bunch of good m4/3 equipment, and I see really good video work done with them, I just can't square the value proposition for me right now.
 
I have looked a few times at those systems but always I turn away. No ovf available is a real problem for me, just can't get used to them. A bit too small to fit well in my hands. I'm more of a wide lens person so anything wider than 35mm eq is something I rarely use which makes that using legacy glass (which is touted as a plus) is just a no-go. A bit too much video oriented which is something that doesn't appeal me at all. I could see it as a fixed lens camera.

dfatty said:
interestingly, most of the other cameras i saw were sony nex, or whatever it is they call it now. in second place were gopros (or something like it) on a stick, which a lot of older folks had. dslrs were rare. i also saw less people taking photos with tablets than i've seen in the past.
Click to expand...

Don't know where you spend your holiday but I rarely see anything but dslr's. And that is the whole range from entry model to high-end with expensive glass. Then come the phones and p&s, then the tablets. And very exceptionally I see a mirrorless. And more often a Fuji than a Sony, if it is a Sony it is a A7, never a NEX.

I once a year see a 4/3 camera and that is at a music festival where someone of the press uses one. Otherwise I never see them in the wild. About the same occurence as film cameras (that would be me at that festival :D ).
 
It's perfect for the small amount of digital shooting I do. I have a Panasonic Lumix GX-1 with Panasonic 20mm f1.7 and 7-14mm zoom lenses. And a Leica adapter that allows me to use all of my Leica and Canon screw mount lenses and Leica M-mount lenses. And my cost to get it was WAY more reasonable than other options. My motto is: digital is for sharing and film is for caring, so the M4/3 Lumix is perfect for me. And I've never had to turn it in for sensor repair, etc......
 
Spanik said:
Don't know where you spend your holiday but I rarely see anything but dslr's. And that is the whole range from entry model to high-end with expensive glass. Then come the phones and p&s, then the tablets. And very exceptionally I see a mirrorless. And more often a Fuji than a Sony, if it is a Sony it is a A7, never a NEX.
Click to expand...

this was in hawaii. perhaps the hot weather discourages heavy kit, i was certainly expecting to see more dslrs. at sunrise or sunset i would see a handful of dslrs at scenic spots, but that wasn't the norm just visting scenic sites during the day.

i saw a couple of m43 users, but most seemed to be what i thought were sony nex - they certainly weren't dslrs. i was surprised to see so many sony's, i didn't realize so many people use them.
 
I initially got into m4/3 for video purposes, and now use a Panasonic GH4 along with a G6 for backup or B roll. Video files are excellent.

The full-frame cameras are still used for most commercial still shooting, but I do on occasion pull out the GH4 for its quiet electronic shutter. Low ISO files are really quite good, but m4/3 doesn't yet match full-frame at higher ISO speeds.

An old Pano G3 and Oly EP-2 have become my daily carry-everywhere cameras, so cheap that I don't worry about them, but they are very capable for casual street shooting. I agree with Swift1, that the early 12mp Pen cameras have beautiful colors.

I wish Sigma would release an m4/3 mount Foveon-chip camera!
 
I bought an M4/3 camera - the Panasonic GF1. Its a fine camera and has that Panasonic rendering which I have found to be very good. But I don't see it so much as a replacement for SLR cameras so much as a replacement for my small sensor pocket cameras where the comparatively larger sensor gives better dynamic range in a body that is not all that much larger.

Having said this I also have Sony NEX cameras (a couple of models including the NEX 7). I do think they have reached the point there they are a viable alternative to DSLRs particularly in relation to dynamic range / image quality where I can shoot easily at ISO 1600 with little visible grain. But the shortcoming of NEX is the system needs more lenses.

I am planning a trip to Japan next year that will involve a good deal of walking along the Nakasendo and so will be inclined to not take my D700 (or more problematically the large pro lenses that go with it) all of which would need to be carried over long stretches of terrain. So I plan to take the NEX system. I may take an M4/3 as back up, the main advantage of which is that the lens range is better. Speaking of which I own a Sigma 30mm f2.8 (excellent lens) the Olympus 45mm f 1.8 and the Olympus 60mm macro f2.8 both of which are also excellent performers.

In summary all sensors are getting better and I freely admit my M4/3 camera is older so performs less well. But something like the NEX has a natural advantage due to its significantly larger sensor size. If that is not an issue for you then M4/3 may be fine. I could imagine it being useful in a studio setting where light can be controlled and dynamic range is less of an issue. But I am still not convinced that this is the case out in the field.
 
It is an excellent system overall. I use it mainly with my Rolleiflex SL lenses: Zeiss 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4.

U3565I1340328736.SEQ.0.jpg


med_U3565I1377353573.SEQ.0.jpg


med_U3565I1403734711.SEQ.0.jpg


U3565I1426948871.SEQ.0.jpg


It has built-in IS and 10x focus magnifying. It is small and light and cheap. The E-PL1 cost brand new $150 with a one year warranty.
 
I bought into the m4/3 system a few years ago when I got an Oly E-PL1 and the Pany 20/1.7. Although I've been very tempted by the Fuji X100 series (great IQ), I've stuck with m4/3 mainly b/c of the ability to change lenses and the superb roster of excellent native lenses. I now have a Lumix GX1 and an Oly Pen E-P5 and a small handful of native glass (as well as adapters for "legacy" glass). Both the Lumix and the Pen are very compact (the GX1 especially so) and make good travel cameras. As tempting as an X100S or *T might be, for the quality of the images, I have no complaints about the image quality from the E-P5 with the Oly 17/2.8. Both the Oly and Lumix cameras have fast autofocus and pretty decent high iso performance, which is important to me since I often use digital cameras for indoor or low light photography. The AF on the E-P5 with the latest Oly lenses is lightening fast. And I feel that, with the latest Pen model, Olympus has made major strides in making the menu functions more user friendly, although I still think Panasonic has a better user interface. The m4/3 sensors have improved significantly in recent years.

I'm still first and foremost a film photographer, and a digital camera serves as a back-up on travels. If I were just starting out with digital, I might give Fuji a close look. But having started with m4/3 before the X100 appeared on the scene, I've stuck with the m4/3 system and have not regretted it.
 
I really liked the output from my OMD when I had it but the camera felt like a toy ... too small for me.
 
I still use my M4/3 system quite a bit. I gave my Panasonic G1 to my wife. I currently have an Olympus OMD. I regret selling my Panasonic GF1. I really loved that camera. The lenses from both Olympus and Panasonic are quite remarkable. The files also lend themselves to black and white conversion extremely well. The color output from the OMD is fantastic.

Olympus OMD and the Panasonic 14/2.5.

Vendor _5180011

Olympus OMD and the Panasonic LUMIX G VARIO 14-45/F3.5-5.6

Jackson Heights _8120024
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom