what do you really think of m4/3?

I have the EM-5 mkII and the image quality is very good and overall a more than capable-enough camera for my needs. I do have a few issues with it that, if present in one of the top-spec'ed m4/3 camera, are probably universal for the system.

Coming from a dslr, battery life is way too short. Especially since the camera isn't smart enough to know when you're looking through the evf vs when the camera is on but slung around your side. As a result, I constantly have to turn mine on and off, which leads to the next issue:

Startup lag. This isn't terrible, but it is usually a second or two depending on the lens. Never noticed this on my dslr.

Also I feel autofocus, primarily on thin, wispy subjects close to the lens or with macro, can be sub-par compared to phase AF.

So, those are my minor gripes. If I were getting paid to shoot big jobs or had fast action to capture, I'd shoot a dslr. Otherwise, it works.

I used to use legacy glass on my m4/3 bodies, but got tired of doing so due to the 2x crop factor and the lower performance of many lenses. If I weren't already invested in the system, I'd seriously consider something like a sony a6000 and EOS M,
 
paulfish4570 said:
gary, the panny 20/1.7 looks like a winner. i'll give it look. love the flatness ...
Click to expand...

Btw there are two versions of it.. No difference that I am aware of in terms of lens formulation, the mk2 is suppose to have a faster af from what I hear. I have the first version picked it up when I bought the gf1 way back when..

Good luck w/ it.

Gary
 
jsrockit said:
I just can't get into it. The Olympus E-M1 is a nice camera, and there are some really nice lenses, but I don't like the 4:3 aspect ratio. To get away from that, you need to use a cropped jpeg file. That's a no go for me too. I stick to APSC and FF 2:3 formats.
Click to expand...

There is an option for several different format rations on the Olympus OMD I believe!

Texsport
 
I think they're great! Although, now that full frame cameras are nearly as small, they've lost some of their appeal, for me. I really like Oly's design aesthetic and like what Panasonic and Leica have done together, as well. I think m4/3 has really helped move camera tech forward over the past decade.

I'm not sure why the aspect ratio bothers people; I think it's all a matter of what you're used to, and it's easy to crop.
 
I shoot a Pany GH3 a lot. I wish it could be my only camera. But, the achilles heel of the m4/3 format, in my experience, is low light and dynamic range. If I nail exposure exactly, ISO 1600 is fine. Shooting with a full-frame sensor camera, though, ISO 1600 is child's play. I shoot a 5D MkIII at 6400 without a worry. And I haven't seen much progress in m4/3 ISO performance yet. The GH4 and even the newer G7 aren't significantly improved over the GH3.

I'm not sure stuffing full-frame sensors in tiny bodies is the solution, either. Despite innovations like 5-axis IS, a camera needs some mass to handle well.
 
mabelsound said:
I think they're great! Although, now that full frame cameras are nearly as small, they've lost some of their appeal, for me. I really like Oly's design aesthetic and like what Panasonic and Leica have done together, as well. I think m4/3 has really helped move camera tech forward over the past decade.

I'm not sure why the aspect ratio bothers people; I think it's all a matter of what you're used to, and it's easy to crop.
Click to expand...

I still have my Lumix GF1, but I have to admit it never really worked for me. Sold all the lenses, but kept the kit lens.

As for the odd size, I would crop them if I showed them, since I long ago moved back to FF. It's all what one is used to, I guess, and FF is now almost as cheap.
 
JP Owens said:
I shoot a Pany GH3 a lot. I wish it could be my only camera. But, the achilles heel of the m4/3 format, in my experience, is low light and dynamic range. If I nail exposure exactly, ISO 1600 is fine. Shooting with a full-frame sensor camera, though, ISO 1600 is child's play. I shoot a 5D MkIII at 6400 without a worry. And I haven't seen much progress in m4/3 ISO performance yet. The GH4 and even the newer G7 aren't significantly improved over the GH3.

I'm not sure stuffing full-frame sensors in tiny bodies is the solution, either. Despite innovations like 5-axis IS, a camera needs some mass to handle well.
Click to expand...

Another problem I have with them is the battery power. I have to carry numerous batteries with me all the time. Other than that, I really enjoy shooting with the cameras and most of the lenses are excellent.
 
I have been working with M43 for a few years now, and sold my 5DII with all of my lenses to fill out my Olympus kit, with money left over. I can fit a very extensive gig kit in a Domke F2, which would have been impossible with the Canon.

Traded up from the original E-M5 to the E-M5II, and find it a very welcome improvement.

The lenses are tiny and fantastic, and the autofocus is great.
The cameras handle well (after you've set them up in the menus).
I've had no issues with battery life or performance, and shoot M43 in a variety of different scenarios. The silent shutter mode is fantastic for photographing live music and theatre.

The only Canon lens that I really miss is the 24mm f1.4II, of which there is no direct equivalent in the M43 lineup. I suppose that the 12mm is close enough, but I have not yet used it. Favourite primes are the Zuiko 17mm f1.8, Zuiko 45mm f1.8, and for zooms, the 14-40mm f2.8 and the 40-150mm f2.8.

I've recently acquired a Sony A7II, and find it sluggish (and very loud) in comparison. It does play very nicely with my legacy glass, though, with which the Olympus can't compete (due to 2x crop). I definitely find the E-M5II's EFV better than the A7II's, and the battery life is much better.
 
mabelsound said:
.....

I'm not sure why the aspect ratio bothers people; I think it's all a matter of what you're used to, and it's easy to crop.
Click to expand...

I agree and wonder about others' phobias about cropping to change the aspect ratio. Having shot 6x6 in MF, 6x7 in MF, 4x5 in LF, 3x2 in 35mm and others in digital, I find a crop to whatever aspect ratio works best in the vast majority of images. I would guess that probably 90% of my 35mm images over the years end up being cropped to 8x10/4x5 aspect ratio. But I never hesitated to crop a 6x6 neg to a 3x2 aspect ratio or a 35mm neg to a square if that was what worked best.

Maybe it goes back to the wet darkroom days where the aspect ratio of the negative and that of the printing paper seemed to always be different so adjusting the aspect ratio was the norm.

I shooting a lot with a Fuji XP-1 and XT-1 now and cannot tell you the native aspect ratio. I just know that I commonly crop to 8x10/4x5.

I had a m4/3 system and it did everything I needed it to do. The only reason I quit using it was that it got stolen and I came across a killer deal on a X100 to replace it.

But then I have never understood the logic that a digital camera sensor must match the size and aspect ratio of a piece of 35mm film. It always seemed like apples and oranges to me.
 
+1

Same here.. Shot with so many different camera types and aspect ratios..really does matter that much to me..

Gary
 
olympus and panasonic don't have the same status as fuji and sony because the industrial design of their products is disappointing and haphazard. panny's f2.8 zooms are purple, oly's retro bodies are half-baked, the narrow lenses with wide mounts look weird, etc. it's unfortunate because many of the lenses (though not as well thought out as fuji) are really good, and autofocus on 4/3 is generally going to be faster than on larger formats.

oly is finally making a pen with the evf in the corner, so that's something to look forward to. i'd love to see the e-1 design updated, too.
 
the gx7 is really an amazing camera... focuses in the dark. the hexar af of today!

i am thrilled with the development of the format as it lightens my load like never before.
 
Keith said:
I really liked the output from my OMD when I had it but the camera felt like a toy ... too small for me.
Click to expand...

I love my OMD EM5.

With the grip on it's perfect for my hands and if I want even more grip, I also attach the extra battery module.
 
Recent convert to m43. Picked up a OMD EM10mk2 and Olympus 45mm 1.8 lens. Also got an inexpensive Fotodiox M mount to m43 adapter.

So far very impressed with the ergonomics and haptics. The dials are nice and chunky and give good click feedback. Like to be able to change aperture with one dial and use the other for exposure compensation.

The image stabilisation is phenomenal. I have shaky hands and it really makes a world of difference. I got my 79 year old father to take a few pictures with it and they came out blur free - remarkable for low indoor lighting, more so as he has a noticeable parkinson's tremor .

I bought it as my go to travel and travelling light digital camera. I have high hopes it will excel in its brief. I think m43 hits the sweet spot in the compromises between image sensor/size of lenses/weight of system.
 
I have a micro 4/3rds for awhile and do like using them the size the sharp
lenses, and now with the 20 megapixels camera they could only get better.
 
Just spent five minutes pondering over all the things I could write about this camera. The great big viewfinder, how easy it is to focus, the smooth operation, amazing build quality.

Then realised nobody else was posting about their Leica M4 and M3. I'll get my coat.
 
aizan said:
olympus and panasonic don't have the same status as fuji and sony because the industrial design of their products is disappointing and haphazard. panny's f2.8 zooms are purple, oly's retro bodies are half-baked, the narrow lenses with wide mounts look weird, etc. it's unfortunate because many of the lenses (though not as well thought out as fuji) are really good, and autofocus on 4/3 is generally going to be faster than on larger formats.

oly is finally making a pen with the evf in the corner, so that's something to look forward to. i'd love to see the e-1 design updated, too.
Click to expand...

Talking about industrial design, I think Sony A7 (the one with “plastic” lens mount) is one of the ugliest cameras in years. While OMDs and PENs are beautiful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom