Micro 4/3 Despite lust towards FF and DSLR dinosaurs, I'm just drifting towards m4/3...

[Brian]

In 2010- many people were buying u43 to use legacy lenses with a digital camera. A fixed-lens u43 would not have had the appeal. That is also when the prices of legacy lenses started moving upward. That was a big reason for me buying the EP2. I have the 17/2.8, came with a silver EP2. I also have the Kit 14~42. I have adapters for Leica, Nikon, Konica, Canon, M42, Olympus OM. I used a lot of them on the EP2. After getting the Nikon Df, I could use all my F-Mount and Kodak Retina lenses with it and Leica mount lenses with the M9 and M Monochrom.

These days, I use the EPM1 with the 17/2.8, which is a nice, compact setup.

 

[drd1135]

Years ago, I took my E-PM1 with the Lumix 14 2.4 to the Udvar-Hazy Center, an extension of the Air and Space Museum in DC. I had an incredibly productive day of photography. Many of those images are among my favorites. Mostly I remember the joy of having a pocketable camera with a lens that was the perfect focal length for the task at hand.

 

[Brian]

I took the EPM1 with 17/2.8 on a Business trip to Huntsville. I made sure to have enough time for the Rocket Museum. Worked out well for me.
Saturn V- no problem. The airline rules don't count a camera being worn as an "Item", but consider a field bag as a carry-on. So- EPM1, 17/2.8, Flash, in an ever-ready case, not counted against the 2 carry-ons, but meant NO EVF-2. A Pen F would be a good replacement, at the right price. I would not trust just leaving the EVF-2 on the camera for an airline trip, it is too fragile.

The Udvar Hazy is 45 minutes from me, and is the place that I do a lot of walk-around lens comparisons.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

I took some awesome photos with the EPM1 in Disneyland. While not the best IBIS, I took some cool low light shots. Honestly the Olympus body I really was fond of is the E-PL2. The SOOC colors from that camera were my favorite.

 

[Brian]

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

This shot, taken some 8 years ago- sums up what I liked about the Olympus camera. It was small, and had a good build quality. I look at the D850 sized THING that Olympus has focused on, and wonder how they went wrong. The u43 sensor is 1/4th the size of a full-frame, 35mm sized sensor. A 20MPixel sensor is equivalent to 80MPixels in a full-frame camera. This out-resolves almost all lenses available for use on the camera. The sharpest lens I own, the AF-D Micro-Nikkor 200mm F4 ED lens comes no where near 80MPixels of resolution. SO- higher resolution sensors are not practical. The pixel size is small already, meaning High-ISO suffers as there are just not that many Photons being collected. SO- you end up with a D850 sized camera aimed at the pro, with 20MPixels that the lenses cannot keep up with. We'll never know if the better direction for Olympus would have been to focus on compact cameras for serious amateurs that wanted better image quality, a selection of good lenses, and smaller/lighter form factor than full-frame. Given that Olympus is selling the Division, the direction they went in the last 5 or so years was the wrong one.

(I do own a sharper lens, but it is corrected for 1wavelength of light emitted by a LASER, was used in an optical computer in the 1980s, and cost $40,000 to fabricate back then)

 

[drd1135]

I don’t know why it took them so long to put an EVF in a PEN. I do know that the E-M5 was a ground braking camera for them. After that, the E-M1 was a bit bigger, etc., as they kept trying to add features to “compete”. Then the Pen F was a sales disappointment. For me, their best camera was the E-M5 II. I wish the iii had just been the II with the 20 mp PDAF sensor

 

[davidzvi]

The feel of the E-M5.1 in the hand got me interested in m4/3, but the E-PM1 kit got me hooked.

Even though I own Fuji APS-C gear, I think full frame and micro four thirds complement each other very nicely. And that's why I own both of them as well. While I have no plans to sell off my u43 gear, I may have reached a point where I may no longer buy any more of it. The price of Oly's 100-400mm zoom put an end to that. And I really don't need anything else.

When I had a reason to have FF, the combo was great.

Yup, very much with you on that one. Unless the release reveals an extreemely compelling reason I don't see myself spending that kind of money (2x as much as my most expensive lens so far). Was hoping it would be closer to the 75-300mm.

I'd rather buy an RX10mk4 at that price

The price of the 100-400 does surprise me a little. But maybe there will b "something" that will make it worth while. I may end up with it. I want the 12-100 f/4 Pro companion lens on the roadmap, but I think the question of if it will ever come to might be haw much development has already been done on it.

I'm partial to FF and current 1" sensors. I find 1" sensors get me the small form factor of M43, but with BSI sensor tech and OSPDAF. APS-C is too close to the size of FF and Samyang's small f/2.8 and f/1.8 AF primes are just as big if not smaller than the APS-C FL/DOF lens equivalents.

I've thought about it, but I think it would be a 10mm / 18mm prime only combo for me and I recall there was something about the control function limitations that put me off.

....I’ve always seen my Nikon kits as work tools, where as the other systems were items that help me express art. Sounds lame, I know, but that’s just how it registers in my brain.

After getting into m4/3 that's exactly how I viewed my Nikon gear. Since I've always been one that enjoys buying and selling stuff, keeping my work gear static saved my a lot of $$$$. FF gear can be pricey.

A bit OT, but there seems to be a meltdown going on over at 43rumors over the announced specs of the EM 10 MkIV. CDAF vs PDAF crowds. I couldn't tell you what type of AF any camera I've ever owned has/had. Maybe if I was an action, BIF, or wildlife enthusiast such things would be more important. Or if I obsessed over technical spec sheets. SMH.

I recently thought I would arm myself with the new age PDAF only to find out I don't need it.
It's nice but there's a premium.

And on the other end of the stick I thought I didn't need IBIS but adore it.
And it's dirt cheap.

It's for tracking and improved low light AF where contrast can be reduced. The uproar is kind of silly, but when even the X-A# and X-T### have it the lack stands out on a spec sheet. But at least this one is back to being smaller and lighter, the E-M10.3 is only 4g lighter than the E-M5.3.

Not sure I agree with "burying it and moving on".

Yes, JIP is likely not going to do anything meaningful to the line.
So any money you spend on an Olympus system will stay there (probably hard to resell at all).

But if what's available right now is a good fit for someone - no reason not to keep using it...
I've been using a few 'dead' systems and they still make great photos for my purposes...
Especially if you like long lenses and travelling light, there's still no alternative to some of m43's options.

The sale is something I have considered when recommending a system, but it still comes down to what the user wants and needs. M4/3 still has one of the lenses, I think maybe Sony just recently pasted them? But (IMHO) no one matches them in feature/performance/size equation.

If one goes the "preowned goods only" route, the financial risk is greatly diminished. Secondly, thanks to slow(er) sensor developments for the last 4 years you can get an old body that should still be competent against the best of µ4/3.

Agreed about the Olympus PL lineup. They work well but the churnout rate is high, something that wasn't the case with DSLRs or indeed, with CaNikon even today. It's just a company strategy, can't generalize over the products.

Too many too frequently, one of the problems that has hurt the camera industry IMHO. The trend toward "something for this years CES" was not the way to go.

I would have loved to see a smaller / simplfied Pen F, who know.

 

[wt21]

Because I'm covered in poison ivy, I'm not sleeping much, so looking back through the old 12MP EP1 picks, it had amazing color in good light and very nice B&W

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

And, at some point I sold on some aggravating lenses because they were really front heavy (OM 50/2 macro) or a pain to focus (Fujian 35mm 1.7 CCTV lens). I regret the sale of both.

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[tilman]

The price of the 100-400 does surprise me a little. But maybe there will b "something" that will make it worth while. I may end up with it.

Yeah, I'm just surprised that they seem to have developed a direct Panasonic 100-400mm competitor, instead of offering something that the system doesn't have yet (an in-between, more budget-option that goes to 400mm, weather-sealed, a step-up from the 75-300 but not pro-grade).

What they delivered is probably worth the price they're asking for, but if I were interested in a lens of that weight, size and price I would have picked up a Panasonic 100-400mm already...

 

[Biro]

What they delivered is probably worth the price they're asking for, but if I were interested in a lens of that weight, size and price I would have picked up a Panasonic 100-400mm already...

Just order the RX10 IV already. C'mon... you know you want it...

 

[tilman]

Just order the RX10 IV already. C'mon... you know you want it...

Hahaha, I'll get to it...
It simply would have been easier to "justify" the purchase of yet another lens than the purchase of yet another camera

 

[tonyturley]

Our favorite enabling site says the RX10 IV is 250g heavier than a Pen F + 75-300II, but I wonder if the IQ of the RX10 IV's lens is better? Compact Camera Meter

I've owned the 75-300II, and while it wasn't sterling, it was decent.

 

[mike3996]

Our favorite enabling site says the RX10 IV is 250g heavier than a Pen F + 75-300II, but I wonder if the IQ of the RX10 IV's lens is better? Compact Camera Meter

I've owned the 75-300II, and while it wasn't sterling, it was decent.

Remembering that a misfocused photo tends to rank pretty low on the IQ section, I think PEN-F with a tele is not going to be as good as a Sony in this battle

 

[tilman]

That's my thought. A RX10mk4 with its autofocus/tracking capabilities would give me something I don't have yet... (whereas a 100-400mm would only give me a bit more reach - I'm fairly happy with my 75-300mm)

Anywho, this is getting a bit off on a tangent, I guess

 

[MoonMind]

That's my thought. A RX10mk4 with its autofocus/tracking capabilities would give me something I don't have yet... (whereas a 100-400mm would only give me a bit more reach - I'm fairly happy with my 75-300mm)

Anywho, this is getting a bit off on a tangent, I guess

Only partly ... Getting reach with little bulk is one of the real advantages of ... But I guess the Sony talk might put some people off

But then, the fact that reach is even easier to get at with 1" cameras, especially those superzoom models, is a valid point.

For me, the Panasonic FZ1000 was a very worthwhile acquistion because it beats the 14-150mm II (yes, the lens alone!) for price and IQ. The 14-150mm II is lighter, but not smaller. I prefer zooming manually, but the FZ1000's powerzoom is quite okay (I like the step zoom setting most). But what you can't do with one of the bigger superzooms is something trivial: Go smaller if desired. So, in the end, still wins, but by a much smaller margin than one would think. The FZ1000 is one killer proposition ... No other camera of that kind has the status, though - because of either size or price (or both).

The size and bulk of the RX10 IV is the key reason I don't own one; it'd be *the* all-in-one solution, I have to agree. The RX100 VII is appealing as well - but at three times the price of the FZ1000, and offering less reach, it's just not worth it for me to switch, even though I actually *don't* own anything as small *and* as versatile.

All that said, I'm pleasantly surprised time and again by the images the 14-150mm II, arguably just the middle child of the three superzooms, helps me produce. At the end of the day, you get a reliable superzoom that you can swap for a small, premium prime at any time. No superzoom, not even Sony's best, can offer that.

M.

 

[tilman]

I’m not thinking of switching though. I’d still have all my m43 gear (large and small), plus a camera that can do good continuous autofocus.

For me the step up from 75-300mm (one of THE lenses that keep me happy in m43) to Olys new 100-400mm just doesn’t seem to be what I was hoping for. That’s all

 

[tonyturley]

Sorry for pulling the thread so far OT. While there are times a faster, longer lens would be nice, they come with a price - in $$$, size, and weight. I guess for now I'll just have to keep rolling with my P45-150.

 

[davidzvi]

Yeah, I'm just surprised that they seem to have developed a direct Panasonic 100-400mm competitor, instead of offering something that the system doesn't have yet (an in-between, more budget-option that goes to 400mm, weather-sealed, a step-up from the 75-300 but not pro-grade).

What they delivered is probably worth the price they're asking for, but if I were interested in a lens of that weight, size and price I would have picked up a Panasonic 100-400mm already...

Just order the RX10 IV already. C'mon... you know you want it...

Hahaha, I'll get to it...
It simply would have been easier to "justify" the purchase of yet another lens than the purchase of yet another camera

I’m not thinking of switching though. I’d still have all my m43 gear (large and small), plus a camera that can do good continuous autofocus.

For me the step up from 75-300mm (one of THE lenses that keep me happy in m43) to Olys new 100-400mm just doesn’t seem to be what I was hoping for. That’s all

Definitely a lens over another system or camera, I just recently got down to one. And then there is the whole power zoom thing, I'm not a fan of power zoom. In case I haven't mentioned it.

I don't already have the PL100-400 for several reasons, mainly because it's not the focal length I want. What I want is the companion to the 12-100 f/4 Pro that's on the roadmap. Why I may buy the O100-400 anyway? Because while I am optimistic, I also understand that if it's not actually already under development I'm not sure we'll ever see it. If I had to guess I think the companion to the 12-45 f/4 Pro is the better bet for being in development already. But I'd need to use a TC to get the range I want (something that ends in the 225-250mm range). I considered going with the G9 over the E-M1.2 back in 2018 to pair with the PL50-200, but still not quite long enough with out a TC.

 

[tilman]

Haha, at the end of the day I feel I have more time to talk about photography right now than opportunity to go out and do it.

My imagined Oly 100-400mm (2 times the quality, weight and price of the 75-300mm) just didn't happen (instead we likely got 3 times the quality, weight and price).
That doesn't make the 100-400mm a bad lens (it probably is excellent).

Just a disappointment for me, combined with the disappointment of the sale of Olympus' imaging division.
But... If the department/division isn't stripped out completely, it could be that the same engineers & developers will keep working on Zuikos and O-MDs for a while (at slower pace and smaller scale, but still...)

And the used market will provide options for m43 users for quite some time... So all's not lost... (and maybe Panasonic will even come up with a new m43 sensor at some point - who knows... )

 

[bartjeej]

I found the RX10 iii / iv lens to be stellar at all focal lengths - combined with the more modern sensor and PDAF, the iv especially gives most m43 combinations a run for their money IQ wise. The top m43 cameras probably have better stabilisation and WAY better weather sealing (which is a biggie for me), but the all in one factor is also not to be dismissed.

@davidzvi isn't the oly 12-100 f/4 pro on the market already?