Micro 4/3 What Do You Use MFT For?

[dionhouston]

Oh, on the question "Should mFTs be considered the smallest of the large sensors, or the biggest of the small sensors?"

Interesting question. I know I’m speaking to the choir here, but it seems to me that’s like asking “is this car the biggest of the compacts or the smallest of the mid-size?” Is there any significant qualitative difference?

For fun, I’m in Poland now and I brought an old PowerShot SX530 HS. It’s got an awesome 1/2.3” sensor and I think it set me back $250 when new? 5.6x crop factor. I put a custom firmware on it so I could shoot RAW. I got this…

It’s got some purple fringing and the camera is as non-weather-sealed as you can get. It also doesn’t have a viewfinder which drives me nuts. But frankly I don’t think it’s bad. I’m confident if a company wanted to they could produce a pro model with this sensor. So what’s the difference?

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

 

[John King]

Oh, on the question "Should mFTs be considered the smallest of the large sensors, or the biggest of the small sensors?"

Interesting question. I know I’m speaking to the choir here, but it seems to me that’s like asking “is this car the biggest of the compacts or the smallest of the mid-size?” Is there any significant qualitative difference?

For fun, I’m in Poland now and I brought an old PowerShot SX530 HS. It’s got an awesome 1/2.3” sensor and I think it set me back $250 when new? 5.6x crop factor. I put a custom firmware on it so I could shoot RAW. I got this…

It’s got some purple fringing and the camera is as non-weather-sealed as you can get. It also doesn’t have a viewfinder which drives me nuts. But frankly I don’t think it’s bad. I’m confident if a company wanted to they could produce a pro model with this sensor. So what’s the difference?

View attachment 391718

I've taken some very nice photos with my Nikon Coolpix E5000, which also had a 2/3rd sensor (now gone to god, sadly). Just not in the same league as my E-1. Both 5 MPx.

 

[dionhouston]

I've taken some very nice photos with my Nikon Coolpix E5000, which also had a 2/3rd sensor (now gone to god, sadly). Just not in the same league as my E-1. Both 5 MPx.

Oh yeah, for sure. And this one isn’t competition for my E-M1.2. I just don’t think the size of the sensor is the limiting factor. Canon was clearly going for the “something better than a smartphone” consumer market and priced it accordingly. But it is 16MP…

 

[agentlossing]

M4/3 is "smallest of the large sensors" for sure. It doesn't behave like smaller sensors. That's one of the things it has going for it.

 

[Pauhana]

M4/3 is the camera system I use daily now that I retired. So much nicer to carry than my old Canon gear. iUse it primarily for bird photography. But also for landscape, Astro, grandkids, well everything. I just don’t listen to the noise that I need a 60 mp camera and a 800 mm lens for bird photography. Rather spend that money on several birding trips with friends. Its Just a tool, and a very fun one at that

 

[davidzvi]

......
As near as I can tell though, the whole thing about dynamic range isn't directly about the size of the sensor, it's about the size of the pixels right? And that's where I go back to the Goldilocks factor (glad you liked it @Glevum Owl ) -- if we were to put the same size pixels as one of those nice-DR FF cameras, I'm sure we'd get the same performance -- on maybe a 5-megapixel sensor. And vice versa, the same size pixels as a modern M43 sensor on FF probably would have similar DR -- but there would be a metric b... -- a whole lot of them
.......

Sadly it doesn't work like that. The old D700 had a 12mp FF sensor and scores about the same as the E-M1.2. The 20mp E-M1.2 scores higher than the 16mp E-M5.2.

.........
How many photos does one see here taken at less than ISO 200? Precious few ...
.........

While there are differences and different use cases, these are minimal at best. Most criticisms rely on comparing one particular mFTs camera with every other format, while failing to mention that no single one of those other cameras can match ALL the features routinely found in most mFTs cameras.
.......

I have about 10,000 images in my catalogs under 200 iso.

I'm a big m4/3 fan, but you can't say no single FF can match ALL the features routinely found on mFT cameras without acknowledging the opposite is also true.

 

[ac12]

I now use m43 for almost everything.
The only thing I use my Nikon DX dSLR is for field games (football, soccer, lacrosse).
This is simply because it is MUCH easier to turn the zoom ring on the Nikon 70-200/4 lens, than ANY of my Olympus Pro zooms. I can turn the zoom ring with my fingers, not having to grab it with my hand. When working the zoom ring for 4 hours, this makes a difference.
I had hopes for the 40-150/2.8, because it is an internal zoom. But the zoom ring has significantly more drag than the Nikon lens.

 

[Carbonman]

I had hopes for the 40-150/2.8, because it is an internal zoom. But the zoom ring has significantly more drag than the Nikon lens.

I found that it's not that there is so much drag but the engraved metal zoom collar doesn't provide easy traction. I put one of those silicone rubber wristbands on it and can now zoom with the tip of a finger or thumb quite easily.

 

[sasquatchphotog]

I use m43 for almost all my photography now, as it's my highest specced system. After I rediscovered photography/videography in 2020 (thank you Covid), I went through an LX15, FZ2500, a GM1 and a G9. I still have all those cameras barring the FZ2500, which was sold to part fund the G9. All bought/acquired second hand (I got the GM1 for free via Freecycle from a very generous guy - the menus are locked to Japanese, but I've become familiar enough with Lumix menus to get by).

My principal interests are wildlife/nature, travel and family documentation. m43 generally works wonderfully for the first two, but I've struggled with the latter - meals out in dim restaurants, family birthday parties in lamplit living rooms, weddings etc. I've occasionally branched into flash, but my family/friends are camera shy enough without having each shot announced with a bright flash.
I use DxO Photolab with the amazing DeepPrime NR. For wildlife, landscape etc, it's fantastic - for people though, I don't always find it as pleasing, even with the slider way down.

I feel I'm currently at a crossroads of sorts where I'm wondering whether to go all in and upgrade my lenses for m43 (invest in the "bag of primes" 10-25, upgrade 100-300 for 50-200) or whether to branch into full frame first with the S5 II (currently available with the 20-60 and 50 1.8 for £2099), keeping my small consumer m43 lenses for travel.

The radio silence on m43 cameras isn't helping - the GH6 doesn't appeal, neither really would an updated GX or GM camera as they're too small for my liking.

The answer to these sorts of musings is often to hire and try - which may end up having to happen at some point, but feels punishing as it eats into a purchase budget!

I've taken many images I'm pleased with my m43 cameras, but at times I can't help but wonder whether the addition of a larger format would help.

 

[ac12]

I found that it's not that there is so much drag but the engraved metal zoom collar doesn't provide easy traction. I put one of those silicone rubber wristbands on it and can now zoom with the tip of a finger or thumb quite easily.

Yes, especially when my hands get sweaty. Then holding the zoom ring gets slippery
I often have to carry a towel on my belt to wipe my hands, when they get sweaty. For me, it is not limited to outdoor games in the sun, it also happens in the gym.

On my list of stuff to do, is to get a silicone band for my pro lenses.
That metal zoom ring may LOOK nice, but it is not practical. That is why Nikon, Canon and Sony put rubber on the zoom ring, to give you grip.