Glenn Harve

The most inferior camera system is the one that isnt used. That is, if getting out and making images is the actual mission.

JimRPhoto Loc: Raleigh NC

I would suggest that many people have more than one “tool” for a specific purpose. For example, many families have more than one car, perhaps different body types (SUV, SAV, sedan) and choose which one to use on a give day depending on what they need on that day. Snow? All wheel drive day, etc. I use my full frame system for days when I am driving to the location of the activity, maybe an arboretum, maybe a landscaped garden, or the nearby lake and river. But when I am carrying my photo gear over my shoulder or in a backpack (like a trip by air) then I use the MFT system. Both give me excellent results. So for me it comes down to the quality of the system, and the weight/size of the system. I got into the MFT system only five years ago in prep for a trip to Europe, and have been most satisfied with the compactness of a kit of several lenses and two camera bodies, all fitting in an over the shoulder bag. So in a nutshell, it all comes down to personal preference like so many other things we do. JimR

User ID

I find very little actual difference in noise between FF and M43 in real use. This is cuz FF requires 4X higher ISO than m43 just to get the same shot.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For my shot I need a particular shutter speed whether the format is 1 inch or MF or in between. Shutter speed effect is not affected by format.

I also need a certain DoF, but that *is* affected by format. I need f/5.6 DoF from my FF camera, and at my shutter speed that requires ISO 12,800.

Or, at the same shutter speed I can open up to f/2.8 and maintain that same DoF by using my m43. At F2.8 the required ISO is only 3200.

The noise level is about the same in both scenarios above.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If I were to choose MF I’d need f/9.0 to maintain that DoF at the same shutter speed. So MF requires ISO 32,000.

I have not seen MF ISO 32,000 noise myself. But I hafta believe it’s about the same as the two scenarios above.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Yeah, but what about those light m43 lenses?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I have a Lumix GH4 I use for video and stills. I will trade for a GH6 late this year. The pro video features “out film” most cameras under $4000. 25MP stills are more than adequate for what I do.

Full frame cameras are like trucks: If I need a truck, I rent one.

fetzler Loc: North West PA

I enjoy my two Olympus cameras ( PEN F and EM-1 mkIII). Indeed, I think it makes better photos than my Nikon D7200 in many instances. The cameras are super for macro and close up photography.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

I don’t think most shooters here believe M4/3 is inferior. Just physics at work. The question is not which produces better photos but is the difference large enough to go full frame. I shoot M4/3 Panasonic have for a about 10 years, I love em I have a crop sensor canon and can’t tell the difference. I would say 90 percent of photographers will not notice much difference because they print 8x10 to 11x14. No one has walked into my house and asked wow is that a full frame photo. They just like them cause they are pretty

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

I’m firmly entrenched in both the Nikon FF and M4/3 camps. Like many I started with Nikon APS-C. For many years I progressed from the D40 up to the D500. I was using an old Fuji bridge camera when I kayaked and wanted to up my game so I got a Panasonic G9. It was a fantastic camera in so many ways but when I started shooting BIF the focus couldn’t keep up.
What really sold me on M4/3 though was a trip to the Bahamas. One leg was an island hopper where my total luggage was 44 lbs. The D500 and those lenses stayed home and my G9 kit gave me great results. It also sold me on mirrorless so when I saw a good sale on the D850 I’d been salivating over I opted on the sale price for the Z7 instead and I never regretted that decision. Eventually my G9 took a swim while kayaking, (luckily I bought drop/spill coverage), while waiting for the replacement I went with a Sony RX10MIV for kayaking, (I have a love/hate relationship with that one), but I knew I wanted to stick with M4/3 so I picked up an Olympus E-M1X for the improved focus tracking. Long story longer, when Nikon announced the Z9 I realized I hadn’t touched the D500 with the 200-500 for months. I gave it a slight edge over the E-M1X for focus tracking but most of my wildlife photography is done while hiking or kayaking and the E-M1X was close enough. I still love my Z7 for the things I use it for, (those available light nightclub shots I got last week for instance), and I’m looking forward to my Z9 when it arrives, but I’m looking forward to my OM-1 too, which will arrive first.

User ID

The Zuiko macro fills the frame with a subject about 1/2x5/8 inch, and it can output in-camera focus stacked jpegs.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

I think I might want a GH6 later this year too.

Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

Perhaps because they watch videos produced by certain YouTubers who claim M43 is not suitable for professional photographers. The fact is, that there are quite a few top professionals who earn their living with M43 systems, but are not as well known as those making outlandish claims. There are two in particular who rubbish M43 (read Olympus/OMD Solutions cameras amd lenses). I would make the point that, if they are incapable of producing professional quality images, it's not the cameras or lenses that are the problem. I currently own an EM1X and an EM1 mark III. I will be part exchanging both for 2 x OM1 bodies. Prior to returning to OLympus/OMD Solutions, I owned a Sony A7III, A9 and A7R4. I photograph wildlife almost exclusively and believe that the new OM1 will be virtually perfect for me.

Hanson

You don't need explanation from anybody for justification. As long as you are happy with your MFT Olympus system, that is enough. BTW, I have been a happy Lumix user for many years. I read about new models of Nikon and Canon all the time with no intention to buy any.

dgilliam

If one compares only specifications, the larger format almost always wins out. Having used ancient film formats from 5x7 to APS-C as well as digital formats APS-C to 35mm, I would always suggest considering the best tool for the job.
The 5x7 view camera can take exceptional images of, say, landscapes or architecture but, it is not the best tool for Birds in Flight or an afternoon stroll. Use what works for you - it sounds like you found it. Let your images speak for you and forget the noise about which system is best.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Early reviews are mostly very enthusiastic. A couple full frame snobs made fun of it, but they’re both body builders.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

For Macro enthusiasts, these are the most popular m43 Macro lenses:

Olympus ED 30mm f3.5 Macro (not stabilized)

Panasonic Lumix 30mm f2.8 Macro ASPH (stabilized with MEGA OIS)

Panasonic Leica DG Macro-Elmarit 45mm f2.8 ASPH (stabilized with MEGA OIS)

Olympus ED 60mm f2.8 Macro (not stabilized)

The Panasonic stabilization should be turned OFF when the lenses are used on Olympus bodies.

Panasonic stabilization works with Dual IS 2 in late model Lumix G, GH, and GX cameras. Older lenses may require a firmware update.

Both Olympus and Lumix IBIS work with all of these.

I have the 30mm Lumix Macro. It is tack sharp and works well as my film copying lens, an art copy lens, a pet/people portrait lens, and a general purpose long normal lens. It's good for "talking head" video interviews. It's too short for insects, poisonous snakes, and use around sloppy industrial processes. I have used it for panoramas created from multiple images, with good results.

Some other Macro lenses are available from third parties, and of course, dSLR Macro lenses can be adapted to m43 bodies.