Micro Four Thirds: I am curious as to how many people here use Micro 4/3 cameras. I am a recent convert. I had always sworn by my Nikon SLRs and DSLRs but I found that wrestling the...

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

I am curious as to how many people here use Micro 4/3 cameras. I am a recent convert. I had always sworn by my Nikon SLRs and DSLRs but I found that wrestling the big cameras and those really big lenses on board aircraft was becoming a real PIA. So for my trip to Galapagos I decided to try a lighter rig. I was astounded at the image quality I was able to get with a Panasonic GX8 and the new Panasonic/Leica 100-400mm f4 - 6.3 lens as well as the Olympus 7-14mm f2.8. These four images were all shot at 400mm, the equivalent of 800mm on a full frame DSLR.

Mockingbird #1 5184 x 3888
Mockingbird #1 5184 x 3888...

(Download)

Short eared owl 1593 x 1194
Short eared owl 1593 x 1194...

(Download)

Mockingbird #2 3822 x 2867
Mockingbird #2 3822 x 2867...

(Download)

Flightless Cormorant 5184 x 3888
Flightless Cormorant 5184 x 3888...

(Download)

RichardTaylor Loc: Sydney, Australia

Great set.

For me it was one lens. An Olympus M-Zuiko Digital 40-150 f2.8 pro. A great lens that is relatively compact.
I now do a lot (not all) of shooting with two Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II bodies with the above lens and a Olympus EZ-M 12-40mm F2.8 PRO lens.

minniev Loc: MIssissippi

mcveed wrote:

I am curious as to how many people here use Micro ... (show quote)

Great shots! I'm an m43-only person, use Oly EM1 and EM5 cameras, a mix of Panasonic and Oly lenses. Makes travel a lot easier. 2 cameras + 5 lenses = less than 5 lbs in travel sling bag

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

RichardTaylor wrote:

Great set.

For me it was one lens. An Olympus M-Zuiko Digital 40-150 f2.8 pro. A great lens that is relatively compact.
I now do a lot (not all) of shooting with two Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II bodies with the above lens and a Olympus EZ-M 12-40mm F2.8 PRO lens.

Richard,
The 40-150 will be my next purchase along with a second GX8. I plan to carry two GX8s, one with the 100-400 and one with the 40-150, when on the trail of wildlife. When hunting landscapes I will be using the Panasonic 12-35 and the Olympus 7 - 14. This sunset was shot with the 7-14.

(Download)

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

minniev wrote:

Great shots! I'm an m43-only person, use Oly EM1 and EM5 cameras, a mix of Panasonic and Oly lenses. Makes travel a lot easier. 2 cameras + 5 lenses = less than 5 lbs in travel sling bag

Minnie,
Yes, I knew you were a MFT person. It was some of your excellent images that reinforced my decision to go for it. Wrestling myself away from my D800 and D750 was not pretty. But the Galapagos trip convinced me it was the right decision.
Cheers, Don

jwt Loc: Texas Hill Country

mcveed wrote:

I am curious as to how many people here use Micro ... (show quote)

Great set Don; you can't go wrong with the micro 4/3 cameras I also use Panasonic and have two that I use regularly the DMC-G6 and the DMC-GX7 with several automatic Panasonic lenses.

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

Mcveed, lovely pictures. Thanks for posting and starting the mirrorless argument again. I have toyed around with moving from my Canon 60D and 80D to mirrorless. The finances are a consideration because I have so much invested in Canon. I would hate to buy into mirrorless and then not like it. That would be an expensive mistake. You mirrorless owners certainly love them and do not regret the change. However, I never hear from people who regretted it. I suspect when my current gear gets to heavy, I will switch.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

You are not getting the same images. And you are not increasing the focal length. The idea of equivalency is misused and misunderstood.

https://photographylife.com/sensor-crop-factors-and-equivalence

The larger sensors have greater DR. That extra dynamic range translates to better detail in highlights and shadows. The larger and more expensive lens have other attributes that have to be considered, not just focal length. This includes, aberration, distortion, vignetting, coatings to increase saturation and contrast, reduce falres, AF, VR/IS, weather-sealing, etc. You are using a 100-400 f/4 -6.3. This change is light results and a change of technique. At a steady f/4 in a Nikon 200-400 I am using different strategies at the 400 f/4 than you are at 400 f/6.3.

You would be surprised to find out that this transmission is not linear. It jumps to the higher f/stop faster than many would think. The images are fine if you just look at them on an LCD but when you start printing and doing larger prints, that's when you start seeing differences.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

Mark7829 wrote:

You are not getting the same images. And you are ... (show quote)

Yes, Mark. We've heard all of that before. I think the most important part of the PL article at your link is paragraph 11. There are advantages and disadvantages to all systems. I was not suggesting that my Micro 4/3 shots would produce a print as large as your full frame camera or my chum's Hassy. I was showing shots taken with an easily portable camera, hand held with no resulting back ache. If the IQ is satisfactory to the photographer, why lug around huge rigs that demand tripods and monopods?

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

mcveed wrote:

Yes, Mark. We've heard all of that before. I think... (show quote)

If the IQ is satisfactory to the photographer compared to the work of that photographer, I would agree. There was a recent article in that 80% of all photographers think they are excellent at their craft. In my personal a humble experience, and no offense plzz, most photographers at least 80% don't know photography. Many are satisfied with mediocrity (present company excepted). There is some truth to what you say, but the 4/3 and all crop sensors are not at the level of full frame camera and lenses. But that being said, the camera and lens alone do not "make" the picture. They only "take" the picture. It's the photographer who makes the picture with skills, knowledge and abilities centered around light and composition. We see award wining shots with iPhone images. So why carry around a 4/3 camera when you can just carry an iPhone?

http://www.ippawards.com/2015-winning-photographs/

abc1234 Loc: Elk Grove Village, Illinois

Mark7829 wrote:

If the IQ is satisfactory to the photographer comp... (show quote)

Apropos to this are the people who buy those lovely full-frame cameras and top-rate lenses and then ask what the aperture does.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

Mark7829 wrote:

There is some truth to what you say, but the 4/3 and all crop sensors are not at the level of full frame camera and lenses. So why carry around a 4/3 camera when you can just carry an iPhone?

http://www.ippawards.com/2015-winning-photographs/

The first statement is true, but it is also true that full frame DSLRs are not at the level of medium format cameras, which are not at the level of large format cameras. The camera that is most likely to make it to where the subjects are is most likely to get the shot. I have carried an iPhone, in fact I carry one when I'm out shooting. It has an app for calculating HFD and DOF. I have also taken pictures with it in a pinch - but I got no joy from it. One of my favourite photography books was written by Canadian photographer (and photographic philosopher) Freeman Patterson. The title is 'Photography for the Joy of it'. If there is no joy in it, it is a poor hobby.

Mark7829 Loc: Calfornia

mcveed wrote:

The first statement is true, but it is also true t... (show quote)

Wait a minute ... I did not make the claim about equivalency. That term is used exclusively by crop sensor cameras in regard to full frame. Full frame shares no "envy" issues with any other formats. It's funny, we use the term equivalency but that is a very narrow perspective, yet it is used to often mean in all regards. Well it does not. I have no desire to use medium or large format. But I am not going to mention or even suggest that their might be equivalency.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

Mark7829 wrote:

Wait a minute ... I did not make the claim about equivalency. That term is used exclusively by crop sensor cameras in regard to full frame. Full frame shares no "envy" issues with any other formats. It's funny, we use the term equivalency but that is a very narrow perspective, yet it is used to often mean in all regards. Well it does not. I have no desire to use medium or large format. But I am not going to mention or even suggest that their might be equivalency.

Well, we can discuss semantics all night. When I used the term 'equivalent' I meant it in the very narrow sense of having 'an angle of view equivalent to'. Neither did I suggest that their was any claim of equivalence between full frame and medium format. I used the same terminology that you did, "not equal to". I suggest we drop it. I'm sure anyone else reading this is bored to tears by now. And I'd like to hear from some more Micro 4/3 users.
Cheers, Don

minniev Loc: MIssissippi

mcveed wrote:

Well, we can discuss semantics all night. When I used the term 'equivalent' I meant it in the very narrow sense of having 'an angle of view equivalent to'. Neither did I suggest that their was any claim of equivalence between full frame and medium format. I used the same terminology that you did, "not equal to". I suggest we drop it. I'm sure anyone else reading this is bored to tears by now. And I'd like to hear from some more Micro 4/3 users.
Cheers, Don

Glad to know there's another Freeman Patterson fan - his books have been my favorite photography books for years. Absolute classics.

There are trade offs everywhere along the way with photography. We make each "deal" with the most advantages we can, but no system is perfect in every way. Most of us are hindered by something - the difficulty of working/traveling with heavier equipment, the prohibitive costs for some systems, the need for printing huge, the need for capturing fast moving objects - and we make choices to address the needs we have with compromises usually required.

I have not found all that many m4/3 users on UHH. I follow the sections of interest on DPR to stay up with the conversations (or ask questions) about my gear, and use FYC mostly for sharing pictures and ideas. The "e-word" sparks all kinds of argument and confusion on various fronts, but many m4/3 users (like me) mean it simply to explain the differences between what we see through a 300 m4/3 lens and a 300 lens with another camera/lens format.