TheOutline Loc: Charlotte, NC

An interesting topic. I have been shooting micro 43 mirrorless for about 5 years. I am still unsure if I would like a second system, which would be a full-frame system. Has anyone added a full frame to micro 43 or vice versa? Do you notice any difference in image quality or color saturation? I do believe that the noise factor is real, but I never blow-up photos larger than 16x20. Curious as to any suggestions. By the way, it still feels awkward to zoom “backwards” from Nikon, using my Olympus micro 43. So, I would consider pairing my micro 43 with full frame Nikon or Sony Canon zooms opposite Nikon, so I won’t consider Canon. The zooming in the opposite direction really makes me miss action shots, such as photographing live soccer or live football. I don’t like the slow response that I’ve experience with my Oly Em1 mark two

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

You’ll notice the speed of operation increases with full frame gear (or any of the newest gear). I urge you to try before you buy if at all possible.

Do look at Panasonic’s latest, the Lumix S5 Mark II. It’s the first Lumix with hybrid phase detect autofocus. It takes L-mount lenses, which are native to Leica, Panasonic, and Sigma cameras. It also lets you install custom lookup tables (LUTs) and get any sort of color you want, right in the camera, when making JPEGs.

Also try the OM Systems OM-1. It is MUCH faster than your current m43 body, and uses all your current lenses.

YouTube is a great source of user reviews.

If you aren’t post processing raw files, I urge you to start. That’s where the best color saturation and other qualities come out.

TheOutline Loc: Charlotte, NC

Thanks for the reply from just the the road apiece. We are very fortunate to live in NC!

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I lived in CLT for 35 years.

TheOutline Loc: Charlotte, NC

Prob my fav city to live in. We liked Nashville a lot, as well

pesfls Loc: Oregon, USA

I used and still do use Nikon gear and have for over 50 years. A few years ago I bought an Oly Pen F and two of their pro lenses for travel/vaction. Yes they work differently but you can overcome that. I’m a creature of habit and did.

I would just suggest you spend some time fiddling with your Oly before heading out to a serious endeavor. It’s easilly accomplished with a bit of prep.

As to image quality, they are both great. The Oly is superb if you like to shoot in mono. Just enjoy.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

srodday Loc: Mass

It doesn’t bother me to switch between Oly and Canon. I do bird photography and so I tend to be actively zooming and I have probably shot enough with both that once I am using it, I don’t think about it.

I have the new OM-1 and love it.

High ISOs the canon R5 is better but Topaz denoise does amazing things that I don’t mind using either. Oly is lighter too!

So try/rent before you buy. You may not need it.

whitehall Loc: Canada

Having been a Canon shooter most of my life I cautiously added the 4/3 system mainly by reason of weight. However I found that IQ and dynamic range were just not up to full frame standards. This changed with the introduction of the new OM 1 camera. I now have both an OM1 and the Canon R5, and simply use them for different purposes. If I travel the OM 1 comes along. Likewise for BIF mainly because of its weight frame rate and pro capture feature. For landscape and low light photography full frame still reigns. My two cents worth.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

The advantages of NEVER selling anything... I have both Canon and Olympus. The Canon's are my tripod/monopod system and the Oly is my walk around. IBIS or ILIS is the difference... NO stab. on the canons and it shows ! The older you get the more stab. is a factor. Just because you have one type of something does not mean you cannot have something else also.

Jeffcs Loc: Myrtle Beach South Carolina

I use both Olympus and Sony both systems have their performance advantages. So I suggest renting something first just see if it (Sony/ Nikon/canon/etc.) will work/be to your liking. Good luck.

Peteso Loc: Blacks Hills

I have been shooting with Olympus with Pro lenses for about eight years. About a year or so ago, I bought a Sony A7Riv. I use both systems and love them both. Most of my photography is landscapes and wildlife. Briefly, for landscapes, I prefer the Sony to the Olympus, primarily because of image quality. The Sony is also a more elegant system, so it’s like driving a luxury, high-performance car. For wildlife, I prefer the Olympus, primarily because of the ProCapture features. For hiking, particularly when it may include both wildlife and landscape, it’s sometimes a close call, but if I don’t carry both cameras, I generally prefer the Olympus, because of weight and long lenses, including the lens extenders, which are often a must. I hope you find this helpful.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

My journey may inform your dilemma. It is not the same as yours, but does relate to it. After shooting only with crop frame cameras for 12 years, I bought a full-frame camera (of the same brand) in preparation for a night sky workshop. I needed both the wider frame and the much more capable low light performance.

I really liked using the full-frame equipment for all kinds of photography and bought a second body (same brand, newer model) to go along with my first one. I was very happy for a while with my path and my choices.

Somewhere along the way, though, it became obvious that much of the time, the full capability of the full-frame gear was simply not needed. While there were readily available setup changes that would allow the "big" camera to photographically emulate the crop camera, there was not a way to recover the agility and quickness.

The result was that I bought a crop frame camera to complement my new "main camera." It is of the same brand and similar capability and specifications. Its interface and operating system are nearly identical. After experimentation andcareful choice of setup parameters, it is impossible to visually distinguish images between the two cameras.

The surprise has been this...my expectation was that the full-frame cameras would remain my primary choice. But as it has turned out, the crop cameras are capturing at least 75% of my images over the past four years. But the system is working well, and I'm keeping them all, with no plans to change equipment.

fetzler Loc: North West PA

I have OLY cameras (PenF and EM1-mkIII) and a Nikon D7200. I think photos from the OLY system are a bit better.
Micro 4/3 cameras offer a great deal to macro and long lens photographers. Long telephotos for micro 4/3 are light and rather inexpensive. The small sensor has advantage in macro photography as lower magnification can be used to fill the frame. AI processing has significantly reduced the noise issue.

There are a a number of high megapixel FF cameras and this can be a bit of advantage on some occasions. Bokeh from large aperture lenses can be useful for portraits. Of course the equipment is larger and more expensive. What would you like to drag around. Personally, I would not choose a FF camera for macro photography particularly when higher magnifications are used. I do have experience in using medium format SLR's for macro work and it is very much a challenge and not really suitable for very small objects.

You are not clear about the type of photography that you do. I good piece of advice would be to rent a camera and try it out. The "best" camera depends on the type of photography that you do.

lindmike

Hi, Burkphoto,t
My question to you isn't about this post. Last week there was a discussion regarding smartphones vs DSLR. you listed several of the capabilities of smartphone one of which is the GPS. Did you mean a GPS feature on the phone when purchased or a GPS app? I have an Iphone 13 Pro.

Thank you,


Lindmike