Is M4/3 being left behind ? Features-wise

Started Jan 8, 2013 | Discussions thread
amvrvd
Regular MemberPosts: 217
Like?
Re: Is M4/3 being left behind ? Features-wise
In reply to sgoldswo, Jan 8, 2013

Sure, as I said, I personally couldn't care less, I don't have 4/3 glass which would be one of the two main reasons for PDAF, and I'm not a sports or wildlife photographer either, so AF tracking and backwards compatibility wouldn't make a difference, for me. But acknowledging the fact that very other mayor player has this feature on, it wouldn't hurt at all to implement it in m4/3 cameras, specially having Sony sensors already.

In terms of gimmicks, I concur, they're useless most of the time and pretty much take away from the photographic experience BUT it cannot be denied that such things DO make a difference when selling these cameras, if not, companies simply wouldn't bother with the R&D. Gimmicks attract consumers and make profits, period. People here are just too used to the notion that they're the only ones buying this stuff, we gotta get down from our high horses and look at reality, enthusiasts are just but a minority of the market, it's really a blessing that PanOly are even bothering to release primes, let alone excellent ones. M4/3 is at a nice place where it serves as a bridge between the common consumer and enthusiast (and to some degree, Pros), it's versatile enough to accommodate for the necessities of every user, but in that front Sony and other companies are pushing objectively harder.

It's not that we need these features, it more like the system needs them, at least in order to stay relevant and competitive.

Some comments are right, m4/3 is certainly in a good position, maybe even at an advantage, but that's only in regards to native lenses, but (IMO) m4/3 is more than just that. As wonderful as this system is you just cannot discard the fact that brand recognition goes a loooong way in this market, I would venture to say that the system itself is more recognizable than the companies behind it at this point (most people still don't recognize the cross compatibility of Oly and Pany lenses), in this regard Sony, Canon and Nikon, albeit less attractive alternatives (to me at least), are FAR more recognizable in stores than PanOly, we're not surfing the top of a wave, we're rushing against the current like a ferocious trout. We have the lens advantage but we need to at least stay comparable technology-wise:

We don't have :

- Brand recognition/Store presence

- In Sensor PDAF

- Compacts with EVF

- Focus peaking

- One button BKT

- Automatic Pano

-Decent non-vomit inducing in camera HDR

- Decent AF tracking

- DOF control (nothing that can be done here, I personally prefer m4/3 DOF though)

- Wide(ish) angle legacy lens adaptability (1.5x vs 2x crop factor)

- Solid Exclusive Third party support (always APS-C hand me downs)

- etc...

We do have:

- Superb Native Lenses

- Fast static AF

- weather sealing

- 5 axis IBIS

- Video supremacy

- Size (to some extent)

I myself could argue about every one of these points, that's true, BUT, the thing is, why should any of these points be neglected ? they're easy to implement, the technology is there, has been there, for a long time. It's only a lack of will IMO. Please remember: I'ts not that WE need these features, it's more about the system needing them. Just like I don't touch the Art filters and they don't interfere in any way of my camera set up, these features would not deteriorate your photographic experience either, but just having them in there makes a world of difference in terms of marketing and system growth and thus system consolidation.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow