Full-Frame, what am I missing?

[ikolbyi]

As someone who is heavily invested in both MFT (OMS & Panny) and FF (Panny), I wanted to share an image of the two systems side-by-side for those who continuously discuss MFT & FF systems as if MFT is now a cancer or dead system (my interpretation on this forum commentary).

The grass is not necessarily greener on the other (FF) side, it all comes down to how you use the system and what you are trying to photograph.

The below sample is of a static image with natural lighting. Something I saw in my yard after a heavy rainstorm so I brought out both cameras for a quick and dirty comparison. I am noting now the setting are different between the cameras because the systems are different. Different focus distances, lenses, sensors, etc .... but I tried my best to make the image comparison identical. Images processed through DXO v7.

Lumix G9.2

Lumix S1R.2



Which one do you prefer?

 

[Jorginho]

Seems to have a bit better dynamic range as expected. On the leftside of the mushroom the G92 looks darker (clearly) than the FF one.

Personally I think that my very good and (which I seem to collect far more) bad pics are all my fault and really never the fault of the cam. So as long as I am the limiting factor there is no use to teplace my EM1.2. I also use the LX100-2 a lot and the same is true: mostly my own fault if it does not look good.

 

[JNK 100]

The FF shot looks better as the background is more blurred to make the mushroom stand out. Stem detail is also better.

It is strange to compare these two formats as FF sensor area is 4x the size and no one suggests M43 offers better IQ.

 

[Jorginho]

The FF shot looks better as the background is more blurred to make the mushroom stand out. Stem detail is also better.

It is strange to compare these two formats as FF sensor area is 4x the size and no one suggests M43 offers better IQ.

However, such static subjects could easily be shot with the handheld Panasonic Hires shot in which case it would get better detail. Or with a tripod in which case everything gets a lot better. I think you are getting close to Medium Format with that kind of shot.

 

[C Sean]

As someone who is heavily invested in both MFT (OMS & Panny) and FF (Panny), I wanted to share an image of the two systems side-by-side for those who continuously discuss MFT & FF systems as if MFT is now a cancer or dead system (my interpretation on this forum commentary).

The grass is not necessarily greener on the other (FF) side, it all comes down to how you use the system and what you are trying to photograph.

Correct!

The below sample is of a static image with natural lighting. Something I saw in my yard after a heavy rainstorm so I brought out both cameras for a quick and dirty comparison. I am noting now the setting are different between the cameras because the systems are different. Different focus distances, lenses, sensors, etc .... but I tried my best to make the image comparison identical. Images processed through DXO v7.

Lumix G9.2

Lumix S1R.2

Which one do you prefer?

I prefer the 2nd due to the finer detail.

I always thought Full Frame images are approx 25-30% better when it comes to IQ. That isn't that big when you factor in the lens and sensor sizes when it usually comes to Full Frame.

This 'Is Full Frame worth it?' debate has drastically change since the early 2010 where before M43 was more affordable and there was a bigger price tag between that format and Full Frame cameras. Now there are options to get great performing Full Frame mirrorless cameras cheaper than M43, it's harder to justify M43 cameras especially they are getting bigger and Full Frame companies offering smaller alternatives.

I think M43 vs Full Frame should come down to which system/format is better value for your money? A system that is slightly more portable and allow you to can more lenses or a system that can handle harsher lighting conditions and doesn't require to carry as many lenses?

If we compare Fuji Film/Sony APS-C to M43, this is where M43 get destroyed and for some reason we never see these debates!

--

Sean Miller’s albums | Flickr

www.flickr.com

 

[ikolbyi]

I showed the images to non-camera individuals and had 100% consensus they preferred the image from G9.2. Most camera individuals preferred the S1R.2 image and referenced technical differences mainly over aesthetics except for one.

for those who didn’t understand the value of this post it was about the subject photographed (the mushroom) and how different tools provide a unique interpretation of the subject. Both images tell a story. They are both detailed and full of information and both were well accepted beyond this forum.

everyone just needs to enjoy the gear they own because modern cameras are very capable regardless if OMS or Panny release a new model/sensor. To end how I began: it’s about photographing the subject- not the camera gear, the grass is not always greener on the other side. Use the tool that best fits your needs.

 

[jjbinx]

I showed the images to non-camera individuals and had 100% consensus they preferred the image from G9.2.

I think it’s the wider framing of the G9II image that gives it more appeal, not the DoF or anything else related to the sensors.

You may suggest that you simply used the native aspect ratios of the two cameras but there was nothing to stop you from recomposing or using a wider focal length and then cropping the FF image to have the same aspect and framing as the m4/3 image.

If you really were trying to show a comparison you would have made an effort to frame the subject the same way in each image

jj

Most camera individuals preferred the S1R.2 image and referenced technical differences mainly over aesthetics except for one.

for those who didn’t understand the value of this post it was about the subject photographed (the mushroom) and how different tools provide a unique interpretation of the subject. Both images tell a story. They are both detailed and full of information and both were well accepted beyond this forum.

everyone just needs to enjoy the gear they own because modern cameras are very capable regardless if OMS or Panny release a new model/sensor. To end how I began: it’s about photographing the subject- not the camera gear, the grass is not always greener on the other side. Use the tool that best fits your needs.

 

[John W H]

Just posted the on another thread.

One with s5ii and sigma 50f1.2

One with OM1ii and 12-40 f2.8

Raw processed identically in LrC











John

 

[JNK 100]

The FF shot looks better as the background is more blurred to make the mushroom stand out. Stem detail is also better.

It is strange to compare these two formats as FF sensor area is 4x the size and no one suggests M43 offers better IQ.

However, such static subjects could easily be shot with the handheld Panasonic Hires shot in which case it would get better detail. Or with a tripod in which case everything gets a lot better. I think you are getting close to Medium Format with that kind of shot.

A 'stitched' M43 shot will not be the same IQ as MF

If this was the case, no one would use MF or FF cameras.

Carrying around a tripod negates any perceived benefit with an M43 camera.

The biggest problem with M43 is sensor size and native (real) resolution.

The other is the difficulty in subject isolation by restrictions on DOF with M43.

 

[ikolbyi]

The FF shot looks better as the background is more blurred to make the mushroom stand out. Stem detail is also better.

It is strange to compare these two formats as FF sensor area is 4x the size and no one suggests M43 offers better IQ.

However, such static subjects could easily be shot with the handheld Panasonic Hires shot in which case it would get better detail. Or with a tripod in which case everything gets a lot better. I think you are getting close to Medium Format with that kind of shot.

A 'stitched' M43 shot will not be the same IQ as MF

If this was the case, no one would use MF or FF cameras.

Carrying around a tripod negates any perceived benefit with an M43 camera.

The biggest problem with M43 is sensor size and native (real) resolution.

The other is the difficulty in subject isolation by restrictions on DOF with M43.

I agree with this. I tried and for for limited photography that I required higher MP I ended up adding an S1R-> S1R.2 and stopped using that feature on my MFT cameras. a 50 MP MFT image was not equivalent to native 50/47 MP FF sensor.

 

[James Stirling]

The FF shot looks better as the background is more blurred to make the mushroom stand out. Stem detail is also better.

It is strange to compare these two formats as FF sensor area is 4x the size and no one suggests M43 offers better IQ.

However, such static subjects could easily be shot with the handheld Panasonic Hires shot in which case it would get better detail. Or with a tripod in which case everything gets a lot better. I think you are getting close to Medium Format with that kind of shot.

A 'stitched' M43 shot will not be the same IQ as MF

If this was the case, no one would use MF or FF cameras.

It will actually be closer than you may imagine. But as with all pixel shift features movement is its weak spot. So it's utility is not the same as a dedicated high MP camera

A controlled sample from DPreview

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/om-system-om-1-review#IQ

Carrying around a tripod negates any perceived benefit with an M43 camera.

Whilst that is certainly true , I feel to get the best from high MP FF or MF sensors that shooting on a tripod certainly helps

The biggest problem with M43 is sensor size and native (real) resolution.

The other is the difficulty in subject isolation by restrictions on DOF with M43.

--
Jim Stirling:
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." - Thomas Paine
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post

 

[James Stirling]

The FF shot looks better as the background is more blurred to make the mushroom stand out. Stem detail is also better.

It is strange to compare these two formats as FF sensor area is 4x the size and no one suggests M43 offers better IQ.

However, such static subjects could easily be shot with the handheld Panasonic Hires shot in which case it would get better detail. Or with a tripod in which case everything gets a lot better. I think you are getting close to Medium Format with that kind of shot.

A 'stitched' M43 shot will not be the same IQ as MF

If this was the case, no one would use MF or FF cameras.

Carrying around a tripod negates any perceived benefit with an M43 camera.

The biggest problem with M43 is sensor size and native (real) resolution.

The other is the difficulty in subject isolation by restrictions on DOF with M43.

I agree with this. I tried and for for limited photography that I required higher MP I ended up adding an S1R-> S1R.2 and stopped using that feature on my MFT cameras. a 50 MP MFT image was not equivalent to native 50/47 MP FF sensor.

The HHHR 50mp is not so effective regarding boosting resolution but can do a decent job reducing noise. For static subjects the pixel shift tripod mode can give very good results though movement is a weakness. Of course the S1R/II have their own pixel shift options

--
Jim Stirling:
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." - Thomas Paine
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post

 

[ikolbyi]

I enjoyed your choice of photo, excellent detail in the images.

 

[DocBobB]

IMHO modern post processing has reduced the “advantage” of FF. DXO Photolab noise reduction and detail enhancement is a real game changer for MFT. I no longer think about high ISO as a limitation. In the long run that’s where significant developments in photography will take place - post processing, not “better” gear.

 

[Lepewhi]

Good point!

 

[Owlsfan]

I think many just go out on a normal day and take normal photos. We don't need to push limits or blow out backgrounds. We don't pixel peep so we won't see these "busy" backgrounds.

But there is this fear that you are missing something if you don't go full frame.

I was scared so I had to join up But I just can't build the same cheap and light kit with Nikon.

For instance yesterday I took my underrated 100-300 out. I honestly love it and don't find it soft at all. Never went over iso 500. Got great photos and carried less than 1kg including bag and 12-32.

You can lighten your kit by getting a high megapixel camera so you can crop shorter lenses but they don't come at OM5 prices unfortunately.

Some people go full frame and often like to come back and tell you M43's shortcomings. On a regular basis too but I'll always fight it's corner.

 

[Cafe Racer]

I showed the images to non-camera individuals and had 100% consensus they preferred the image from G9.2.

Those non-camera individuals would probably choose a vibrant smartphone photo over both camera images.

Most camera individuals preferred the S1R.2 image and referenced technical differences mainly over aesthetics except for one.

for those who didn’t understand the value of this post it was about the subject photographed (the mushroom) and how different tools provide a unique interpretation of the subject. Both images tell a story. They are both detailed and full of information and both were well accepted beyond this forum.

everyone just needs to enjoy the gear they own because modern cameras are very capable regardless if OMS or Panny release a new model/sensor. To end how I began: it’s about photographing the subject- not the camera gear, the grass is not always greener on the other side. Use the tool that best fits your needs.

 

[ikolbyi]

Those non-camera individuals would probably choose a vibrant smartphone photo over both camera images.

These are the same audience who fund professional photographers to capture special moments. Without that audience, there wouldn't be a market for photography services.

 

[ikolbyi]

IMHO modern post processing has reduced the “advantage” of FF. DXO Photolab noise reduction and detail enhancement is a real game changer for MFT. I no longer think about high ISO as a limitation. In the long run that’s where significant developments in photography will take place - post processing, not “better” gear.

This is exactly how I am able to use an OM-1.1 for ice hockey photography: DXO

 

[BudgetTraveller]

Those non-camera individuals would probably choose a vibrant smartphone photo over both camera images.

These are the same audience who fund professional photographers to capture special moments. Without that audience, there wouldn't be a market for photography services.

I went to several wildlife photo workshops and you can tell who is who. Sadly, non-camera individuals outnumbered camera individuals, because most of the time many of the non-camera individuals are looking to get trophy shots and only trophy shots. They have little interest in improving their skills and or improving their creativity. It's all really about the camera and the grass is greener than the other side and their followers, which numbers sometimes in the millions are thinking the same.

Success is out there to be had or bought, but rarely contemplate the fact that successful photographers start from within by improving their skills and creativity by going out there and take lots and lots of photographs. But you know, they don't want to. They want AI autofocus to do all the work. They want lots of DR, so they don't have to stack photographs in post and post immediately to social media. I mean, literally many of these non-camera individuals get their self-esteem from social media postings. An imperfect image ruins their self-esteem and so, they are on a constant quest trying to keep up with the Joneses. The Kim Kardashian curse.

I even had met people who go on the same workshops YOY with better and better cameras trying to get the best shot. But you know, if you look carefully, they are all blaming their equipment for all the missed shots, but NEVER themselves. But they do have lots of money. Those trips cost like $5000/double occupancy for a week. Private tours are like $2000/day!

 

[Asherax]

Nice Sunday article on the BBC website about an OM Systems ambassador... MFT doesn't appear to have effected his ability to create profoundly beautiful images.... mostly on an E-M1.2.

MFT!