Reading mode: Light Dark

Why Micro Four Thirds?

Go to last post
F

FishHawk

Well-known member
Messages
219
Reaction score
3
Location
US
Ok , why is a Micro Four Thirds camera better then lets say a Canon G1 or one of the point and shoot cameras with a large focal length lens?

Some of the higher end point and shoot cameras have larger sensors than the Micro Four Thirds cameras.

I'm just looking for information as to why I should got this route for a walk around camera rather than a high end point and shoot camera.
Thanks FishHawk
 
FishHawk said:
I'm just looking for information as to why I should got this route for a walk around camera rather than a high end point and shoot camera.
Click to expand...
It's much easier to change lenses on a m4/3 camera than on a P&S.
 
Some of the higher end point and shoot cameras have larger sensors than the Micro Four Thirds cameras.

Not disputing your word but which ones are they?
 
FishHawk said:
Ok , why is a Micro Four Thirds camera better then lets say a Canon G1 or one of the point and shoot cameras with a large focal length lens?

Some of the higher end point and shoot cameras have larger sensors than the Micro Four Thirds cameras.
Click to expand...
Well Canon G1 has been discontinued for a while now. It had 3.1mp and 1.8" LCD. The list of ways any m43 camera is better would be endless.

The only higher end 'point and shoot' cameras with larger than 4/3rds sensors are generally more expensive than most of the m43rds cameras.

The ones with 'large focal length lens' have smaller sensors.

Take your pick.
 
Hi FishHawk,
FishHawk said:
Ok , why is a Micro Four Thirds camera better then lets say a Canon G1 or one of the point and shoot cameras with a large focal length lens?
Click to expand...
It's not "better", neither are cameras like the Canon G1. Both are different. Which one is "better" depends on your needs and the circumstances you want to use the camera in.
FishHawk said:
Some of the higher end point and shoot cameras have larger sensors than the Micro Four Thirds cameras.
Click to expand...
Yes, very few, but there are "compacts" that have larger sensors. I guess by "point and shoot cameras", you mean cameras with a fixed lens ?
FishHawk said:
I'm just looking for information as to why I should got this route for a walk around camera rather than a high end point and shoot camera.
Click to expand...
Here are a few advantages of the µ43 cameras compared to cameras with a large sensor and a fixed lens:
  • Interchangeable lenses. This gives you access to lenses that are not available in fixed lens cameras. For example: fast primes (for working in low light, for small DOF) ; fisheye ; very long tele ; very wide angle.
  • Evolving system. Because you can buy the lenses separately, you can buy another camera body later and reuse everything else. With a fixed lens camera, you cannot reuse anything because it's an all-in-one solution.
  • Performance. Most all-in-one systems are decent, just like low to mid range bodies from an interchangeable lens system. But high end bodies beat both hands down.
Here are some advantages of fixed lens cameras:
  • Frequently more compact, though a larger sensor limits how compact a camera can be (for tele, larger sensors require longer lenses).
  • No need to swap lenses: just zoom and that's it. With interchangeable lens cameras, you can buy superzooms that do this as well, but frequently, you want to have a wide angle zoom + a tele zoom or a similar setup, which means swapping lenses from time to time.
  • Less expensive: because it's an all-in-one package and because you don't have the option of buying additional lenses, the options are limited to memory cards, a spare battery and possibly an external flash. No drooling over fancy, but expensive, options.
Which approach is "better" depends on what you want to do with your camera. For shoestring travel or occasional hobby photography, the advantages of an all-in-one can be important. For more serious work, or work requiring specific lenses, an interchangeable lens system like µ43 has its benefits.

Peter.

--
gallery at http://picasaweb.google.com/peterleyssens
blog at http://lightchangesstuff.wordpress.com/
 
Other than the G1, I do not believe that I have seen any point and shoot with a sensor larger than the Pens. The G1 is not one of the super zoom class of point and shoots with only a 4x optical zoom.

You seem to be interested in birding. Until you are willing to invest the money in the lenses that you would need in a true system, you should just go ahead and do the research on the super-zoom point and shoot cameras and go that route. You would also be smart to buy a very good tripod.

--
Visualize Whirled Peas.
 
CrashE3 said:
Other than the G1, I do not believe that I have seen any point and shoot with a sensor larger than the Pens. The G1 is not one of the super zoom class of point and shoots with only a 4x optical zoom.

You seem to be interested in birding. Until you are willing to invest the money in the lenses that you would need in a true system, you should just go ahead and do the research on the super-zoom point and shoot cameras and go that route. You would also be smart to buy a very good tripod.

--
Visualize Whirled Peas.
Click to expand...
Agreed - the Canon G1X is a new category of camera, having a very-slightly-larger-than Four Thirds sensor, but a non-interchangeable lens. I think the sensor size difference with the G1X versus m4/3 is on a similar scale to that between Canon's "APS-C" DSLRs and APS-C sensored DSLRs of other brands (i.e. negligible - in that example the Canons have the slightly smaller sensor, but only to the extent that their multiplication factor to achieve a full-frame 35mm equivalent lens focal length is 1.6x, versus 1.5x in the other brands).

Other than the G1X, I'm struggling to think of anything that could be classified as a point and shoot with a larger sensor than m4/3 cameras. As far as non-interchangeable lenses go, there's just the APS-C sensored Fuji X100 and the Leica X1, definitely larger sensors but neither is exactly a point and shoot.

I think a lot of people are still misled by the "Micro" in Micro Four Thirds - I've noticed plenty who assume that larger-than-average sensor compacts like the Panasonic LX5, Canon G12, Olympus XZ1 and Fuji X10 have sensors bigger than Micro Four Thirds, when in fact those are all a lot smaller. Many folks "outside" m4/3 apparently don't realise that the Micro in the name refers only to the lens mount/mount-to-sensor distance and consequent reduction in size of lenses and bodies, and not the sensor itself, which is exactly the same size as "full" Four Thirds, though given the name I suppose it's an understandable misconception.
 
i don't know of even one point and shoot with any zoom worth mentioning with a sensor as large as (or larger than) micro 4/3 cameras can have. between my current 2 lenses, i can cover between 14 mm and 200mm much sharper and clearer than even my fz150. i tested the two cameras side by side in lower light conditions, and my old gf1's pics have better iq.

i also don't know of any all-in-one lenses that can shoot as high quality pics as shorter and prime lenses. with micro 4/3 cameras, you can choose the right lenses for the job, and that can make a big difference in quality in general and especially in different lighting conditions.
 
Because you can change the lens.

If you want a cheapish zoom lens going form mile wide to modern tele and have no intention of using anything else, then, as you say, there are fixed lenses cameras that would suit as well or better.

You could consider the G1X, which has a big sensor but a slow lens and is quite big, or the Olympus XZ1 (or something like that) which has a small sensor but a fast lens.

Personally I would rather have either than a CSC such as MFT or Nex if I wanted a zoom and never planned to change it.

I have no use for either camera of course, because I use fast primes and UWAs. But your needs may well be different.
FishHawk said:
Ok , why is a Micro Four Thirds camera better then lets say a Canon G1 or one of the point and shoot cameras with a large focal length lens?

Some of the higher end point and shoot cameras have larger sensors than the Micro Four Thirds cameras.

I'm just looking for information as to why I should got this route for a walk around camera rather than a high end point and shoot camera.
Thanks FishHawk
Click to expand...
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com
 
Louis, the Original Poster has posted in the past that he wants to do birding photos. So he would probably prefer a lens with long telephoto (at least 200mm FF equiv). And it also seems he would like a camera that has a large sensor (hence the mention of the G1X).

If he chooses a fixed lens camera (lets use this instead of Point&Shoot or Compact) with the telephoto reach, he can get a superzoom, but they all have sensors around 1/2.3" (not big at all, small even by fixed lens camera standards).

If he chooses a fixed lens camera with a big sensor, the options are the G1X and the X100. One does not have the telephoto reach he would like, the other doesn't have a zoom lens at all.

If he wants a large sensor and long telephoto reach, then an interchangeable lens camera is the only option.
 
Well, if he wants a long tele then he's answered his own question - a G1X is useless because there is no long tele.

GH2 and 100-300, bosh, done.

The trouble is it is a slow lens. And a fast lens at those lengths weighs arm + leg, so there is no point in MFT.

I'd suggest a Nikon D7000 and a 70-200 VR11 with a tcon 1.4 in the pocket.

Heavier than MFT, but such is life.
AndyGM said:
Louis, the Original Poster has posted in the past that he wants to do birding photos. So he would probably prefer a lens with long telephoto (at least 200mm FF equiv). And it also seems he would like a camera that has a large sensor (hence the mention of the G1X).

If he chooses a fixed lens camera (lets use this instead of Point&Shoot or Compact) with the telephoto reach, he can get a superzoom, but they all have sensors around 1/2.3" (not big at all, small even by fixed lens camera standards).

If he chooses a fixed lens camera with a big sensor, the options are the G1X and the X100. One does not have the telephoto reach he would like, the other doesn't have a zoom lens at all.

If he wants a large sensor and long telephoto reach, then an interchangeable lens camera is the only option.
Click to expand...
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/acam
http://thegentlemansnapper.blogspot.com
 
I'd warmly recommend a mFT-body and the m.zuiko14-150 (seems to be a better choice than the m.zuiko40-150)...

--
XZ-1 4ever
 
Hi,

I understand your concerns.

For me it was the cheapest may to get into a 16mp system for a decent price (GX1).

The camera itself sold me with its quality and the IQ rivals my D300 (better in some respects only slightly worse in others). Its smaller and the the lenses I am interested in are affordable and there are some I can't afford right now (Leica glass) but if things change I have the option.

Here in Tucson there are no pro camera stores so I was limited with hands-on experiences. I suggest if you have the availability go and fondle some µ4/3 and take some photos.

I was able to fondle some equal price dslrs and was unimpressed with build etc...

I can't wait to make some prints but so far my full size RAW 16mp+ files are quite impressive on screen!

HTH

Warren
 
pcake said:
i also don't know of any all-in-one lenses that can shoot as high quality pics as shorter and prime lenses. with micro 4/3 cameras, you can choose the right lenses for the job, and that can make a big difference in quality in general and especially in different lighting conditions.
Click to expand...
The G9 had a damn good lens. But it's "wide" angle was limited to 38mm equivalent focal length and the lens was weakest at it's widest angle (it's only weak spot, really).

In comparison, the lens on the newer S90/S95 really sucks.
 
Although it was a troll-bait post, PeterLeyssens wrote a really good answer.
 
FishHawk said:
Some of the higher end point and shoot cameras have larger sensors than the Micro Four Thirds cameras.
Click to expand...
Until this latest Canon G model, which models are you including in that group? The last thing the Fuji X100 and Sigma DP models are, is point & shoots.
 
Kuppenbender said:
Well Canon G1 has been discontinued for a while now. It had 3.1mp and 1.8" LCD. The list of ways any m43 camera is better would be endless.
Click to expand...
Given he's talking larger sensor, I'm sure he means the new G1X, not the ancient G1 :D

Back to the original question.

I have an XZ-1 for my wife. It's a great general purpose camera. f1.8 and a decent zoom range (3x or so).

I have an E-PM1. Better in low light with the [email protected] lens due to the much larger sensor and better high iso performance.

Better at long zoom with the 45-175 lens attached.

Better at wide angle with the 9-18 on.

Moral of this story. If not buying more lenses, a really good P&S can match or beat it in a smaller pacakage. But for biggest flexibility at both a cost and size premium, buy a m4/3 camera AND lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top