Tribute to M43 tread!

Started Jan 10, 2013 | Discussions thread
Absolutic Veteran Member • Posts: 5,272
Re: Tribute to M43 tread!

SlamdunK wrote:

Absolutic wrote:

completely disagree, have both FF system (Canon 5DM3 with L lenses) and m43 system (oly OMD with lenses) and DOF, continuous AF, low light are all clearly to me things that are important. Each has its use, and NO, m43 system does not replace FF for me. However, once they start making F/1.0 and faster lenses ´╗┐with AF´╗┐ (thus competing with equivalent F/2.0 lenses on FF), better argument could be made. And I am glad Panasonic is making 42.5/F 1.2, it is a step in the right direction. My opinion only.

So the PL25 f1.4, 20mm 1.7 or other fast native m43 lenses on the OMD or GH-3 is not great for low light?

i tried PL25 twice, and i am not a big fan of that lens, personally, so maybe I am prejudiced against it, but I don't find the bokeh with that lens any good.  20/1.7 is better in my opinion in terms of D.O.F, but still not in the same league as FF lenses.

On the AF issue, I have a older GF2, and have never missed a shot because of autofocus, even sports, I just can not relate when people say AF is not good. (I dont shoot much birds though, so that might be the case)

I am talking about shooting small objects like birds correct.  I've shot a lot of birds in flight with all my systems, and m43 is the most disappointing because you have a delay in your viewfinder/display, and you don't even know what you are shooting, after the first shot.   It just does not work.   While in any DSLR with optical viewfinder, with a small blackout (which you don't even see on a good system) you can at least track birds.   With m43 it is a guess work.   I remember cursing when I was trying to track large birds with G3, and basically the picture freezes in your display after the first shot, and what you see is 2 seconds after it is happening in real life, which means your bird flew away.

. It would be great with autofocusing f0.95 lenses though.

Yes and because these lenses have to cover a much smaller circle, I am surprised that Olympus insists on making an 'easy-to-make' F/1.8 to F/2.0 lenses.   I understand they want them small and light, but I will gladly pay for a 300 to 400 gram 45/F 1.0 lens.

Do you really think the weight and cost are worth the difference? Is it really a business case that can be defended for most professionals to gain those two extra stops in dof? You can take superb shots without it, Ì dont think most customers see the big difference.

Weight (not cost) is a difference.   As far as the cost, m43 gear is pretty expensive.  12-35 = $1300, 35-100 = $1600, 75 (which in my book is 150/F3.5 equivalent) is $900,  OM-D and GH3 all came out with prices of over $1000.  7-14 is $900 new.   The cost of my m43 package which consists of OMD, 7-14, 14-150, 14/2.5, 45/1.8 and 75/1.8 is well over $3000.    With current prices of D600 and 6D (D600+24-85 kit was under $2000, you can add 28, 50, and 85 1.8 primes and be at the same price level).

However, weight IS the difference, and that is why my OM-D goes with me 75% of the time, while my Canon 5DM3 is more of a studio or indoor camera.

 Absolutic's gear list:Absolutic's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P7700 Olympus E-M1 Fujifilm X-T20 Canon EOS Rebel T7i Sony a9 +19 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow