Food for thought - FF vs M4/3's cost

Started Mar 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
Photozopia Senior Member • Posts: 1,302
Re: Food for thought - FF vs M4/3's cost

Just playing Devil's Avocate here ...

Why, if all are arguing the raison d'etre of m4/3rd is lightweight .... why then are all these arguments 'boosted' by examples comprising the same comparative weight outfits as FF cameras?

Surely the reason for smaller formats is 'same results/lighter package' - NOT silly " ... I can carry ten times more lenses per kilo than an FF user can ... "

I've rarely - if ever - hauled ALL my gear in one bag, every trip ... no matter which format.

Somewhat farcical to claim small, lightweight, kit advantage ... then ruin the argument by carrying (even if only hypothetically) the whole stock-list of an Olympus retailer in a camera bag.

Possibly the argument for a single camera/lens combo alone is somewhat less compelling .... ?

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