-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
I really need help choosing a system. Why should I choose M43 over Sony A7ii?
- Thread starter thinkscotty
- Start date
Bhima78
Veteran Member
There are plenty of options in the Sony camp. The Batis 85 and Sony's 55mm f1.8 come to mind as fantastic portrait lenses. That's not to say he couldn't take a fantastic portrait with an m43's lens, but I think sony has plenty for portrait shooters. Its those that want a jack-of-all-trades set of lenses that sony's solution looks a bit meh.
dulynoted
Senior Member
Thats not true....if you crop a 25mm on full frame to match the field of view of a 25mm on a m43 camera then you would need what a 64mpx camera to match the field of view and pixel count? The pixel pitch is different between sensors remember. 4 16mpx m43 sensors equals one ff 64mpx sensor. So if you crop a 36mpx sensor like the d800 to 25% of its viewing area to match m43 you would be left with 9mpx with about the same snr of the m43 camera. And thats if shot at the same iso shutter speed and aperture, but why would you do that the formats expose and operate differently. If you used a truly equivalent exposure (2 stops wider aperture on m43 to match dof and total light gathered leading to two stops lower iso on the m43 camera and the same shutter speed) then the ff crop would actually be a full two stops behind the m43 image in snr. So in the best case scenario (bright lighting, studio) a ff crop is lower in mpx and total detail, and equal (or thereabouts) in snr to a m43 sensor but in most cases(any time a certain dof is needed from f1.8 through f16 or further) will actually be about 2 stops behind the m43 sensor.
H
Henry Richardson
Guest
Coincidentally, I was in Yodobashi Camera this morning and they had a Sony A7II with LAEA4 and Sony 35mm f1.4 attached out to play with. Now that is a big honking combo. The body isn't so big for camera with a FF sensor (same size as the GX8 with tiny 4/3 sensor), but when you add the LAEA4 and the amazingly large 35mm f1.4 you certainly have a big, heavy camera.
tkbslc
Forum Pro
If you get the higher end m4/3 lenses, you are right there with the Sony FF glass quality wise. And you'll cut the noise/DOF difference down to a stop or less.
PL 15mm f1.7, 25mm f1.4 and 42.5mm 1.2 are going to be pretty close to the 28mm f2, 55mm f1.8 and 85mm f1.8 in real world use. And you'll still have access to a wide array of other lenses from cheap to expensive and from fisheye to super telephoto.
tkbslc
Forum Pro
Yes, it is only about 1 stop if shooting the same aperture. But Fuji has faster lenses in their lineup. For native mount AF lenses, Sony FE has only f1.8-2.8 primes and f4 zooms. Fujifilm has a few f1.2-2 primes and f2.8 zooms.
So that stop is erased once you start buying lenses.
Only downer for Fujifilm is the video is below par if that interests you. And they don't have many affordable lenses, but I guess Sony doesn't either.
jalywol
Forum Pro
And the Sony 35mm f1.4 is also a $1,400 lens.....You can get the Minolta AF 35mm f2 for about 1/4 -1/3 of that price; it's under half the weight (240g vs 510g), and an inch shorter...and is very, very good glass.
-J
captura
Forum Pro
Thanks. I was mistaken on one point; the CZ24 doesn't have OSS. Instead of that one could get the E-10-18 OSS wide lens.
Falk from Hamburg
Active member
- Messages
- 53
- Reaction score
- 20
Hi, I'm also pleasantly surprised by the well balanced responses here. Because you were asking about the differences between mft and full frame a good video (with... Interesting style) came to my head:
It compares the a7s and the gh4. It has a focus on video but also mentions a lot in regard to stills too. And it includes a blind test where Michael shows pictures taken with both and let's you write down which you prefer. Maybe this will help.
Day Hiker
Forum Pro
Video is irrelevant to real photographers. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Jim Pilcher
Bonita Springs, Florida, USA
captura
Forum Pro
Hi, I just wanted to remind everyone that there's another good reason for getting huge resolution. That is the tiny crops you can pull off with a high acutance sensor, and still have a reasonably good image. I don't own a full-frame camera, but am amazed by what my APS-C sensored Coolpix 'A' can produce in fine crops.
captura
Forum Pro
No doubt about it, the CZ24 is the better lens. But only the OP can choose for himself. Have shaky hands? Need a wider lens? Maybe the 10-18. Or why not get all four lenses.Nah, I think the 24mm f1.8 is the real first class lens out of the bunch. The others are good but not as good. You do pay quite a lot for that first class though.
How does the Sony APS-C system stack up to M43 choices? Well if one can manage with only 2-3 lenses, it may be a cheaper solution to getting similar resolution. The construction quality may not be there, but the reliability is good, and so are the results.
LearningForeverIHope
Senior Member
It is also what I notice, most often but not always. Many users here post awfully neat images fully worthy of professional work.
Take into account that what you see online has been downsized, often a lot, using automated software, sometimes of dubious quality. DPreview is one of the worse offender of that kind. The worse side effects are somewhat alleviated when the source file contains more pixels.
That can be although only part of the photos found in galleries uses or exceed the DR of the camera. So it shouldn't be a constant.
Also likely.
No you are right.
First though I know that you will try to assert that you do need such and such feature.
Second, personally, I try to judge of any tool I'll have to use I only give my confidence to those users who are the best at exploiting all of its potential.
Third I try to find out how easy and practical it was to achieve the results they got, e.g. I can achieve the resolution of a Nikon 810 or better with my E-M1 but it'll require a number of shots, stitched or in a burst and/or HDR and some PP. This may or may not be applicable.
Consider also that you are investing in a system. Will the n43 system evolve? I'd say most certainly and greatly considering the past and recent history of the system. Will Sony? Again most certainly but!... But, although they have good lenses for the A7 they still haven't developed a full complement of them. What they have may be enough for you. Moreover Sony has a history of developing systems half way and then drop mounts and their users. I still hold a grudge for them... which may very well not concern you.
All the best in your quest.
Last edited:
tkbslc
Forum Pro
Some of us fake photographers shop for cameras, too, though. So I thought it was worth a mention.
captura
Forum Pro
J, I didn't like the A6000, (although many others do.) So I bought the E-M10. But if I need to get really detailed Landscape shots, I still haul out the trusty old NEX-7. APS-C + 24 mp works for that.Honestly, having used both the A6000 and most of the current M43 cameras, if it was a choice between them, I'd go with the M43. The Sony APSC lenses are nowhere near the caliber or variety of the M43 assortment, and, while AF in daylight is excellent on the A6000, it's just a disaster in lower light (like indoors in the evening). Plus, I found it to be more similar overall in its rendering capabilities to M43 than to what my A7 can generate. I was very disappointed in it, as I had thought it would be a good smaller second camera to complement the A7, since it could use my FF lenses, but it really did nothing for me, and I ended up selling it. YMMV, of course....No doubt about it, the CZ24 is the better lens. But only the OP can choose for himself. Have shaky hands? Need a wider lens? Maybe the 10-18. Or why not get all four lenses.Nah, I think the 24mm f1.8 is the real first class lens out of the bunch. The others are good but not as good. You do pay quite a lot for that first class though.
How does the Sony APS-C system stack up to M43 choices? Well if one can manage with only 2-3 lenses, it may be a cheaper solution to getting similar resolution. The construction quality may not be there, but the reliability is good, and so are the results.
-J
Also I disagree with your assessment of the lenses. Some of them are very good, indeed.
Ulfric M Douglas
Veteran Member
Good question.
Excuse me while I pop to the end of the thread and see what painful argument this whole thing devolved into ...
jalywol
Forum Pro
Go mf3 if you really need the size or/and 4k video (GH4).
Anything post in this thread regarding IQ, lens selection, lens price, lens quality, better design, ergonomy, etc is either wrong or a personal choice.
I suggest you start choosing the lenses you want/need and then compare each system on that basis.
Anything post in this thread regarding IQ, lens selection, lens price, lens quality, better design, ergonomy, etc is either wrong or a personal choice.
I suggest you start choosing the lenses you want/need and then compare each system on that basis.
Bhima78
Veteran Member
https://www.brautrausch.de/en/
His work is very good, and is one of the examples I have shown my friends to prove m43's is more than capable of high quality photography.
His work is very good, and is one of the examples I have shown my friends to prove m43's is more than capable of high quality photography.
thinkscotty
Member
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 13
This was a very helpful response.
Your "grudge" against Sony has been something I'm honestly a bit worried about as well, to the extent that I've considered ignoring their lenses, buying a nice Nikon adapter, and buying Nikon lenses in case Sony "dumps" the mount again, as you say.
I'm not actually going to do that, but the fact that I considered it shows the confidence level in Sony as a company dedicated to its systems is not very high.
And since I'm really investing in a system, not a camera, that bothers me a lot and its one of the top reason M43 appeals to me. It's a cross-company effort. I like that. As a newbie, I wish that there lens mounts were far more standardized already - instead of having 6-7 mount systems in common used, 2-3 would make my life so much easier. I'm assuming its the same business technique that tech companies like Apple and Google use to "lock" users into their system and make it harder to get out. But it's annoying.
Your "grudge" against Sony has been something I'm honestly a bit worried about as well, to the extent that I've considered ignoring their lenses, buying a nice Nikon adapter, and buying Nikon lenses in case Sony "dumps" the mount again, as you say.
I'm not actually going to do that, but the fact that I considered it shows the confidence level in Sony as a company dedicated to its systems is not very high.
And since I'm really investing in a system, not a camera, that bothers me a lot and its one of the top reason M43 appeals to me. It's a cross-company effort. I like that. As a newbie, I wish that there lens mounts were far more standardized already - instead of having 6-7 mount systems in common used, 2-3 would make my life so much easier. I'm assuming its the same business technique that tech companies like Apple and Google use to "lock" users into their system and make it harder to get out. But it's annoying.
Similar threads
- User review
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum