Why Micro 43 instead of dslr?

Isabel Cutler · Apr 29, 2016

Three micro 43 bodies, a 45mm f/1.8 lens, 20mm f/1.7 and 35-100 lens, 3 spare batteries, a spare SD card, a few lightweight odds and ends, in a heavy duty ThinkTank Urban Disguise bag. Total weight: 8 pounds 8.24 ounces.

These will come with me tomorrow to shoot a Women's Issues forum. I will not use flash because the higher ISO images I've taken with this equipment are very respectable for web use. I have very little need to print my images.

Isabel

Galleries by Isabel Cutler

www.pbase.com

Isabel Cutler

Explore Isabel Cutler’s 8,250 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

NCV · Apr 29, 2016

I wonder how I ever hauled my Nikon D300 with 3 lenses up and down the Italian Apennines mountains after replacing it with a EM5 and 3 2.8 zooms that weigh a fraction of my Nikon kit.

The image quality is almost identical.

Trevor Carpenter · Apr 29, 2016

I was shooting birds the other day alongside someone with an FF and a very nice gimbal when a great opportunity flew by. Did you get it I said. "No couldn't get on it". I got 12 shots. His pictures would have been better than mine but unfortunately he didn't get any.

maltmoose · Apr 29, 2016

You have some real nice photos on your Flickr pages. I did randomly click on some of your pics that i liked and most were m43 and a couple turned out to be dslr though

but a couple were really unexpected m43... i think a squirrel on a 60mm macro hehe

Old Listener · Apr 29, 2016

Trevor Carpenter said:
I was shooting birds the other day alongside someone with an FF and a very nice gimbal when a great opportunity flew by. Did you get it I said. "No couldn't get on it". I got 12 shots. His pictures would have been better than mine but unfortunately he didn't get any.

--
My Galleries are at
my albums are at https://picasaweb.google.com/115423645123114525430
latest birds at https://goo.gl/photos/tDqEhPMiwZ47fpey8

But his gear is better for BARs. (Birds at Rest.)

A few years ago, I was taking bird pictures at a wetland area in Martinez, CA. I was using a Nikon crop body DSLR with a 300mm f4 Nikon and a 1.4x teleconverter on a monopod. The camera was in manual focus mode. I was all set up for BARs some distance away. As I walked back to my car, I noticed a northern Harrier (marsh hawk) gliding toward me about 15 feet off the ground. A great shot coming up but I wasn't ready for it. In a panic, I tried to get the bird in the frame and in focus. The bird came right over me and I struggled to keep in in the frame. I got something I liked in the very last picture.

Northern Harrier - Not perfect but in the context, a memorable picture. I like the darker accents along the wing edges and the colors in the background. The sense of light on the bird and in the background appeals to me too.

I'd rate the G6 or G7 with 100-300 zooms as being far nicer to use for wildlife than any of the Nikon DSLR setups we used.

--
some of our photos

billhunt01

Explore billhunt01’s 541 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

NatureLover

Powered by SmugMug

naturelover.smugmug.com

Isabel Cutler · Apr 29, 2016

[No message]

Stupot99 · Apr 29, 2016

I get a little tired of all the m43 vs FF threads, so much angst! We each choose the system that best fits our individual needs, weighing up the different compromises.

For me, weight is crucial - every pound counts when backpacking/hiking/climbing. GM5 + 12-32mm 3.5-5.6 + 35-100mm 4.0-5.6 + spare battery + Dashpoint 20 case = 1 pound 4 oz.

Tom Caldwell · Apr 29, 2016

NCV said:
I wonder how I ever hauled my Nikon D300 with 3 lenses up and down the Italian Apennines mountains after replacing it with a EM5 and 3 2.8 zooms that weigh a fraction of my Nikon kit.

The image quality is almost identical.

Georgeee · Apr 29, 2016

We all know the trade-offs. If m43 is equal or better image quality on the same ISO (especially high), why people keep asking the question ?

dennis tennis · Apr 29, 2016

Georgeee said:
We all know the trade-offs. If m43 is equal or better image quality on the same ISO (especially high), why people keep asking the question ?

If I don't tell the world that mFT is better than FF DSLR, I will feel soul crushing depression by evening.

princecody · Apr 29, 2016

Isabel Cutler said:
Three micro 43 bodies, a 45mm f/1.8 lens, 20mm f/1.7 and 35-100 lens, 3 spare batteries, a spare SD card, a few lightweight odds and ends, in a heavy duty ThinkTank Urban Disguise bag. Total weight: 8 pounds 8.24 ounces.

These will come with me tomorrow to shoot a Women's Issues forum. I will not use flash because the higher ISO images I've taken with this equipment are very respectable for web use. I have very little need to print my images.

Isabel

http://www.pbase.com/isabel95
https://www.flickr.com/photos/isabel95/

Why ask a question of this sort? Common sense lady! Micro Four Thirds is the Best system hands down out there. Smaller, Best selection of lenses, cool features, & fluidity

bmoag · Apr 29, 2016

I stuck with occasionally using my early Panasonic m43 dslr despite what I consider its horrible EVF, slow handling and image noise issues. It was the highest quality solution for when I simply could not carry a larger camera, but I really did not like that camera.

I recently acquired an Oly OM D M10 Mark II. What a revelation, what a great camera. I am not the first to point out, however, that Olympus software engineers are somewhat challenged at designing control interfaces.

The Oly does not match up in ideal technical image quality to my Nikon full frame brontosaurus but the brontosaurus stays home for most bicycle and hiking treks. And in truth, I have files where processed raw images from different sensor types are purposefully jumbled to remind myself that I can't even tell which camera or lens was used to make which image.

I also had relatives who acquired high quality photo gear when I was younger some of which I still have. It is an amazing experience to acquire crytalline sharp images with a 60 year old Leica M lens on the Oly.

Marko2 · Apr 29, 2016

Georgeee said:
We all know the trade-offs. If m43 is equal or better image quality on the same ISO (especially high), why people keep asking the question ?

How did you get that from this: "higher ISO images I've taken with this equipment are very respectable for web use"?

Moti · Apr 29, 2016

Because for my photography needs, a dslr cannot do what an M4/3 can.

Moti

Cipher010 · Apr 29, 2016

We all know where m4/3 excels. For example, weight, bulk, cost, very strong overall performance in telephoto range etc. To be balanced, I wish to note that large sensor offers better subject isolation, bokeh and also, theoretically, larger real estate of FF sensor allows manufacturing of (relatively) higher IQ sensors.

Roger Engelken · Apr 29, 2016

Isabel Cutler said:
Three micro 43 bodies, a 45mm f/1.8 lens, 20mm f/1.7 and 35-100 lens, 3 spare batteries, a spare SD card, a few lightweight odds and ends, in a heavy duty ThinkTank Urban Disguise bag. Total weight: 8 pounds 8.24 ounces.

These will come with me tomorrow to shoot a Women's Issues forum. I will not use flash because the higher ISO images I've taken with this equipment are very respectable for web use. I have very little need to print my images.

Isabel

http://www.pbase.com/isabel95
https://www.flickr.com/photos/isabel95/

That pretty well covers it.

Next week I am off to Cape Town, South Africa with the 300 f/4, 40-150, 12-40 and 7-14 PRO lenses, along with the 25 and 45 f/1.8 lenses. Couple those two two E-M1 cameras and an E-M10 in a carry on bag, and I still make it under the 17 lbs. limit. The weight is certainly a major benefit, and the images add the icing on the cake, as it were.

Isabel Cutler · Apr 30, 2016

bmoag said:
. And in truth, I have files where processed raw images from different sensor types are purposefully jumbled to remind myself that I can't even tell which camera or lens was used to make which image.

...is when I look at an impressive image wondering what camera took it only to learn it was my Samsung Note 4 smartphone! Of course, it oversharpens and that's aggravating, but you can't beat it for lack of weight!

The other day, however, I left my "real" cameras home, but had my phone. It was frustrating missing so many shots of wildflowers because the phone refused to focus because wind moved the subjects. I longed for a "real" camera.

Isabel

traveler_101 · Apr 30, 2016

Stupot99 said:
I get a little tired of all the m43 vs FF threads, so much angst! We each choose the system that best fits our individual needs, weighing up the different compromises.

For me, weight is crucial - every pound counts when backpacking/hiking/climbing. GM5 + 12-32mm 3.5-5.6 + 35-100mm 4.0-5.6 + spare battery + Dashpoint 20 case = 1 pound 4 oz.

Wow, one heck of nice shot!

Why Micro 43 instead of dslr?

Forum Pro

NCV

Guest

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Community Leader

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts