My "Unpopular" Opinion? Locked

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
Flat view
This thread is locked.
CharlesB58 Veteran Member • Posts: 8,612
My "Unpopular" Opinion?

I'm pretty sure some people won't like a couple of things I'm going to say, but with the constant flow of "Fuji is better" posts and others in which either the utter failure or unbeatable superiority of m4/3 is expressed by some, I want to weigh in with my personal point of view as a working photographer.

I specialize in concert/performance photography. This has long been the almost exclusive realm of FF cameras, or at least APSC with better high ISO performance. All my colleagues at the website i staff for use mostly FF with some APSC used when a bit more reach is needed with telephoto lenses. That reflects the genre standard at large.

That said, I admit that the photos I take with my EM1s take more work to clean up and lift shadows than most FF files (which often don't need much work anyway.) I admit even with my best effort starting with .orf files, OOC .jpegs from cameras like the Sony A7rii, and CaNikon FF dslrs are cleaner and usually have better DR. (To me, DR is a more important factor than noise when it comes to concert photos.)

The shallow DoF advantages of FF are sometimes missed. On occasion I'd like more isolation at a given f stop than I get with m4/3.

Even as AF has improved with each generation of m4/3 cameras, I have associates with 5 year old DSLRs that focus faster and more accurately under conditions where I know my EM1s struggle.

Then again, theylike how small and light my kit is compared to theirs.

So why do I stick with m4/3?

I enjoy using it. I am confident that I can get the results I want. The style I want my images to have depends less on absence of noise or wider DR than on what I have been doing with 4/3 and m4/3 for nearly 10 years. I'm settled into the system for what it does for me, advantages I've come to depend on as second nature, and the very fact that my photos don't look like the typical concert photos out there.

It's just as many years ago, there were those who first switched to 35mm Leicas while most photographers stuck with 4X5 or medium format They liked that combination of easier portability, and overall operation, but there was also the fact that their photos simply had a different look that pleased them.

That's where i'm at: I love using my m4/3 and prefer the results I get, and I have clients who pay for those results. I know I have more noise in my ISO 6400 photos than a Nikon, Canon or Sony user has. I know I will have more trouble shooting fast moving action than someone with a Canon or Nikon DSLR. I know I don't have as many lenses available. I know I may be paying more for a lens or camera body than it would seem comparable lenses or bodies from other makers cost.

I even know that some people look at my use of Olympus gear with some skepticism, since so many pros use Canon and Nikon.

I also know that I'm limiting myself as far as the expectations of certain genres are concerned. I confess I'd probably take a different approach if I were actively seeking commercial work or doing weddings.

I know all this and am still very happy using m4/3.

So what's not to like about my opinion?

My opinion includes telling anyone having complaints or doubts about m4/3 IQ or AF to just go ahead and buy or switch to another system. Really, don't come here and complain about it, just consider that to fully enjoy photography, you should really, truly enjoy using your gear. If you think you will like Fuji or Sony or Nikon or Canon (or even Pentax) better, then get into that system and stop putting yourself through the angst of trying to justify m4/3.

Also, if you have to get all fanboyish and unrealistic to justify staying with m4/3, again you should just switch systems. You need to honestly enjoy photography, not convince yourself you are enjoying your gear just because you don't want to feel you made a mistake in buying it.

You see, in my opinion, to really enjoy photography to the fullest, you should forget you are even using your gear, in a sense. By that I mean it should be worry/hassle free. You should just be able to put the camera to your eye and concentrate 100% on capturing a composition in the most aesthetically pleasing way you know how, without any lingering doubts about the technical performance of your gear.

-- hide signature --

Photography is not about the thing photographed. It is about how that thing looks photographed. Quote by Garry Winogrand

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