Past II - Size Advantage starting to disappear from m43

Status
Not open for further replies.

JPTHEOG

Veteran Member
Messages
2,690
Reaction score
752
Location
Mississauga, CA
Just to ensure my point isn't lost and given the interest in the topic, I'm going to state a few things upfront.

I'm not saying :

M43 has lost its advantage of small sized lenses and cameras

That you can't get cheaper smaller high quality glass when compared to Sony FF

That you don't have a better lens line up that is fully flushed out and provides more options (i.e. high quality Zooms)

That you don't have other advantages

I am saying:

When comparing the best offerings of m43 to Sony FF, the size advantage many join the m43 format for is just starting to disappear. This can be seen simply by making combination comparisons, you don't need direct experience with the camera to make this observation.

The possibility of having a similar sized camera and lens combination (especially if you are a prime only shooter) with a FF sensor and cutting edge technology is mind blowing

Cost factors for going to Sony FF cannot be ignored when compared to the value in the EM1mkii

So perhaps this frames it a bit better. Additionally, while zoom options might be better for the EM1mkii, of the new Sony zoom is any good, it's a great walkabout range with potential for high quality results, at a steep price.

It's also my opinion that you should be comparing the high end options when it comes to lenses and with the size (but apparently excellent optical quality) of the new Olympus lenses, you now have a much bigger and heavier kit, quite compatible to the new Sony A7rmkiii of course with the compromises that come with the current Sony lens line up not fully flushed out. So depending on your needs, this isn't necessarily fully true.

It would be up to you whether the cost difference matters.

Also, as ii mentioned previously, the m43 format suits me just fine. I have the Pen F as you can see from my gear, and frankly love it. Not sure if sell it for a long time. This is just a topic that interests me and other folks so worth having.

Trolls not welcome.

--
My flickr account.....in its infancy as of March 2015. Feel free to comment!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/130003647@N03/
 
Last edited:
What do you base your statement on?

Please show us all those Sony f1.2 lenses that are similar in size and weight to Olympus and Panasonic f1.2 lenses.
 
There are no benefits to m43 anymore for em1 ii and GH4/5 shooters its gone.

The Sony FF, in particular the a7r iii and a9 now have a lens selection and body size that is superior. For people who want a more leisurely approach a cheaper 7rii or a used one with a 24-105 will be far superior in iq and output to almost any gh5/em1 ii body with a bag full of 1.2 primes, bold claim but I will post some findings soon.

The 24-105 looks ultra sharp and with 2 stops of headroom on that sensor it will be difficult for Panasonic and Olympus contain people swapping to FF imo.

My advice for anyone currently considering GH5/12-60 or 12-35/35-100 2.8's or em1 ii 12-40 2.8 12/100, 40-150 2.8 is wait and try A7riii and 24-105. Yes, its a premium cost, an extra £/$1k but the improvement will be huge. All Sony lens is comparable to current Oly/Pana premium lens pricing for their premium and cheaper for the 1.8/2 primes.
 
Sony don't seem to be interested in size so much as quality. The GM zooms are outstanding, big and expensive. The standard 28-70 and 24-70 zooms don't match up to the flagship bodies. The f/4 16-35 and 70-200 are a bit better.

FE mount primes are a mixed bag but there are some truly stunning lenses if you don't mind paying for them and they are not that large.

I just took a picture for reference with my EM1 and Zuiko 50mm f/2. I had to stop down to f/5.6 to get enough DoF. I could have used the A7R2 with 90mm f/2.8 macro but it is bigger, heavier and wouldn't have taken a better picture.

There are so many MFT body and lens combinations that Sony isn't interested in matching for size, cost and performance envelope. I can take my GM1 out with a complete zoom and prime kit in a tiny bag or have the EM1 hanging off one shoulder on a strap on the 50-200SWD with the A7R2 off the other with a Loxia 21mm.

If someone wants to concentrate on one system only then you have less choices on cost and weight with Sony.

Andrew
 
What do you base your statement on?

Please show us all those Sony f1.2 lenses that are similar in size and weight to Olympus and Panasonic f1.2 lenses.
omg here we go again ;)
 
There are no benefits to m43 anymore for em1 ii and GH4/5 shooters its gone.

The Sony FF, in particular the a7r iii and a9 now have a lens selection and body size that is superior. For people who want a more leisurely approach a cheaper 7rii or a used one with a 24-105 will be far superior in iq and output to almost any gh5/em1 ii body with a bag full of 1.2 primes, bold claim but I will post some findings soon.

The 24-105 looks ultra sharp and with 2 stops of headroom on that sensor it will be difficult for Panasonic and Olympus contain people swapping to FF imo.

My advice for anyone currently considering GH5/12-60 or 12-35/35-100 2.8's or em1 ii 12-40 2.8 12/100, 40-150 2.8 is wait and try A7riii and 24-105. Yes, its a premium cost, an extra £/$1k but the improvement will be huge. All Sony lens is comparable to current Oly/Pana premium lens pricing for their premium and cheaper for the 1.8/2 primes.
How about 4K video uncropped ? How about 4k 60fps ? How about 60 fps stills at 18MP ? 15 fps with mechanial shutter ? 60 fps in RAW before even pressing the shutter ? Several seconds hand held sharp exposures ? Price ? 800mm equiv reach that a 3 years old can carry ?

I had the A7RII. The image quality is indeed outstanding, jawdropping etc. In all other aspects, it’s not even in the same league as m43 flagships, which is why I returned it.
 
Last edited:
There are no benefits to m43 anymore for em1 ii and GH4/5 shooters its gone.

The Sony FF, in particular the a7r iii and a9 now have a lens selection and body size that is superior. For people who want a more leisurely approach a cheaper 7rii or a used one with a 24-105 will be far superior in iq and output to almost any gh5/em1 ii body with a bag full of 1.2 primes, bold claim but I will post some findings soon.

The 24-105 looks ultra sharp and with 2 stops of headroom on that sensor it will be difficult for Panasonic and Olympus contain people swapping to FF imo.

My advice for anyone currently considering GH5/12-60 or 12-35/35-100 2.8's or em1 ii 12-40 2.8 12/100, 40-150 2.8 is wait and try A7riii and 24-105. Yes, its a premium cost, an extra £/$1k but the improvement will be huge. All Sony lens is comparable to current Oly/Pana premium lens pricing for their premium and cheaper for the 1.8/2 primes.
How about 4K video uncropped ? How about 4k 60fps ? How about 60 fps stills at 18MP ? 15 fps with mechanial shutter ? 60 fps in RAW before even pressing the shutter ? Several seconds hand held sharp exposures ? Price ? 800mm equiv reach that a 3 years old can carry ?

I had the A7RII. The image quality is indeed outstanding, jawdropping etc. In all other aspects, it’s not even in the same league as m43 flagships, which is why I returned it.
There is no chance with arguing... He had an X-T2 and proofed that upscaled 24MP was equal if not better than the a7rII. Then he went on with E-M1.II followed by GH5. GH5 upscaled seemed to be an improvement, better than X-T2. Now the circle closes with a7RIII (and even a7RII) being an unmatched improvement to m43.

If I had the money I probably also would get a new toy every month. But I don't and I'm happy with my G81/E-M1.1 + Panny 12-60kit, 100-400PL and those adapted lenses from Nikon and 4/3... Isn't it just great being able to be happy and not having to worry all the time about missing a better toy?
 
There are no benefits to m43 anymore for em1 ii and GH4/5 shooters its gone.

The Sony FF, in particular the a7r iii and a9 now have a lens selection and body size that is superior. For people who want a more leisurely approach a cheaper 7rii or a used one with a 24-105 will be far superior in iq and output to almost any gh5/em1 ii body with a bag full of 1.2 primes, bold claim but I will post some findings soon.

The 24-105 looks ultra sharp and with 2 stops of headroom on that sensor it will be difficult for Panasonic and Olympus contain people swapping to FF imo.

My advice for anyone currently considering GH5/12-60 or 12-35/35-100 2.8's or em1 ii 12-40 2.8 12/100, 40-150 2.8 is wait and try A7riii and 24-105. Yes, its a premium cost, an extra £/$1k but the improvement will be huge. All Sony lens is comparable to current Oly/Pana premium lens pricing for their premium and cheaper for the 1.8/2 primes.
How about 4K video uncropped ? How about 4k 60fps ? How about 60 fps stills at 18MP ? 15 fps with mechanial shutter ? 60 fps in RAW before even pressing the shutter ? Several seconds hand held sharp exposures ? Price ? 800mm equiv reach that a 3 years old can carry ?
Every system has its strengths and weaknesses.
I had the A7RII. The image quality is indeed outstanding, jawdropping etc. In all other aspects, it’s not even in the same league as m43 flagships, which is why I returned it.
Agree.

It's all down to what aspects you value more.

Personally I value IQ, ISO, MP, DR over ergonomics and features, and that's why my main camera is an A7RII.

When I just want to have fun and enjoy the process I use my Leica M ;)

--
My Flickr
My Getty Images
 
Last edited:
Flagship bodies in both systems are getting bigger and so are the professional series of lenses.

Prices are high at the top also.

There seems to be a strange desire for extreme equipment.
 
There seems to be a strange desire for extreme equipment.
They have to, because 1) low to mid range is getting eat up by smartphone and 2) high end = higher profit margin which is required to stay alive in this shrinking market.

--
My Flickr
My Getty Images
 
Last edited:
Cherry picking and repeating falsehoods doesn't make them true.

We still have cameras like the GF7 while the A7 cameras are getting larger.

Sony also has abandoned making new APSC lenses, and their FE lenses keep getting bigger.

M43 on the other hand keeps offering larger "Pro" lenses as well as smaller high quality "pancake" lenses.

My favorite post in the last thread was by a fanboi who claimed the Sony 2X TC would not affect IQ....he implied it would not change the effective aperture and would not slightly degrade resolution. That is how far those guys are willing to go. Sad.

The truth is Sony "smallest" FE often (not always) is about the size of FF DSLRs when lenses are attached.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#716.286,487.515,ha,t

http://camerasize.com/compact/#593.30,724.394,716.345,ha,t
 
Last edited:
There are no benefits to m43 anymore for em1 ii and GH4/5 shooters its gone.

The Sony FF, in particular the a7r iii and a9 now have a lens selection and body size that is superior. For people who want a more leisurely approach a cheaper 7rii or a used one with a 24-105 will be far superior in iq and output to almost any gh5/em1 ii body with a bag full of 1.2 primes, bold claim but I will post some findings soon.

The 24-105 looks ultra sharp and with 2 stops of headroom on that sensor it will be difficult for Panasonic and Olympus contain people swapping to FF imo.

My advice for anyone currently considering GH5/12-60 or 12-35/35-100 2.8's or em1 ii 12-40 2.8 12/100, 40-150 2.8 is wait and try A7riii and 24-105. Yes, its a premium cost, an extra £/$1k but the improvement will be huge. All Sony lens is comparable to current Oly/Pana premium lens pricing for their premium and cheaper for the 1.8/2 primes.
How about 4K video uncropped ?
I thought it was uncropped
How about 4k 60fps ?
You need a super computer to run those files!
How about 60 fps stills at 18MP ?
Again, I have not see anything really great from those results and they are upscaled h265 hevc
15 fps with mechanial shutter ?
10fps is enough for me
60 fps in RAW before even pressing the shutter ?
I guess,
Several seconds hand held sharp exposures ?
Sony claims 5.5
Price ? 800mm equiv reach that a 3 years old can carry ?
Which 800mm lens is that?
I had the A7RII. The image quality is indeed outstanding, jawdropping etc. In all other aspects, it’s not even in the same league as m43 flagships, which is why I returned it.
Well, I suspect you weren't doing something right as its easy to see the difference between m43 and FF even 24-105 f4 vs 1.2 primes.
 
I think you are on to something. I own the Sony RX1 which is mind blowing despite its age and I'm nonetheless still wanting a Pen F when it goes on sale. For me, it's the feature set on the Olympus cameras and the nice wifi integration for my iPad workflow.

I love small capable cameras and will always consider an Olympus model. I did think of what you are saying back when I purchased the OMD E M1 12-40 combo, then compared to an APS-C DSLR.

--
Joe
 
Last edited:
Here are 3 cameras. A DSLR with a 40mm F/2.8 lens, a Sony FE camera with a 35mm F/2.8 lens, and 2017 model M43 camera with a 40mm F/3.4 (EFL) lens.

The FE has advantage due to a smaller focal length and the M43 camera has one due to the slightly smaller aperture.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#699.30,724.394,716.345,ha,t

I can easily slip that M43 camera in to jacket pocket. Not so with the giant (near DSLR sized) Sony camera.

And YES, Sony "smallest" FE is very often the size of comparable DSLRs!!!! This is Sony's "Smallest" option compared to a DSLR (just one of many examples)

http://camerasize.com/compact/#724.515,716.286,ha,t
 
Last edited:
I don't think the size advantage is disappearing now. It took a dent when Sony showed that it can build APS-C and FF mirrorless bodies that are very similar in size as the GH or OMD series.

As far as bodies are concerned i think we have seen that at least at the high end size and weight of recent models increased slightly for high end models simply because there is no point in making it smaller than a certain minimum that is determined not only by sensor size but by grip size, monitor, and controls that are essential.

So this would alone would support your argument since as far as mirrorless bodies are concerned there is only so much you can gain by making the sensor smaller.

However, as far as lenses are concerned you still have an advantage. Lenses like the new 1.2 aperture primes to me are outliers that Olympus needed to offer because some photographers do no want to acquire a second system if they want to do certain work where characteristics such as narrow depth of field and smooth ("feathery" :) ) bokey is needed. If someone is out to buy a system only for that purpose then i think you would be better up to get a FF camera.
 
Here are 3 cameras. A DSLR with a 40mm F/2.8 lens, a Sony FE camera with a 35mm F/2.8 lens, and 2017 model M43 camera with a 40mm F/3.4 (EFL) lens.

The FE has advantage due to a smaller focal length and the M43 camera has one due to the slightly smaller aperture.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#699.30,724.394,716.345,ha,t

I can easily slip that M43 camera in to jacket pocket. Not so with the giant (near DSLR sized) Sony camera.

And YES, Sony "smallest" FE is very often the size of comparable DSLRs!!!! This is Sony's "Smallest" option compared to a DSLR (just one of many examples)

http://camerasize.com/compact/#724.515,716.286,ha,t
Before you go out and bust someone read OP's post again.

Hint - It's not a competition of who is being the smallest or lightest :)
 
Flagship bodies in both systems are getting bigger and so are the professional series of lenses.

Prices are high at the top also.

There seems to be a strange desire for extreme equipment.
Actually its not the most extreme for me but the most compact capable body and lens combo covering the range 24-105/120 where the majority of images are composed!

The isolation and nuance of even an f4 lens on FF appears superior to a bag of M43 1.2 prime from what I can tell with brief comparison. You can maybe demonstrate otherwise be interested to see but I really think a FF mirrorless body with a decently sharp 24-105 F4 lens will actually do 90% of what I shoot. Add in a 70-300 as a relatively light tele and I just don't see me wanting anything more short term. For really specialist stuff a fast prime eg the affordable 28 f2 and a nifty 50 1.8/55 1.8 and 90 2.8macro and you are set for 99%. That little lot will be cheaper than what you will need to spend on m43 and you will not get the same iq, dr, performance and ultimately that FF "look"
 
There are no benefits to m43 anymore for em1 ii and GH4/5 shooters its gone.

The Sony FF, in particular the a7r iii and a9 now have a lens selection and body size that is superior. For people who want a more leisurely approach a cheaper 7rii or a used one with a 24-105 will be far superior in iq and output to almost any gh5/em1 ii body with a bag full of 1.2 primes, bold claim but I will post some findings soon.
How is an f4 lens far superior to f 1.2 primes?

Besides Olympus has a 12-100mm f4 lens, which is 24-200mm in FF (so double the reach), same F number, it's smaller and lighter and probably half the price when the Sony lens comes out. How is the Sony lens superior?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top