Past II - Size Advantage starting to disappear from m43

Status
Not open for further replies.
The game. Take a tiny piece of information, expound on it and treat it as if speaks for the whole. The original poster fails to make his case. Dummies like me are perplexed and ashamed they even entered this pointless black hole.
 
Since you are the chief troll these days, praising Sony more than some people actually get paid to do :)), can you tell me the alternative to the kit I'm using ?

GX80, Laowa 7.5mm f/2, Panasonic 15mm f/1.7, Panasonic 42.5mm f/1.7

That's my primary kit, but in some cases I take:

GX80, 12-32mm, 45-175mm with or without one of 25mm f/1.4 or the 75mm f/1.8

And for family outings without photography goals:

GX80 with 14-140mm II

Anything providing better images, better video, better autofocus, image stabilisation, for the same price, size, weight ?
Well, imo, as I have said repeatedly now I will live predominantly with a 24-105, I am very happy with the fl of the PL12-60 and with an equivalent min focus on the 24-105 to the 12-60 and the 42mp sensor behind it will meet 90% of my shooting and I suspect most others too. I will want a tele and the 70-300 is my preference for the 2x combo with the 24-105

For indoor I would consider the 35 2.8 or 28 2 and as a faster option and nifty 50 the 55 1.8 would be my preference but I'd probably buy the std fe 50 initially.

For my single wide I like the look of the venus 15 f2.

That would be it

24-105 and probably the 70-300

35 2.8

50 1.8

15 2

I don't believe people need that much more but it is in a different league obviously to a gx80, horses for courses.
In a different league in IQ correct, but also in a different league in price, size, and general usability. The 24-105mm alone looks bigger than my whole kit, and almost as expensive on its on, plus it may be a crap lens, just like all other non-GM Sony zooms.
 
So tell us again how the GX850 with a 20mm F/1.7 prime is "starting" to lose its size advantage after Sony just announced one of their largest mirrorless camera bodies ever? ..one (with lens) often very close in size to a DSLR?

http://camerasize.com/compact/#724.515,716.286,ha,t

http://camerasize.com/compact/#699.30,724.394,716.345,ha,t
ITS NOT......is English your first language? Perhaps its just an issue with comprehension in all seriousness?
Here is what you said...

"I am saying: When comparing ...the size advantage many join the m43 format for is just starting to disappear. "

What is "starting"??? The EMx and GH3/4/5 body sizes were around BEFORE the first A7.

And how can the size advantage "disappear" when Panasonic is STILL making pocketable camera/lens combinations????

As I pointed out, if anything Sony is replacing their A7 cameras with larger models. The A7ii is larger than the A7....and there never was a"pocketable" A7x camera body.
 
The game. Take a tiny piece of information, expound on it and treat it as if speaks for the whole. The original poster fails to make his case. Dummies like me are perplexed and ashamed they even entered this pointless black hole.
Here is my point:


my point is made here. The highest end body with as close to equivalent as you can get in focal length but high optical quality lenses (assuming the Pro Oly matches up which I suspect it will).

Is this comparing the entire system, no, but this is where it starts. I ain't no fanboy either!~
 
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
The uncropped 4k sucks on A7R series
Honestly I am not that bothered about video, so you can talk to the clouds as far as I'm concerned. From what I can tell the 4k a7r iii is superior to the gh5 from a cinematic perspective and shallow dof. You really will need a speed booster to get close and the af in video is not the best.
Let me explain to you the ,,cinematic,, format. It’s APSC. All that ,,FF is cinematic,, is just marketing crap. Take a look at Hollywood movies and observe the shallow dof use. Autofocus and cinematic are 2 terms that never go together. Low light is better on the Sony, but not at all important in ,,cinematic,, use. Documentary, probably yes.
How about 4k 60fps ?
You need a super computer to run those files!
No you don’t, the cheapest intel i3 from 2 generations ago flies with 4k 60p
You don't have a gh5, how do you know this, they certainly do not fly, that's serious grunt.
I don’t have the GH5 but I do have 4K 60fps fies from the GH5 and other cameras. They play on a Haswell i3 without hiccups. Even HVEC plays no problems. All with the integrated graphics. These files also work on my 2 years old Nvidia Shield android TV.

How about 42MP files. Do they require a powerful computer to edit ?
How about 60 fps stills at 18MP ?
Again, I have not see anything really great from those results and they are upscaled h265 hevc
I have not seen anything really great from any A7 cameras on these forums, and I’ve seen amazing photos from 6MP cameras from 20 years ago. That doesn’t really tells anything about these technical discussions.
Hmm.
Frankly, if any photographer can’t get amazing photos with any system made today, be it m43 or any other, that photographer is either a very bad one, or a lazy one. That’s a fact, proven by plethora of masterpieces taken in the digital era with much, much lesser cameras than we have today.
15 fps with mechanial shutter ?
10fps is enough for me
That’s irrelevant.
Oh
It’s just like me saying ,,I need 60 fps,, anything less won’t work for me. So yes, it is irrelevant.
60 fps in RAW before even pressing the shutter ?
I guess,
Several seconds hand held sharp exposures ?
Sony claims 5.5
Sony IS is not even close to Olympus or Panasonic Dual-IS
Not correct
Yes, correct. I’m starting to doubt you actually owned all the cameras you claim.
Price ? 800mm equiv reach that a 3 years old can carry ?
Which 800mm lens is that?
Panasonic 100-400mm
I wouldnt allow my 3 year toddler to carry my gear!
Yeah that’t wasn’t the point.
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.
That’s not what I said. What I said was that the E-M1.2 or the GH5 blows away the A7RII in everything exept technical image quality. In fact, comparing the A7RII with m43 flaghsips is a joke at best to me, after using them.
Now we've renegaded to an a7r ii!
You mean that camera and lens that hasn’t came out yet ?
 
Last edited:
The layout and access to certain controls is dictated by the size of the hands of the intended users. It has little to do with the sensor size.
 
I have skimmed through some of the "comments" in this thread and its part one.

A lot of the stuff written in this thread and the other, supposedly by alleged adults ( or perhaps by men children), brings to mind a certain competition that was held in the privacy of the boys toilets at primary school, to see who had the biggest one. We were 11 years old at the time! Now it seems we must see who has the biggest camera. Face palm stuff.

Some of the more idiotic elements who have posted here do not realise that no one camera or camera system is not able to do everything perfectly, or to put it plainly for the simpletons; M43 is near perfect for some situations, whilst FF and MF is the best tool for other situations.

When I used film I had three systems: 5x4 120 and 135. Each did certain tasks very well whilst being useless for others. I did theatre and dance photography. Whilst my 5x4 had the best image quality, it would be less than useless to photograph a Ballet.

When I go hiking M43 is perfect as I can take even long telephotos and the weight of the camera gear is more than acceptable. FF with the same equivalent lenses would be a weighty pain in the backside to cart up a mountain.

I love my little LX100, I just sling it over my shoulder and have fun taking pictures with it . Im not going to do giant exhibition prints with the pictures I take and the quality of the output is more than enough.

To some who have posted here I say just grow up!
 
I notice you've cherry-picked the two largest MFT cameras to represent the system. Hardly representative. Obviously, you're biased and pushing an agenda. Another "FF" troll in the MFT forum. Boo, hiss.
They're the two highest end MFT cameras, as well as being the largest. When it comes to features and performance they're the closest to the Sony FF options. I think that makes it reasonable to compare them, despite there being smaller MFT cameras available.

If I was looking to replace my Sony A77ii with an MFT option it's only really the GH5 or E-M1ii that I'd be considering. Anything else (for me) would be too much of a downgrade. If I did need to replace it then the small difference in size and weight between the GH5 and Sony FF would make that a difficult choice.

I think the OP has made it clear that this thread wasn't aimed at people who are 100% happy with the capabilities of the smaller/lower-end MFT options.
 
I notice you've cherry-picked the two largest MFT cameras to represent the system. Hardly representative. Obviously, you're biased and pushing an agenda. Another "FF" troll in the MFT forum. Boo, hiss.
They're the two highest end MFT cameras, as well as being the largest. When it comes to features and performance they're the closest to the Sony FF options. I think that makes it reasonable to compare them, despite there being smaller MFT cameras available.

If I was looking to replace my Sony A77ii with an MFT option it's only really the GH5 or E-M1ii that I'd be considering. Anything else (for me) would be too much of a downgrade. If I did need to replace it then the small difference in size and weight between the GH5 and Sony FF would make that a difficult choice.

I think the OP has made it clear that this thread wasn't aimed at people who are 100% happy with the capabilities of the smaller/lower-end MFT options.
I thought I did
 
. This is a silly argument that looks suspiciously like yet another drive-by trolling in the MFT Forum.
Really?

I was saying that the Sony and M4/3 flagship cameras are getting larger and more expensive. The Sony G (igantic) series of lenses means that Sony systems are larger than most FF DSLR.

The rising prices of flagship equipment is also pretty striking. Now we even have flagship cell phones that cost upwards of one grand.

Extreme size and price rule.

I just don't see anything silly about these facts and how it could be construed as trolling.
 
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/
Um, last time I looked, Sony's 24-70/4 hadn't gotten any smaller, and Panasonic's 12-35/2.8, hadn't gotten any bigger. Citing the GH5 is a red herring.

When Sony makes a 24-70/5.6 that's the same size, cost and optical quality as the 12-35/2.8, then we'll have real size competition. Until then, a Sony kit matching my MFT lens collection as nearly as possible is still bigger, heavier, and much more expensive than my MFT kit. That's why I went MFT in the first place three years ago. Not much has changed since then.

--
If you think digital is hard, try slide film.
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos
Well actually they did, you aren't watching close enough!
Please provide a link to Sony's 24-70 f5.6.
The 24-105 will do essentially the same range as the 12-35 and 35-100 all in one
larger, heavier
lens with the a7r ii/iii. Plus, between 24-105 it will be far, far, superior and even cropped above 105 will provide far better results and isolation to the Pana 2.8's.
Irrelevant to the topic of system size.

If I want a small kit and just 24-70 EFL, and MFT IQ is all I need, Sony makes me carry a larger, heavier lens. MFT's size advantage is not gone or even going away.

--
If you think digital is hard, try slide film.
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos
Actually, the 24-70 f4 is 420g,
which is 30% heavier than the 12-35
so is going to provide a much better experience
It might provide a "better experience", but it's still heavier.

You keep trying to change the subject, because you can't win on size, which is the topic under discussion.
than the GH5 12-35 2.8 and actually the 12-60 2.8-4 too.
I have no idea what you're talking about, but it's clearly an attempt to divert the conversion away from the original topic, because you keep losing the argument.
Had the a7r3 not been announced I'd of stayed Pana GH5 for now, as it is with the better af, touch, joystick its a no brainer and the options for Sony with a7r3 are so much better than m43 its not even funny.
Sounding more like a troll with every sentence. How about staying on-topic?
Of course you have to be happy to carry a gh5/em1 ii size camera, which I am, I actually think they are still very compact compared to what you would need in a dslr, but you know that already.

To confirm

a7r 3 650 and 430 for 12-35 f2 c (24-70 f4c) equivalent lens ie 1080g

gh5 720 and 320 for 12-35 2.8 c lens ie 1050g

The 12-35 f2 c lens can be cropped to a 70-105 f4-6 lens equivalent with no problems if you need a touch more reach, depends which way you want to go I guess.

Overall, the weight saving and size is clearly in Sony's favour now. Its only a matter of time until we see the death of dslr, its really game over once Sony produce the 400 2.8 for serious pros. Nikon have had a small stay of execution with the d850 but they are looking very vulnerable. Canon have a huge base so will continue for some time losing more and more share. M43 will need to go after the smaller and smaller size and faster performance and pana along the better and better video path. The 1.2's are big, expensive and still slow compared to a 1.4 and 1.8 even on full frame and twice the size of 1.8's

Sony will start to dominate by some margin within 3 years and Nikon unless there is a miracle is probably done in 3 years with photo imaging, we shall see,
Dream on, fanboy. Just do your dreaming in another forum.
Lol, wow you are really angry, you have a real problem, you should see someone!
--
If you think digital is hard, try slide film.
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos
I have a gh5 with 12-60, 100-300, 8 1.8, 17.5 1.8 and 25 1.8

Yes a real fanboy of Sony, grow up!
 
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/
Um, last time I looked, Sony's 24-70/4 hadn't gotten any smaller, and Panasonic's 12-35/2.8, hadn't gotten any bigger. Citing the GH5 is a red herring.

When Sony makes a 24-70/5.6 that's the same size, cost and optical quality as the 12-35/2.8, then we'll have real size competition. Until then, a Sony kit matching my MFT lens collection as nearly as possible is still bigger, heavier, and much more expensive than my MFT kit. That's why I went MFT in the first place three years ago. Not much has changed since then.

--
If you think digital is hard, try slide film.
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos
Well actually they did, you aren't watching close enough!
Please provide a link to Sony's 24-70 f5.6.
The 24-105 will do essentially the same range as the 12-35 and 35-100 all in one
larger, heavier
lens with the a7r ii/iii. Plus, between 24-105 it will be far, far, superior and even cropped above 105 will provide far better results and isolation to the Pana 2.8's.
Irrelevant to the topic of system size.

If I want a small kit and just 24-70 EFL, and MFT IQ is all I need, Sony makes me carry a larger, heavier lens. MFT's size advantage is not gone or even going away.

--
If you think digital is hard, try slide film.
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos
Actually, the 24-70 f4 is 420g,
which is 30% heavier than the 12-35
so is going to provide a much better experience
It might provide a "better experience", but it's still heavier.

You keep trying to change the subject, because you can't win on size, which is the topic under discussion.
than the GH5 12-35 2.8 and actually the 12-60 2.8-4 too.
I have no idea what you're talking about, but it's clearly an attempt to divert the conversion away from the original topic, because you keep losing the argument.
Had the a7r3 not been announced I'd of stayed Pana GH5 for now, as it is with the better af, touch, joystick its a no brainer and the options for Sony with a7r3 are so much better than m43 its not even funny.
Sounding more like a troll with every sentence. How about staying on-topic?
Of course you have to be happy to carry a gh5/em1 ii size camera, which I am, I actually think they are still very compact compared to what you would need in a dslr, but you know that already.

To confirm

a7r 3 650 and 430 for 12-35 f2 c (24-70 f4c) equivalent lens ie 1080g

gh5 720 and 320 for 12-35 2.8 c lens ie 1050g

The 12-35 f2 c lens can be cropped to a 70-105 f4-6 lens equivalent with no problems if you need a touch more reach, depends which way you want to go I guess.

Overall, the weight saving and size is clearly in Sony's favour now. Its only a matter of time until we see the death of dslr, its really game over once Sony produce the 400 2.8 for serious pros. Nikon have had a small stay of execution with the d850 but they are looking very vulnerable. Canon have a huge base so will continue for some time losing more and more share. M43 will need to go after the smaller and smaller size and faster performance and pana along the better and better video path. The 1.2's are big, expensive and still slow compared to a 1.4 and 1.8 even on full frame and twice the size of 1.8's

Sony will start to dominate by some margin within 3 years and Nikon unless there is a miracle is probably done in 3 years with photo imaging, we shall see,
Dream on, fanboy. Just do your dreaming in another forum.
Lol, wow you are really angry, you have a real problem, you should see someone!
--
If you think digital is hard, try slide film.
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos
I have a gh5 with 12-60, 100-300, 8 1.8, 17.5 1.8 and 25 1.8

Yes a real fanboy of Sony, grow up!
I think he’s right, and everyone in their right mind reading what you wrote would see the only interest you have is trolling, nothing else. I much doubt you have that Panasonic gear, but if you really do have it, I guess that tolds us even more about how much you know about cameras and photography.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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.
And people have completely pushed back on this claim and shown counter examples why it's wrong. Again, what has really changed from when the E-M1 Mk I and A7 came out? The Sony FF cameras have not gotten any smaller (in fact they have gotten a bit bigger in response to complaints about ergonomics).

FE mount lens are still huge and there is no sign Sony has any plans to release compact lenses (for example some compact or pancake primes and zooms, for which there are plenty in the MFT system).
 
Last edited:
There is nothing disappearing, at least so far. Sure the E-M1.2 and the GH5 are bigger than their predecessors, but there are still plenty of smaller bodies that are the current models in their target market segment. Just buy a Pen F, or GX85, or E-M5 mark 2, or, or .....or even a GM5.

The difference is that we have a lot of option with the M43 sensor size,,,,,,,just try to get one of those Sony FF mothers into a GM5 or a Pen F.

IMO, there is no disappearance, just a broadening of the options.
 
Guys - a little calm here please.

Most of us know that one system is better at certain things than another system and not so good at other things.

Some people, however, are very insecure about their chosen system. They try to justify their choice by constantly attempting to denigrate the virtues of other systems.

That's OK.

But listen guys, over here in MFT land we feel secure in our choice.

When did any of us need to hop over to any of the other forums in order to either defend our choice or attack the choice of others?

Yes, I know, we didn't. That's because we feel secure in our chosen system.

We accept that certain other systems may be better for certain people.

However, we also understand that the self esteem of certain people is so low that they need to pull others down in order to make themselves feel important.

We know that there are people out there who do feel insecure. We should not attempt to argue the virtues of our MFT system. Instead, we should try to make them feel good about the gear they are using.

This will, unfortunately, pose some difficulties, but we must try.

Tell them that nothing worth having comes cheap.

Tell them that, in order to succeed, they must overcome difficulties.

Tell them that they must bear the weight of their chosen aims.

Make them understand that, sometimes, the weight will be too much to bear, but in pursuit of their goals it is a burden they must carry - the rewards are sweet.

Explain to them that sometimes the cost will be too high a price to pay - but pay it they must in order to seek acceptable resolution.

But, although we must not judge, show them that there is another way.

Yes, it will bring tribulations, but this is a task from which we must not recoil if we are to bring the lost home.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top