Downsizing - FF to M43?

like others have said, with M4/3 bodies, it's less about IQ, and more about feature set. Camera size isn't really a big deal since the lenses are always going be be much smaller and lighter than your FF. The big question is, do you need all those high-end features you will be paying a huge premium for? If you want decent C-AF with good handling, a used E-M1 is more than enough for the job. If you want to do some low light sports, getting brighter lenses is way more important than those fancy features IMO. Even if you want the super fast continues shooting for BIF, you still need a decent telephoto lens first. No feature can off set the lens being too short or too slow in the first place.

Tobiasstarmose said:

the benefit of having the GM5 for walking around and the G9 for more serious stuff using all the same glass, and never being to heavy really intrigues me.

Click to expand...

GM5 with what lenses? The ones you listed are quite big and heavy for the GM5. This walk-around body and body for serious work is a nice idea, but I think it does not work that great in practice. Maybe you better off with a walkaround-camera like the Fuji x100 series, or even a Ricoh GR, next to the G9 and fitting lenses.

I went from a Canon 5dmkII with a set of primes and the odd zoom down to m4/3 with a set of primes and the odd zoom. I dipped my toes in the water before a long distance bicycle tour and was convinced it was above the quality threshold for my needs in a much more compact package.

I have mixed feelings about the "size creep" of more recent models, including the GH5 (my current main camera) and G9. The ergonomics of larger cameras work well for me when I am actively shooting, but the weight and bulk is more of a factor than it was on my GH3 or G2. At the same time, the joy of a system is the range of choices, and I still have a GX1 in addition to the GH5. That lets me combine a small camera with a small lens or three for an incredibly competent kit which is smaller and lighter than my old Canon camera plus one lens. Second cameras can easily be found at deep discounts or on the second hand market if featherweight is most important, while robust, full featured flagships allow the best shooting and quality experience.

At this point, I couldn't imagine going back to a 135 format camera. If I had to start from scratch today I would be tempted by Fuji with a slightly different compromise on size/weight/quality. However, for your stated needs, you will probably find the lens lineup and camera performance of m4/3 better matches what you are looking for.

Personally I agree the G9 is a bulky and expensive step forward, the above page has some good information.

It's the full frame LENSES that weigh much more especially tele, though I must say that my EM-1 mk1 is at the upper limit of weight for me.

--
Bob B
www.pbase.com/bbernstein
In use: Olympus OMD EM-1, Zuiko12~60, Panasonic 45-175 PZ, Pan/Leica 25mm f1.4, zuiko 9~18, m.zuiko 75-300, Zuiko 50~200 ED, fl36
On the shelf: e30, e-510, EC14, EC20, 18~180, 14~42, 40~150, 50mm macro,

mg_k said:

OP you complained Sony being big, so your solution is to get the G9 which is even bigger with a quarter of a sensor?

Makes zero sense to me.

Click to expand...

Sad that you are so narrow....

The point is single system.

GM5 with 12-32mm for daily carrying.

G9 with 12-35/35-100 for sports in fast move.

GX85 with 12-32mm for usual work..

A single mount, multiple different body sizes, functions and performances. Multiple different sizes and weights to ranges and F-values etc.

You want small? Take GM5 and 12-32 or 14-42PZ

You want high performer? Take G9 and some Leica lenses.

You want video beast? Take GH5s....

You can't do that with Sony, Canon nor Nikon.

And even more, start combining more video/photography tools from drones to controlled heads, video tools etc. All sharing the same mount. You use your 20mm f/1.7 up in the sky as underwater, you go from top of the mountais to night clubs and other events as you can resize your setup from big to small, capable to simple.

There is nothing wrong with considering a system switch. M43 hits a portability/performance niche that is very alluring, and works quite well for a lot of us here. Still, you need to define what you want the most from your systems to determine the best path for your uses, and avoid regrets.

I understand where you are coming from; camera and system size have been a big factor for me in how often I take the gear out and use it (and how much I enjoy using it when I am out and about). I ended up with M43 after coming from a Nikon DSLR system about 7 years ago, and it was my primary system for about 4 years. Then I moved to an A7, and sold all of my M43 gear.

Working with FF was a great experience for me. I learned a great deal about DOF effects, the joys of expanded DR, and the luxury of files with an amazing amount of recoverable information. However, I also discovered that I really missed my lightweight long tele lenses, huge assortment of available lenses, and, yes, a tiny camera that I could take with me all the time. I also deeply disliked the Sony color rendition and its tendency to mess up the yellow/green rendering in AWB (and sometimes even in manual WB). So, while still keeping the Sony as my primary system, I added back in a GM5 and a couple of lenses.

A few months later I gave a GX8 a try, and realized that, while not an A7 in terms of DR, it was enough better than any of the 16MP M43 sensored cameras that I could make it my primary, and not miss the FF goodness of the A7. At that point, I sold the A7 and lenses, and moved back to M43 completely. A year and a half later, i have no regrets at all.

Now, how does that relate to what you are doing? Well, if the only camera I had to choose from with the 20MP sensor in M43 had been the G9, I would not have done the switch back. Why? Size. For me, the body weight that works is around 450g at the upper end. The G9 is a lot heavier than that, and, to be honest with you, at that weight, it would not be a frequent companion. There is a point for each of us that the inverse relationship between body/system size and enjoyment tips over from positive to negative, and you should think about where that is for you before you go whole hog on a G9.....

Now, given your preference for the diminutive GM5, I would suggest that you wait just a bit and see what Panasonic has to offer in the upcoming GX9. If it's no bigger than the current GX8, I would recommend it as the body you should consider if you decide to switch systems completely. You could also look at the Pen F, which also is a 20MP sensor, but is a very sleek little machine (if you are used to a grip, though, it might be a bit harder to use with larger lenses, which the GX8 handles better).

So, in summary? My advice would be to think carefully about what you really would most like to use in terms of size and weight, and then base your decisions on that. Also, I would suggest to hold on to your FF setup while you make the switch, and sell that gear once you are sure the M43 system will do what you need. For me it actually works better than FF for what and how I shoot, but only you can determine if that's going to be true for you too. Maybe rent some M43 gear before you do the whole switch?

-J

Consider the olympus em1 mk2 given that it is the same price. You save another 84 grams but more importantly, the dimension to fit the bag.

Tobiasstarmose said:

Okay, I think i need to explain my situation a bit better.

First of all i know that the G9 i a big camera, bigger than my A7ii, BUT if the lenses + adapter is what is killing me, I made a comparison between my A7ii with my 3 main lenses, and the G9 with the 3 main lenses.

The sony + metabones + 24-105 + 70-200 + 15-30 is 3.95kg (!!!) Wonder why i almost never have the full system with me. And i will need a grip, or extra battery to be safe.

The G9 + 12-60 + 8-18 + 35-100 (f2.8) is 1.65kg, thats only 150g more than the A7 + Metabones and the 24-105 (1,50kg).

So yes i think i would save sone weight and be more likely to have the "big" system out more often.

On top of that, i use to do a fair bit of sports shooting (I run track and field) but even though im generaly happy with my sony and canon glass using the metabones i have given up on sports..

Having a real single system, and the G9 should help some of this.

The biggest BUT in all this is that is do a bit of asto/landscape when i get the chance, and here the Sony is simply better i guess, I dont know if the high-res mode on the G9 works with astro shots?

In leaning more and more to wards the G9 and a system change.

the benefit of having the GM5 for walking around and the G9 for more serious stuff using all the same glass, and never being to heavy really intrigues me.

Is there any thing im forgetting, or that I would be unhappy with?

And thanks for the massive amount for comments!

Cheers

Tobias

Click to expand...

how the lenses relate across formats. A 70-200 2.8 would need to be a 35-100 f1.4 in m43. In the other direction, the 35-100 2.8 for m43 is equivalent to a 70-200 5.6 on your Sony.

That 12-60 2.8-4 you are lookng at is the same as a 24-120 5.6-8 on FF. It is slower than your 24-105 f4.

You can use f5.6 lenses on FF and they are the same as using f2.8 lenses on m43. There is 2 stops difference in light gathering between the formats. So if the camera weight is the same then you are only saving weight on the lenses if you are using effectively slower lenses on m43.

So really once you decide on a certain body size the lenses are really only bigger or smaller if you change the performance characteristics.

Be warned what i just wrote will probably cause a huge sh!t storm here because many don't know how to compare acoss formats. Search this site for an article on 'equivalence' and you will see what this means.

Nothing wrong with getting a G9. You can get smaller lenses than what you have now, but realize they are not equivalent to the lenses you have now.

--
Jonathan

Though I like my M4/3 system I think if I were changing system now I would consider Fuji. Slightly smaller flagship plus X-T3 on the way, bigger sensor comes in to play and nice lenses etc.. I would test it before dismissing before taking the plunge.

Interestigly never taken my M4/3 with me on holiday as small as it is but instead the trusty RX100 Mk3. Great pics and less hassle.

Tommi K1 said:

mg_k said:

OP you complained Sony being big, so your solution is to get the G9 which is even bigger with a quarter of a sensor?

Makes zero sense to me.

Click to expand...

Sad that you are so narrow....

The point is single system.

GM5 with 12-32mm for daily carrying.

G9 with 12-35/35-100 for sports in fast move.

GX85 with 12-32mm for usual work..

A single mount, multiple different body sizes, functions and performances. Multiple different sizes and weights to ranges and F-values etc.

You want small? Take GM5 and 12-32 or 14-42PZ

You want high performer? Take G9 and some Leica lenses.

You want video beast? Take GH5s....

You can't do that with Sony, Canon nor Nikon.

And even more, start combining more video/photography tools from drones to controlled heads, video tools etc. All sharing the same mount. You use your 20mm f/1.7 up in the sky as underwater, you go from top of the mountais to night clubs and other events as you can resize your setup from big to small, capable to simple.

Click to expand...

you can with m4/3rds but you need to buy 4 bodies and countless lenses....hardly seems cheap and then you have to store it all....why not carry it all just in case..........

Can we end the zombie thinking and learn to think for ourselves?

A 35-100 m43 lens can replace a 70-200 on FF. If we are OK with the output from the 35-100 It does NOT "have to an f1.4 lens". In some cases F2.8 on both systems look similar. Some times there is a hit in IQ and sometimes dof will be greater (often a benfit!).

If someone wants smaller size then there is nothing wrong with a smaller effective aperture. There are many ways to mitigate aperture size.

Mastering Light said:

Can we end the zombie thinking and learn to think for ourselves?

A 35-100 m43 lens can replace a 70-200 on FF. If we are OK with the output from the 35-100 It does NOT "have to an f1.4 lens". In some cases F2.8 on both systems look similar. Some times there is a hit in IQ and sometimes dof will be greater (often a benfit!).

If someone wants smaller size then there is nothing wrong with a smaller effective aperture. There are many ways to mitigate aperture size.

Click to expand...

I can think for myself very clearly. I guess you think I am incapable of original thought? It probably doesn't matter, but I have an engineering degree so relating formats is actually quite easy for me. I fully understand the tradeoffs in m43 vs whatever else you want to talk about. I can lay out the pros and cons quite clearly without any help.

Having someone here object to what I told the OP is as predictable as the sun rising. Anywhere else in the world but this forum this would not be controversial at all.

--
Jonathan

Tobiasstarmose said:

Then in september I look around and found a deal on Panasonic GM5 + 12-32mm

Click to expand...

Oh, the GM5 is a real gem. It really shines with the small Micro 4/3 lenses. And not only the tiny primes and the pancake zoom. It is a very competent telephoto setup with the amazing Panasonic 45-175mm. This little camera does not cease to amaze me.

Tobiasstarmose said:

, and since then the big Sony have not taken more than maybe 100 shots, the GM5 around 3000. And its all down to the size, i can take i everywhere and no really nottis.

Click to expand...

Yep, I carry mine in the pocket everywhere. Since it's winter here now and I have a bit bigger pockets in my winter jacket, I carry it with the 45-175mm. That's kinda of a crazy thing.

Tobiasstarmose said:

So as the stupid gear head i am i started to look at a "big" m43 camera and what lenses would cover my current gear.

Click to expand...

Ouch, that's GAS all right

Tobiasstarmose said:

If i sell all my canon/sony gear, i would almost be on line with what a Panasonic G9 + 12-60mm + 8-18mm would be.

Click to expand...

And you're back to the size and weight range of your current big FF kit, which you just wrote is starting to gather a bit too much dust, so to speak. So what's the point? You'd just get a different big kit that would get little use. EDIT: I read your response. Even G9 would not be in the same weight category, considering the lenses you have in mind.

Maybe G9 would make sense if you planned to go for action/wildlife photography. G9 + 100-400 is hell of a smaller and lighter combo than an A7 with 200-800mm. Which does not exist even.

Tobiasstarmose said:

Would this make any sens to switch, i mean then i would have only ONE system, and not the two and a half i have currently.

What are your thoughts?

Click to expand...

What's the goal here? I get that you want to have a "big" kit, but you already have one and I'm assuming it does work very well and deliver great results. And you can always buy smaller native lenses for your Sony to reduce size and weight.

If you do not want to pair that G9 with large and heavy telephoto lenses, then a smaller, lighter and less expensive Micro 4/3 camera may do the trick just as well. Do you think you really need all the bells and whistles that G9 offers?

If Panasonic were to release GX9, I think that would be a more sensible choice. The problem is that nobody knows if they ever decide to follow up on GX8, which was a bit of a market failure I think.

--
My photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/astrotripper2000/

Tobiasstarmose said:

Okay, I think i need to explain my situation a bit better.

First of all i know that the G9 i a big camera, bigger than my A7ii, BUT if the lenses + adapter is what is killing me, I made a comparison between my A7ii with my 3 main lenses, and the G9 with the 3 main lenses.

The sony + metabones + 24-105 + 70-200 + 15-30 is 3.95kg

Click to expand...

There is a way to shave off some grams. Based on this :

• Replace Canon 24-105 with Sony 24-105 - save the weight and hassle of the adapter (and the lens seems to be very good from what I saw)
• Replace Canon 70-200 f/2.8 with Sony 70-200 f/4 - save half a kilo
• Replace Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 with Sony 12-24 f/4 - save another half a kilo and gain a wider FoV

Including the weight of the adapter, I think that would reduce the weight of your main Sony kit by about 1200-1300 grams. And you'd get much better AF performance (and most likely image quality as well). And it would probably be a bit smaller than your current kit.

The question is, would that make it lighter enough to be worth it for you.

Tobiasstarmose said:

(!!!) Wonder why i almost never have the full system with me. And i will need a grip, or extra battery to be safe.

The G9 + 12-60 + 8-18 + 35-100 (f2.8) is 1.65kg, thats only 150g more than the A7 + Metabones and the 24-105 (1,50kg).

Click to expand...

I think it might be worth to wait for the upcoming 50-200mm f/2.8-4.0 At least the announcement.

That might actually give you a very good reason for the G9. And something that your current kit does not offer at all

Obviously you need to accept the compromises that come with a smaller format. But I'm guessing you are already fully aware and accepting of them already.

Tobiasstarmose said:

The biggest BUT in all this is that is do a bit of asto/landscape when i get the chance, and here the Sony is simply better i guess

Click to expand...

Well, there is Panasonic Leica 12mm f/1.4 which is a pretty amazing lens for astro as far as Micro 4/3 goes (see my flickr album for some examples). However, nothing in Micro 4/3 can match a Sigma 14mm f/1.8 mounted on an FF camera.

Tobiasstarmose said:

, I dont know if the high-res mode on the G9 works with astro shots?

Click to expand...

Doubt it. You would need to take all 8 exposures in short enough time span as to prevent star trails. I think that would defeat the whole point of it.

Tobiasstarmose said:

In leaning more and more to wards the G9 and a system change.

the benefit of having the GM5 for walking around and the G9 for more serious stuff using all the same glass, and never being to heavy really intrigues me.

Click to expand...

I actually have this exact kind of setup.

I have GM5 as my main everyday camera and a pocketable backup.

And my "serious" kit consists of Olympus E-M1 Mark II with 12-100mm f/4, Panasonic 100-300mm II, Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 + SpeedBooster and occasionally Samyang 100mm f/2.8 macro. I will use it with different lenses of course, depending on the need. But the reason I got it was to make it comfortable to use it with those more extreme lenses. Because for me, none of those lenses I listed are really usable on a smallish body like E-M10 (which is what I previously used).
So yes, there are some upsides to a "big" MFT kit. But you know, maybe G85 is also worth looking into

Anyway, good luck on solving that conundrum and keeping that GAS in check.

eques said:

Tobiasstarmose said:

Hi Folks,

Then in september I look around and found a deal on Panasonic GM5 + 12-32mm, and since then the big Sony have not taken more than maybe 100 shots, the GM5 around 3000. And its all down to the size, i can take i everywhere and no really nottis.

If i sell all my canon/sony gear, i would almost be on line with what a Panasonic G9 + 12-60mm + 8-18mm would be.

Click to expand...

No doubt, this is a great kit delivering excellent IQ.

BUT, looking at your history, are you sure, the big G9 with the big lenses would not suffer the fate of your Sony/Canon gear and gather dust?

Peter

Click to expand...

The G9 looks like a pretty big camera. If you're wanting something that's considerably smaller than a DSLR but handles better than a G5 there are lots of choices. Remember that the overall IQ isn't really that much different between models. if you're not shooting fast action where you need the very best AF or shooting a lot of video and want advanced features for that kind of thing, then I don't really see all that much benefit to getting the larger more expensive m43 bodies.



Some might say that cameras like my EM10 don't handle as well as bigger bodies, but if you're mostly using shorter focal length lenses, than I don't see it being that much of an issue. I do use an add on grip with my EM10 and that to me makes it handle perfectly as small as it is.... and it doesn't really add much in terms of weight or size.

Wu Jiaqiu said:

you can with m4/3rds but you need to buy 4 bodies and countless lenses....hardly seems cheap and then you have to store it all....why not carry it all just in case..........

Click to expand...

The idea of the system camera is exactly that, you have multiple bodies, multiple lenses, multiple accessories etc. And you still run with a one format so you can use any combination as your task requires.

If you want cheap and huge range, get a bridge camera. If you want tiny, get a 1" or 1/2.3" camera. If you want easy to carry and always with you, get a smartphone. If you want to do huge prints (over A1 size) and you are 80% time in extreme challenging situations, get a 35mm format.

If the requirements are lower in print size, cropping possibility and ISO range, you can lower the format size smaller and smaller until you come to situation that you can't go any smaller or specific system.

Tobiasstarmose said:

Hi Folks,

So a bit of history:

First camera was a Canon 30D, then a 50D - got more and better lenses.

Then got a Sony A7II, with a Metabones mk IV (T) adapter and a batterygrip.

I have a full fleet of canon glass, 24-105 mk I, 70-200 f2.8, 100m macro, Tamron 15-30 f2.8.

I like the images coming out of the sony, but on my last hiking trip (14 days) i did not take any of the sony gear and only had my phone, a LG G6.

I was happy with the handling, but not completely happy with the quality of the photos.

Then in september I look around and found a deal on Panasonic GM5 + 12-32mm, and since then the big Sony have not taken more than maybe 100 shots, the GM5 around 3000. And its all down to the size, i can take i everywhere and no really nottis.

So as the stupid gear head i am i started to look at a "big" m43 camera and what lenses would cover my current gear.

If i sell all my canon/sony gear, i would almost be on line with what a Panasonic G9 + 12-60mm + 8-18mm would be.

Would this make any sens to switch, i mean then i would have only ONE system, and not the two and a half i have currently.

What are your thoughts?

Click to expand...

I'm partially in the process of going the other way; I've added a Nikon D810 and a couple of primes, for some specific purposes.

That said, I'm still quite happy with my M43 gear. It's portable; it's easy to use; it's less demanding to shoot, process and store; it has more aspect ratios. Image quality on M43 is really good, especially when using better lenses.

That said ;-) the G9 is one of the bigger M43 bodies. I suggest you handle one and see if it works for you. If you prefer Panasonic, the GX8 might be a better option.

Tobiasstarmose said:

Hi Folks,

So a bit of history:

First camera was a Canon 30D, then a 50D - got more and better lenses.

Then got a Sony A7II, with a Metabones mk IV (T) adapter and a batterygrip.

I have a full fleet of canon glass, 24-105 mk I, 70-200 f2.8, 100m macro, Tamron 15-30 f2.8.

I like the images coming out of the sony, but on my last hiking trip (14 days) i did not take any of the sony gear and only had my phone, a LG G6.

I was happy with the handling, but not completely happy with the quality of the photos.

Then in september I look around and found a deal on Panasonic GM5 + 12-32mm, and since then the big Sony have not taken more than maybe 100 shots, the GM5 around 3000. And its all down to the size, i can take i everywhere and no really nottis.

So as the stupid gear head i am i started to look at a "big" m43 camera and what lenses would cover my current gear.

If i sell all my canon/sony gear, i would almost be on line with what a Panasonic G9 + 12-60mm + 8-18mm would be.

Would this make any sens to switch, i mean then i would have only ONE system, and not the two and a half i have currently.

What are your thoughts?

Have other people made this switch and written some thoughts on it?

Thanks

Tobias

Click to expand...

To me, the G9 is too big. Though the equivalent FOV lenses would be smaller (that's a help!) if you packed a phone instead of your Sony, you are looking for something smaller. Try an RX100, which takes better pictures than a phone and is more flexible (in terms of zoom) or if you want to try m43, go with one of the smaller bodies. I have a GX85. I had a Canon 6D and Sony a7, and only used them when I went somewhere that I was willing to carry a big bag. Otherwise, I pack smaller.

Tommi K1 said:

Wu Jiaqiu said:

you can with m4/3rds but you need to buy 4 bodies and countless lenses....hardly seems cheap and then you have to store it all....why not carry it all just in case..........

Click to expand...

The idea of the system camera is exactly that, you have multiple bodies, multiple lenses, multiple accessories etc. And you still run with a one format so you can use any combination as your task requires.

If you want cheap and huge range, get a bridge camera. If you want tiny, get a 1" or 1/2.3" camera. If you want easy to carry and always with you, get a smartphone. If you want to do huge prints (over A1 size) and you are 80% time in extreme challenging situations, get a 35mm format.

If the requirements are lower in print size, cropping possibility and ISO range, you can lower the format size smaller and smaller until you come to situation that you can't go any smaller or specific system.

Click to expand...

yeah i understand camera systems, been using em for a few years....... the point was the guy is talking about downsizing, buying multiple bodies and a raft of lenses doesn't sound like downsizing........just saying like