Reading mode: Light Dark

WRONG WAY - GO BACK !!!

Go to last post
Androole said:
Vetteran said:
Not sure why this is such a sensitive topic regarding sensor size vs. price. Perhaps it's the assertion that the EM1ii is overpriced; which i believe it is.

When a camera body costs $2K and the lenses are in excess of $1K to overcome the MFT sensor size limitations, there are simply other alternatives to consider as the fundamental limitation will always be sensor size driving IQ.

In any event, it appears that Olympus has to push 1.2 lenses to overcome the inherent low light issues and smaller sensor size of the MFT format.

Sensor size speaks for itself.
Click to expand...
Sensor size does indeed speak for itself.

If you want a FF sensor to match the same specs as the E-M1 II or G9, you have to pay $4500 for an A9.
Click to expand...
Or alternately if you remove image quality from the equation you can get a 60fps , 20mp , with great AF for around £320 :-)

Loading…

www.camerapricebuster.co.uk
Androole said:
Sensor aside, how is the A7 III materially different from a G85? The E-M5 III is a long time coming, but when it does arrive soon, it will have 4K and be in the same category as well.
Click to expand...
If you value image quality above features/gimmicks then you have your answer . Apart from MP count the A7III has every feature I would want or need , assuming it matches the spec sheet in real life. Very good AF, IBIS for 4k video, very good DR, up to 10fps { more than I need } , uncropped 4k video, dual card slots , improved battery life , usb 3.1 . What do you think it is missing that most photographers need ?
 
I'm not sure I agree with this idea. I can see what you are getting at, but the fact is that M43 hangs together extremely well as a complete system. It is practical, compact and once longer lenses are in prospect, good value too. IQ is plenty enough for most folks. Those for whom it is not are outliers, I suspect.

Yes there are places here and there in the range when a Fuji or Sony, say, might make sense but then gaps or usage scenarios better suited to a different format are true of their systems too. Overall, though, I find M43 a difficult system to beat. The players have had a long time to work out the kinks and bring their plans to fruition. And once one gets to f2.8 zooms or long telephotos, there is no way I would want to get near the weight and cost penalties on FF.

An attempt to rip everyone off by reprising that 16 mpx M43 sensor yet again would be a problem, however. Same for attempts to extort folks because the "new" actually now quite old M43 sensor is all of 20 mpx. Not much would make me up sticks and move and that one just might.
 
jonathanj said:
samtheman2014 said:
jonathanj said:
Auf Reisen said:
...I am still relatively new to photography and it will be a long time before I outgrow my current gear, if ever.
Click to expand...
You might be surprised, I said that just a couple of years ago, but there are limits I've run into - mainly around post processing latitude in my case. As long as I'm happy with the shot as taken, it's fine (the same was true when I had a Nikon V1), but try and raise the shadows too much, or tweak the colours too much, and MFT files can be quite difficult. Not drastically, but enough that I sometimes miss even the Samsung APS-C files, never mind those from a larger sensor.
Click to expand...
I agree with you Jonathan , the poor shadow performance of m43 when pushed even at base ISO is the only real disadvantage of the system.
Click to expand...
... and then I use the GM5, which drops to the electronic shutter when the shutter speed goes over 1/500, which means a drop in DR and shadows that are almost unrecoverable without turning into a blotchy purple mess..... :-(
jonathanj said:
The sensor size disadvantage is compounded by us being stuck with a 200 base ISO . My ideal m43 camera would have more MP and a base ISO of 50
Click to expand...
Yes. I don't want to exaggerate the issue, I've got plenty of great photos from MFT cameras (especially the GM5), and I've learnt to work around the limitation, but this is the kind of challenge I expect to be fixed in a new generation. Not an even faster burst mode that comes with a 20% increase in weight and a 50% increase in price :-)
Click to expand...
I am ham fisted so the GM5 did not appeal from a handling perspective though it is unfortunate that Panasonic do not seem to be in any rush to update the model. If you look at the shadow noise of even the latest 20mp models there is no advance
 
Okapi001 said:
samtheman2014 said:
Okapi001 said:
samtheman2014 said:
It lost money from start to finish and
Click to expand...
Of course you have reliable financial data to back that up, don't you?
Click to expand...
So you could be right as we only have Olympus's word to say they were losing money , though shutting down a highly profitable business seems unlikely don't you think
Click to expand...
They didn't shut it down, they just evolved the system. What would be the point of having two systems with the same sensor? Olympus just saw the mirrorless future soon enough. Sony is just about to end its DSLR line, and Canon, Nikon and Pentax will do so in the next 10-15 years at the latest.
Click to expand...
Canon currently has 2 systems with the same size sensor. Why? Because they both are profitable. 43 was a massive failure. The SHG lenses were a nassive failure.

What Olympus saw was certain failure if they continued with the 43 system. Luckily for all they noticed that in time before they went bankrupt. That still might happen BTW. I don't think the camera division is really out of the woods yet.
 
samtheman2014 said:
Androole said:
Vetteran said:
Not sure why this is such a sensitive topic regarding sensor size vs. price. Perhaps it's the assertion that the EM1ii is overpriced; which i believe it is.

When a camera body costs $2K and the lenses are in excess of $1K to overcome the MFT sensor size limitations, there are simply other alternatives to consider as the fundamental limitation will always be sensor size driving IQ.

In any event, it appears that Olympus has to push 1.2 lenses to overcome the inherent low light issues and smaller sensor size of the MFT format.

Sensor size speaks for itself.
Click to expand...
Sensor size does indeed speak for itself.

If you want a FF sensor to match the same specs as the E-M1 II or G9, you have to pay $4500 for an A9.
Click to expand...
Or alternately if you remove image quality from the equation you can get a 60fps , 20mp , with great AF for around £320 :-)

https://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Nikon/Nikon-1-Cameras/Nikon-1-J5-Camera-Body
Click to expand...
The J5 is really great for a whole lot of applications, where crop-factor, AF, and speed are the most important factors. It's too bad it's a dead, discontinued system, and Nikon never made any proper lenses for it.
samtheman2014 said:
samtheman2014 said:
Sensor aside, how is the A7 III materially different from a G85? The E-M5 III is a long time coming, but when it does arrive soon, it will have 4K and be in the same category as well.
Click to expand...
If you value image quality above features/gimmicks then you have your answer . Apart from MP count the A7III has every feature I would want or need , assuming it matches the spec sheet in real life. Very good AF, IBIS for 4k video, very good DR, up to 10fps { more than I need } , uncropped 4k video, dual card slots , improved battery life , usb 3.1 . What do you think it is missing that most photographers need ?
Click to expand...
I don't think it's missing anything that most photographers need. Well, maybe weather-sealing...

But the E-M5 II or the G85 isn't missing anything that most photographers need, either.

If you don't need the insane feeds, speeds, and features that the E-M1 II and the G9 have, you're overbuying. People love overbuying gear, that's fine. But its valuable to take your argument to its logical conclusion.
 
Sergey Borachev said:
30 Likes. It seems there are others who are not convinced with Olympus' $trategy.
Click to expand...
No.. it just means if you posted the same thing in any other forum about how expensive a particular brand is you would get the same response....just like saying taxes are too high....
 
Okapi001 said:
samtheman2014 said:
Okapi001 said:
samtheman2014 said:
It lost money from start to finish and
Click to expand...
Of course you have reliable financial data to back that up, don't you?
Click to expand...
So you could be right as we only have Olympus's word to say they were losing money , though shutting down a highly profitable business seems unlikely don't you think
Click to expand...
They didn't shut it down, they just evolved the system. What would be the point of having two systems with the same sensor? Olympus just saw the mirrorless future soon enough. Sony is just about to end its DSLR line, and Canon, Nikon and Pentax will do so in the next 10-15 years at the latest.
Click to expand...
it didn't evolve because m4/3rds is a completely different lens mount and system, 4/3rds is dead.
 
Okapi001 said:
samtheman2014 said:
Okapi001 said:
samtheman2014 said:
It lost money from start to finish and
Click to expand...
Of course you have reliable financial data to back that up, don't you?
Click to expand...
So you could be right as we only have Olympus's word to say they were losing money , though shutting down a highly profitable business seems unlikely don't you think
Click to expand...
They didn't shut it down, they just evolved the system. What would be the point of having two systems with the same sensor? Olympus just saw the mirrorless future soon enough. Sony is just about to end its DSLR line, and Canon, Nikon and Pentax will do so in the next 10-15 years at the latest.
Click to expand...
Don't be daft of course they shut it down and that was a good decision. The fact that you can use the huge heavy and admittedly very very good SHG lenses on their two top bodies E-M1 and II with poorer AF than native lenses and very poor performance on every other m43 camera they have made is not evolving . That was throwing a bone to uses who spent a lot of cash in FT. FT lenses are compatible to m43 in the same way { poorer for most models in fact } that Canon is to Sony

Mirrorless is indeed the future and I personally will never buy another DSLR . However for Olympus , Fuji and Sony they had nothing to lose so folding up their DSLR system was an easy and smart option though Sony do still have some very good SLT models. m43 has lost money for the bulk of its existence and as mentioned above it is only in the last 18months or so that it has made any profit and it is a very small profit . I had some FT gear and I was delighted to replace it with m43 .
 
jwilliams said:
JCoolowski said:
M43 should concentrate on where they can beat the competition: small (yet usable) cameras and fast yet small primes (f1.8 is enough).
Click to expand...
I have always said the smaller primes is where m43 shines. Fast enough without being too big. A lens like the 25 1.8 is a great example of size, cost and performance. It competes where it can and does so beautifully. The huge over priced 25 1.2 tries to compete against FF and fails miserably.

--
Jonathan
Click to expand...
agree, I have a ton of primes, zero desire to get the new Olympus 1.2 primes at over 3 large for them.

I spend tha much for that big and it’s gonna be with a different format
 
Perhaps you missed the point, perhaps not. Most cameras are already superseded at the point of sale with the next upgrade in the pipeline programmed to sell at a respectable but profitable interval from your last purchase.

We do frequently read, look how much more you get for less money comments that the competition are pushing. All I was saying is a do not care, and why does it matter.

Yes of course we all want good value for money and competent gear. I still shoot my Pen EP3 and EM1, how much do they owe me now? It’s a different take but I call that good value for money and a whole lot less landfill .
 
Sergey Borachev said:
Astrotripper said:
Interestingly, out of the cameras you mention, both Olympus and Panasonic cost the same, and less that Fuji or Sony.
Click to expand...
Release price, and the E-M1 II is higher than the D500, higher than the X-H1 and also the G9, and equals the price of the FF A7III.
Click to expand...
Except D500, none of the other cameras you mention were available at the time. So you're kinda not making sense.

You need to make up your mind. You either compare release prices or you compare current prices. Otherwise it's nonsense. Although spewing nonsense is you regular mode of operation, so it's all actually quite expected.
Sergey Borachev said:
Yes, super super specs of the A7III if compared to the E-M1 II.
Click to expand...
How can it be so if it cannot do some of the things that E-M1 II can do?
Sergey Borachev said:
Which bit you can't comprehend?
Click to expand...
The "super" bit. A9 is super specced. A7 III is just a well rounded camera. It might have been considered super specced if it came out at the time E-M1 II was first revealed 18 months ago.
 
I would not buy EM1II or G9, regardless of price.

My background
 
jwilliams said:
samtheman2014 said:
Foto4x4 said:
Just because 4/3rds isn’t around doesn’t mean it failed at all. It’s just a line that has been superseded. Just like fashion and cars, marketers have to watch trends and adjust lineups accordingly. With cars, I see it like their power plants. V8s once dominated US autos. These days high powered 6s and 4s rule and soon it’ll be hybrids, electrics or hydrogen power. Eventually, there’ll be no V8s but if a maker held on to outdated engines and ignored the trends, then they would fail. Is the V8 a failure. No way, but is it’s time numbered, too right.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Androole said:
samtheman2014 said:
Androole said:
Vetteran said:
Not sure why this is such a sensitive topic regarding sensor size vs. price. Perhaps it's the assertion that the EM1ii is overpriced; which i believe it is.

When a camera body costs $2K and the lenses are in excess of $1K to overcome the MFT sensor size limitations, there are simply other alternatives to consider as the fundamental limitation will always be sensor size driving IQ.

In any event, it appears that Olympus has to push 1.2 lenses to overcome the inherent low light issues and smaller sensor size of the MFT format.

Sensor size speaks for itself.
Click to expand...
Sensor size does indeed speak for itself.

If you want a FF sensor to match the same specs as the E-M1 II or G9, you have to pay $4500 for an A9.
Click to expand...
Or alternately if you remove image quality from the equation you can get a 60fps , 20mp , with great AF for around £320 :-)

https://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Nikon/Nikon-1-Cameras/Nikon-1-J5-Camera-Body
Click to expand...
The J5 is really great for a whole lot of applications, where crop-factor, AF, and speed are the most important factors. It's too bad it's a dead, discontinued system, and Nikon never made any proper lenses for it.
Click to expand...
It is a pity that they did not follow through with CX looking at the latest 1" sensors their performance is not too shabby

Androole said:
Androole said:
Androole said:
Sensor aside, how is the A7 III materially different from a G85? The E-M5 III is a long time coming, but when it does arrive soon, it will have 4K and be in the same category as well.
Click to expand...
If you value image quality above features/gimmicks then you have your answer . Apart from MP count the A7III has every feature I would want or need , assuming it matches the spec sheet in real life. Very good AF, IBIS for 4k video, very good DR, up to 10fps { more than I need } , uncropped 4k video, dual card slots , improved battery life , usb 3.1 . What do you think it is missing that most photographers need ?
Click to expand...
I don't think it's missing anything that most photographers need. Well, maybe weather-sealing...

But the E-M5 II or the G85 isn't missing anything that most photographers need, either.
Click to expand...
They are for me , I want much better shadow noise at base ISO, which is easily achievable by just giving us a much lower true base ISO sensor. Which you can easily do with current tech , if they could make it a bit higher MP that would be a double bonus . The AF performance of those cameras is also lacking , for me again { what a selfish git :-) } the E-M5II lacks 4k video

Androole said:
If you don't need the insane feeds, speeds, and features that the E-M1 II and the G9 have, you're overbuying. People love overbuying gear, that's fine. But its valuable to take your argument to its logical conclusion.
Click to expand...
But from Olympus's perspective just to get the most modern 20mp m43 sensor the cheapest option is the £1000 Pen F and for a 4k shooter like me { I know selfish } to get a 20mp sensor and 4k I have exactly one Olympus choice
 
jwilliams said:
Cornu said:
The OMD EM1 II will be good enough for most photographic needs and I have a hard time imagining a situation where you would need a A7 III instead.

Pixel count 20MP -> 24MP? Hmmm

Super-high ISO of the Sony -> black cat in a tunnel photos anyone?

Super-shallow DOF - left eye in focus, right eye out of focus?

So the advantage brought by the A7 III is only important in very specific scenarios...

Additionally, the "good enough limit" will stay, but thechnology will move on, so MFT will cover even more scenarios in the future.
Click to expand...
the EM1 II is good enough, why aren't the f1.8 lenses good enough?
Click to expand...
For most people the f1.8 lenses are absolutely good enough. A number of professionals and enthusiasts that happen to use M4/3 clearly wanted a bit more, and were willing to pay for them, so that's what they get. The f1.8 lenses didn't disappear when the f1.2 lenses were released.

It seems like almost all the arguments on this forum are purely hypotheticals by people who will never touch gear - from any company - of anywhere near the caliber that they are arguing over.

Everyone's got $1000 budgets and $5000 opinions.

Are we all offended that we can't afford the best of the best at everything, and get it with no compromises?
 
Last edited:
Not if you have large hands , I liked the look and size of the GM5 but the handling for me was a no go . The GX8 which some moan is too big is for me the right size :-)
 
CliffWales said:
:-)

I know - but I couldn't resist

check this one out - its amazing how accurate this is LOL

Click to expand...
This is the depressing video that I sadly suspect is true for all of us , and makes a mockery of our dedication to backing up :-)

 
JCoolowski said:
M43 should concentrate on where they can beat the competition: small (yet usable) cameras and fast yet small primes (f1.8 is enough).
Click to expand...
Not really...it depends what kind of photography your shooting...Weddings, Events, HSS and anything that requires more bokeh ....0.95 and 1.2 is the ticket..1.8 is just not enough to give that WOW factor.....These kind of lenses are not that big or heavy but do produce a lot of bang for the buck....
 
George1958 said:
Perhaps you missed the point, perhaps not. Most cameras are already superseded at the point of sale with the next upgrade in the pipeline programmed to sell at a respectable but profitable interval from your last purchase.

We do frequently read, look how much more you get for less money comments that the competition are pushing. All I was saying is a do not care, and why does it matter.

Yes of course we all want good value for money and competent gear. I still shoot my Pen EP3 and EM1, how much do they owe me now? It’s a different take but I call that good value for money and a whole lot less landfill .
Click to expand...
that constantly upgrading cameras is a fools errand. And I'm all for saving the planet. Every camera I have, except one, would probably be considered old or obsolete.

If I am going to buy a new camera though like most people I want the most features or performance I can get for my money. Often this is done by buying something that is just been replaced by the new and improved model.

Sometimes a new model makes enough of a leap in features or performance to buy it. I bought both the GH1 and EM5 not too long after their release because they were significantly better than what had been available. Sadly I just don't see any big leaps in m43 cameras of late and many are using outdated sensors and being sold at rediculous prices.
 
samtheman2014 said:
Androole said:
samtheman2014 said:
Androole said:
Vetteran said:
Not sure why this is such a sensitive topic regarding sensor size vs. price. Perhaps it's the assertion that the EM1ii is overpriced; which i believe it is.

When a camera body costs $2K and the lenses are in excess of $1K to overcome the MFT sensor size limitations, there are simply other alternatives to consider as the fundamental limitation will always be sensor size driving IQ.

In any event, it appears that Olympus has to push 1.2 lenses to overcome the inherent low light issues and smaller sensor size of the MFT format.

Sensor size speaks for itself.
Click to expand...
Sensor size does indeed speak for itself.

If you want a FF sensor to match the same specs as the E-M1 II or G9, you have to pay $4500 for an A9.
Click to expand...
Or alternately if you remove image quality from the equation you can get a 60fps , 20mp , with great AF for around £320 :-)

https://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Nikon/Nikon-1-Cameras/Nikon-1-J5-Camera-Body
Click to expand...
The J5 is really great for a whole lot of applications, where crop-factor, AF, and speed are the most important factors. It's too bad it's a dead, discontinued system, and Nikon never made any proper lenses for it.
Click to expand...
It is a pity that they did not follow through with CX looking at the latest 1" sensors their performance is not too shabby
samtheman2014 said:
samtheman2014 said:
samtheman2014 said:
Sensor aside, how is the A7 III materially different from a G85? The E-M5 III is a long time coming, but when it does arrive soon, it will have 4K and be in the same category as well.
Click to expand...
If you value image quality above features/gimmicks then you have your answer . Apart from MP count the A7III has every feature I would want or need , assuming it matches the spec sheet in real life. Very good AF, IBIS for 4k video, very good DR, up to 10fps { more than I need } , uncropped 4k video, dual card slots , improved battery life , usb 3.1 . What do you think it is missing that most photographers need ?
Click to expand...
I don't think it's missing anything that most photographers need. Well, maybe weather-sealing...

But the E-M5 II or the G85 isn't missing anything that most photographers need, either.
Click to expand...
They are for me , I want much better shadow noise at base ISO, which is easily achievable by just giving us a much lower true base ISO sensor. Which you can easily do with current tech , if they could make it a bit higher MP that would be a double bonus . The AF performance of those cameras is also lacking , for me again { what a selfish git :-) } the E-M5II lacks 4k video
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity, what do you think that you find AF on M4/3 is lacking? Do you primarily use C-AF or AF tracking for fast moving subjects?

Because if not, really any present generation M4/3 will give you among the very fastest single AF speed on the market.

Just look at Imaging Resource's testing on this subject, with the Autofocus Shutter Response times:

www.imaging-resource.com

Olympus E-M5 II Review - Performance - Imaging Resource

Olympus E-M5 II Review - E-M5 II Performance
www.imaging-resource.com www.imaging-resource.com

www.imaging-resource.com

Sony A9 Review - Performance - Imaging Resource

Sony A9 Review - A9 Performance
www.imaging-resource.com www.imaging-resource.com

Loading…

www.imaging-resource.com

E-M5 II = 0.137s

Sony A9 = 0.216s

Nikon D5 = 0.132s

If you need dead reliable C-AF all the time, I'm a bit surprised that you ever managed to find your way into the M4/3 system at all. It's better now than it has ever been before, but it's always been the major weakness of the system.
samtheman2014 said:
samtheman2014 said:
If you don't need the insane feeds, speeds, and features that the E-M1 II and the G9 have, you're overbuying. People love overbuying gear, that's fine. But its valuable to take your argument to its logical conclusion.
Click to expand...
But from Olympus's perspective just to get the most modern 20mp m43 sensor the cheapest option is the £1000 Pen F and for a 4k shooter like me { I know selfish } to get a 20mp sensor and 4k I have exactly one Olympus choice

--
Jim Stirling
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top