MFT vs Mirrorless

Started Apr 7, 2018 | Discussions thread
dougjgreen1 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,068
Re: MFT vs APSC Mirrorless
14

lds2k wrote:

Why go to a MFT when today's APC mirrorless camera body and lens combination are the same size or smaller than the current high performance MFT?

Because they're not. There are many lenses lenses in the M43 system that are FAR smaller and lighter than anything comparable in APSC.

Here is my small lens kit, which I use in conjunction with an E-PL7 body and a VF-2 EVF, The Camera plus viewefinder weighs 14 ounces:

9mm f8 body cap fisheye: weighs barely over an ounce

14mm f2.5, weighs 2 ounces. This is a reasonable aperture wide angle prime

25mm f1.8 This is a moderately fast normal prime that weighs 5 ounces

12-32mm f3.5-5.6 This is a 24-64mm equivalent lens that weighs 2.5 ounces

45-175mm f4~5.6 This is a sharp 90-350mm equivalent tele that weighs under 8 ounces

Background: Once upon a time MFT was the answer to the bulkiness of APC/FX DSLRs with their flapping mirror boxes that significantly contributed to the size of the camera and the size of the attached lenses. I started with MFT in 2012 with the Olympus EM 5 and although it produces terrific images I used it less and less. I originally went to MFT because I got tired of lugging around my Nikon D800 for day to day shooting. As it turned out I used the Nikon for special occasions. As someone said in this forum you don't see MFT at the Olympics.

Then along came the serious mirrorless camera by SONY (I think). The camera was much smaller and the physics of lens design made many of the lenses smaller as well. However, over time this advantage started to diminish as mirrorless camera lenses got faster and faster (f2.8, f4).

Then came the current crop of mirrorless APC camera and lenses and once again the size is as good or better than the current MFT offerings.

So, Why go to a MFT when today's APC mirrorless camera body and lens combination are the same size or smaller than the current high performance MFT?

It's only true if you restrict your MFT body selection to the pro-oriented highest end bodies of GH5, G9, and E-M1, and intentionally pick the fastest lenses in the system, not the smallest ones. There are many MUCH smaller choices in MFT, examples of which I described above. What's great about MFT is that it scales, from an extremely small and light system with quite good performance, to a pro-class system with excellent performancethat's still much lighter than any comparable APS-C system, and all the pieces are cross compatible with one another.

Many folks, such as myself, make use of the different types of MFT gear for different purposes. When I get on an airplane, I can take an entire kit including a body and several FF-equivalent lenses covering 18-350mm, that weighs under 3 pounds all in, and my smallest fully capable camera, with an EVF and a wide to tele zoom mounted on it still only weighs a pound.   Carrying just two small zoom lenses, which together weigh 10 ounces, I can span from 24mm to 350mm FF-equivalent with lenses that are sharp all across that range.

Or if I prefer, I can also mount pro-class, fast aperture glass as well, albeit while sacrificing the tiny size and weight.

-- hide signature --

lds

 dougjgreen1's gear list:dougjgreen1's gear list
Olympus Stylus XZ-10 Nikon 1 V2 Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-PL7 +17 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
sbu
sbu
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow