Has 4/3rds delivered on its 2002 imaging promise?

Started 5 months ago | Questions thread
James Stirling
James Stirling Senior Member • Posts: 2,419
Re: On to Lights! Action! Camera!!!

PhotoHawk wrote:

James Stirling wrote:

PhotoHawk wrote:

rfsIII wrote:

Thank you all for lending your time and expertise. I'm planning to switch from a Canon C100 to filming with m4/3 cameras, so this discussion has been a great education in how to understand 4/3 and m4/3 lenses,

And to draw a bottom line, it sounds like there may be a few amazing lenses built to the ambitious original 4/3 specifications which might outperform lenses from other formats, but in general, the lenses are no better nor worse than any other system.

Not quite true. Have a look at this analysis: http://www.strollswithmydog.com/equivalence-sharpness-spatial-resolution/#more-719

As it turns out, at the time of that article FF had better performance acuity wise as there were no u4/3rds lenses that met the performance of top end FF lenses. Remember Ceteris Paribus , u4/3 rds lenses must be twice as sharp as FF to equal there performance sharpness wise.

I believe that assumes cameras with the same MP count , while you can get lower resolution FF cameras like the A7s , D5 they are specialist usage models. m43 tops out with 20mp and they are still releasing 16mp models like the recently announced Pen E-PL9 { though it does come in denim } With FF cameras currently available with 24, 30 ,36 ,42 , 45 and 50mp sensors

Yes Jim, there is the more active development cycle in FF. Despite the two anchor vendors for u4/3rds the higher volume and research dollars seems to be in FF favour on the high end and smartphone on the other. Pretty much the sandwich described by Thom Hogan in a recent article. That said, if someone wants a light kit and doesn't mind the tradeoffs that a subset inevitably has then whatever floats their boat be it APSC, u4/3rds or 1". Full disclosure here I shoot APSC and I have an older E510 kit I still occasionally use. I'm thinking of FF but the tradeoff line to FF as opposed to my current APSC kit is still in favour of my current kit. But its getting close when the Sony A7III is considered- and may have crossed the line.

As a m43 user for many years I always hoped for A higher MP sensor with a much lower true base ISO. Alas it is not likely to happen Sorry for the delayed action response I missed your reply . I also have a 1" compact that I think could really go places as tech evolves it is small enough to allow for a very diverse body/lens range. It isĀ  pity that Nikon did not make more of an effort with their CX models . The weakness of most 1" compacts is the mediocre lens attached to them rather than the sensor itself . Which at their respective base ISO's competes favourably with m43.

Of course it is easier to design a smaller diameter lens such that it has less aberration. But in high performance FF lenses will outperform top end u4/3rds lenses in terms of sharpness. They also may in other areas.

Now, can anyone tell me how I could go about installing a Wollaston meniscus in an empty m4/3rds lens barrel?

-- hide signature --

Jim Stirling
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams

-- hide signature --

Jim Stirling
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams

 James Stirling's gear list:James Stirling's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Sony Alpha a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Sony Alpha a7R III Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS +11 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow