M43/APSC/Full Frame - Best Suited to My Needs

richmorris73 · Nov 17, 2018

I am really torn between what route to take to upgrade my current camera.

I currently have a M43 Panasonic G6. I did have a few lenses with it, but have sold most now with the intention of upgrading to FF.

In fairness, at base and low ISO, with reasonable lighting the G6 is actually/probably perfectly adequate for my needs.

My photography is hobby only, and travel, landscape, family, a bit of sports - a mixed bag.

I rarely spend any time post processing. So mostly use OOC jpegs.

I print, mostly A4 size or less, and occasionally larger, but no bigger than A3 generally, if I have photo I like.

The reason I am looking to upgrade is for performance at high ISO, low light, where above ISO 800 or 1600 at a push, I find detail is lost as a result of noise/noise reduction. And it starts to be noticeable in larger (A4+) prints, so that I will not use them.

I am certain that some of this is related to my own skills.

Some of the issue might be resolvable with better/faster prime lenses. (My fastest lens was Leica 12-60 f2.8-4)

I found myself looking at upgrading to a Panasonic G9, and that would seem to offer an improvement in higher ISO performance, but maybe by 1 stop?

Then I thought about a Fuji X-T3, which seems to be maybe slightly better again, but not actually much improved over the G9 (at least at jpegs).

Then of course, I started to look at the latest full frame cameras Sony A7 iii and Nikon Z6 which maybe start to improve by 1 stop again. They are a real step up in IQ as ISO increases.

BUT, for my needs, will I really exploit that benefit at A3 print size, and notice much difference up to ISO 6400?

The other benefit of staying M43 is price and size, which although not critically important, means I would be able to buy, and carry a more versatile M43 kit with a couple of bright, fast primes as well as decent range of versatile zooms.

Or will I be disappointed with a slight improvement in M43, compared to what I would get in FF? It looks like that benefit starts to show from ISO 1600/3200.

I'd appreciate any comments or input based on experience of a similar situation and outcome.

Rich

Michael Fryd · Nov 20, 2018

tedolf said:
tedolf said:

...

Click to expand...

My personal experience is that f/1.7 lenses on m 4/3 give me everything I need in terms of DOF and low light capability, and there is a very good selection of lenses with that speed.

tedolf said:

..

Click to expand...

Yes, f/1.7 on an M43 gives results similar to f/3.5 on a full frame. I frequently shoot in that range on full frame.

If that's meeting your needs, then there is no reason to move to a larger sensor, or a wider lens.

richmorris73 · Nov 20, 2018

tedolf said:
bobn2 said:

tedolf said:

Depends on the lens. The Panny 42.5mm f/1.4 is pretty good out to the edges wide open. Some of the Canon white FF constant aperture

Click to expand...

(constant f-number, the aperture changes as it zooms )

Click to expand...

I should have been ready for that.

Yes, I should have said "constant F-number".

Blame Canon for the nomenclature error.

tedolf said:

tedolf said:

f/2.8 zooms are not exactly stellar at the edges, particularly at one end or the other.

tedolf said:

That f/1.4 lens isn't f/1.4 all the way to the edge. It's usually a lot darker at the edges, and probably worse in that respect than the f/2.8 lens.

Click to expand...

Again this depends on the lenses. E.g. the Oly 75mm f/1.8 is pretty much perfect at all apertures.

Click to expand...

Both the above depend on what you call 'perfect'. Certainly ,many mFT lenses have a very consistent performance edge to edge (it comes from them being oversize for their aperture)

Click to expand...

Yes.

tedolf said:

but very often at an absolute level,

Click to expand...

Also true.

tedolf said:

their edge performance can't match the edge performance of FF lenses.

Click to expand...

I haven't seen much to demonstrate this but I will take your word for it.

tedolf said:

It's just that the FF lenses get a lot better in the centre. And since the arrival of mFT's oversize lens philosophy in FF, it's not actually short of fast lenses with edge to edge performance that surpasses mFT easily.

Every single system is a compromise. It's your choice what is the balance of compromise that suits you best.

Click to expand...

Yes.

The point I am trying to make, especially to a beginner is that the difference may not be as great as intuition might suggest, and there are ways (within limits) to work around things if you are using a smaller sensor.

tedolf said:

tedolf said:

tedolf said:

That's the essence of the FF advantage.

Click to expand...

In general I agree with you. The OP has to ask himself whether it is worth the cost and weight penalty for those incremental benefits.

Click to expand...

Which seems to be exactly what the OP is doing, thoughtfully and systematically.

Click to expand...

Agreed, and he should be credited for making the effort.

TEdolph

Hi Tedolph, thanks for your replies.
The more I read on these forums, the more I think that maybe my m43 is just fine with a bright/wide aperture lens when needed.
Then I can easily be convinced that FF with a similar lens (f number) is a significant improvement, especially coupled with a latest generation sensor.
I'll work it out one way or another.
Cheers
Rich

Michael Fryd · Nov 20, 2018

tedolf said:
Michael Fryd said:

tedolf said:

...

Click to expand...

Yes, the range of available lenses (in terms of aperture diameter and angle of view) varies with format. Take a 50mm f/1.8 lens on a full frame. This is a relatively inexpensive lens. On an M43 you would need a 25mm f/0.9 lens in order to get the same results. That's not an easy to find lens.

Click to expand...

Actually you have a couple of native choices.

With speed booster adapters, you have a lot of choices.

TEdolph

Yes. If you can find the lenses you want in M43, then there is little advantage to moving to a larger sensor.

Michael Fryd · Nov 20, 2018

richmorris73 said:
richmorris73 said:

...

Click to expand...

Hi Tedolph, thanks for your replies.
The more I read on these forums, the more I think that maybe my m43 is just fine with a bright/wide aperture lens when needed.
Then I can easily be convinced that FF with a similar lens (f number) is a significant improvement, especially coupled with a latest generation sensor.
I'll work it out one way or another.
Cheers
Rich

A FF with the same f/stop will yield about two stops less noise, and two stop less depth of field than an M43.

However, if you can get an M43 lens that opens two f/stops wider, you will get the same results as a full frame.

This assumes both cameras are of similar generation. If you are shooting an older camera, you should see an improvement going to a current model. That improvement will be independent of an improvement from a wider aperture lens.

kiwi2 · Nov 20, 2018

richmorris73 said:
The more I read on these forums, the more I think that maybe my m43 is just fine with a bright/wide aperture lens when needed.
Then I can easily be convinced that FF with a similar lens (f number) is a significant improvement, especially coupled with a latest generation sensor.
I'll work it out one way or another.

Or split the difference and go with Fuji. :-D

ThrillaMozilla · Nov 20, 2018

Michael Fryd said:
Yes. If you can find the lenses you want in M43, then there is little advantage to moving to a larger sensor.

Oops, don't forget, FF cameras can have much higher pixel counts (with more detail visible), and possibly larger dynamic range.

Michael Fryd · Nov 20, 2018

ThrillaMozilla said:
Michael Fryd said:

Yes. If you can find the lenses you want in M43, then there is little advantage to moving to a larger sensor.

Click to expand...

Oops, don't forget, FF cameras can have much higher pixel counts (with more detail visible), and possibly larger dynamic range.

Yes, but if the M43 camera is meeting your needs, there may be little benefit to increasing pixel count or dynamic range.

12 megapixels is more than enough for an 8x10" print at 300 ppi. For many people 20 megapixels is overkill.

richmorris73 · Nov 20, 2018

Michael Fryd said:
ThrillaMozilla said:

Michael Fryd said:

Yes. If you can find the lenses you want in M43, then there is little advantage to moving to a larger sensor.

Click to expand...

Oops, don't forget, FF cameras can have much higher pixel counts (with more detail visible), and possibly larger dynamic range.

Click to expand...

Yes, but if the M43 camera is meeting your needs, there may be little benefit to increasing pixel count or dynamic range.

12 megapixels is more than enough for an 8x10" print at 300 ppi. For many people 20 megapixels is overkill.

All the cameras I am considering will have plenty of pixels for my needs!
I would rather have better low light performance than more pixels. 24MP will be plenty for my print sizes (A3 max). Certainly I'd rather anither lens than spend another £1000 on a higher MP camera.

Michael Fryd · Nov 21, 2018

richmorris73 said:
Michael Fryd said:

ThrillaMozilla said:

Michael Fryd said:

Yes. If you can find the lenses you want in M43, then there is little advantage to moving to a larger sensor.

Click to expand...

Oops, don't forget, FF cameras can have much higher pixel counts (with more detail visible), and possibly larger dynamic range.

Click to expand...

Yes, but if the M43 camera is meeting your needs, there may be little benefit to increasing pixel count or dynamic range.

12 megapixels is more than enough for an 8x10" print at 300 ppi. For many people 20 megapixels is overkill.

Click to expand...

All the cameras I am considering will have plenty of pixels for my needs!
I would rather have better low light performance than more pixels. 24MP will be plenty for my print sizes (A3 max). Certainly I'd rather anither lens than spend another £1000 on a higher MP camera.

Then your answer is to make sure you have a recent model camera and a lens with a wide aperture diameter.

Look at the lenses you can afford in M43, and compare to the lenses you can afford in full frame. Keep in mind that you should be comparing M43 lenses to full frame lenses that are twice as long (in terms of actual focal length).

That will tell you which system is better for you in low light with shallow DoF. Then go buy a current model camera in your chosen system.

If you can't tolerate very shallow DoF (perhaps you are shooting groups of people at a party), then use a DoF calculator to determine the widest aperture that gives you enough DoF. Don't give an advantage to lenses wider than that as you wont be using that additional aperture diameter.

bobn2 · Nov 21, 2018

ThrillaMozilla said:
Michael Fryd said:

Yes. If you can find the lenses you want in M43, then there is little advantage to moving to a larger sensor.

Click to expand...

Oops, don't forget, FF cameras can have much higher pixel counts (with more detail visible), and possibly larger dynamic range.

Or, possibly smaller. The E-M1 II for instance, gives a higher base ISO DR than the D5. The real advantage of getting more light energy is not DR but better Signal to Noise. Given that they are both 'Signal' divided by 'Noise', they are often confused. DR is the highest signal divided by the lowest noise, and effectively tells you how large a range of distinguishable tones the camera can record. The SNR at a given signal level is the signal divided by the boise at that level and tells you how 'smooth' will the tone at that level look.

richmorris73 · Nov 21, 2018

Michael Fryd said:
richmorris73 said:

Michael Fryd said:

ThrillaMozilla said:

Michael Fryd said:

Yes. If you can find the lenses you want in M43, then there is little advantage to moving to a larger sensor.

Click to expand...

Oops, don't forget, FF cameras can have much higher pixel counts (with more detail visible), and possibly larger dynamic range.

Click to expand...

Yes, but if the M43 camera is meeting your needs, there may be little benefit to increasing pixel count or dynamic range.

12 megapixels is more than enough for an 8x10" print at 300 ppi. For many people 20 megapixels is overkill.

Click to expand...

All the cameras I am considering will have plenty of pixels for my needs!
I would rather have better low light performance than more pixels. 24MP will be plenty for my print sizes (A3 max). Certainly I'd rather anither lens than spend another £1000 on a higher MP camera.

Click to expand...

Then your answer is to make sure you have a recent model camera and a lens with a wide aperture diameter.

Yes, thats the plan!

Michael Fryd said:
Look at the lenses you can afford in M43, and compare to the lenses you can afford in full frame. Keep in mind that you should be comparing M43 lenses to full frame lenses that are twice as long (in terms of actual focal length).

Yes, understood. I am compiling my list

Michael Fryd said:
That will tell you which system is better for you in low light with shallow DoF. Then go buy a current model camera in your chosen system.

Yes, I guess so.

Michael Fryd said:
If you can't tolerate very shallow DoF (perhaps you are shooting groups of people at a party), then use a DoF calculator to determine the widest aperture that gives you enough DoF. Don't give an advantage to lenses wider than that as you wont be using that additional aperture diameter.

Understood. And I'll have to make a judgement here regarding how often I can accept shallow DOF and how often I cannot. Some situations (eg groups of people, landscape) are less tolerant of shallow DoF than others.

Rich

Search

M43/APSC/Full Frame - Best Suited to My Needs

richmorris73

Forum Enthusiast

Michael Fryd

Forum Pro

richmorris73

Forum Enthusiast

Michael Fryd

Forum Pro

Michael Fryd

Forum Pro

kiwi2

Veteran Member

ThrillaMozilla

Veteran Member

Michael Fryd

Forum Pro

richmorris73

Forum Enthusiast

Michael Fryd

Forum Pro

bobn2

Forum Pro

richmorris73

Forum Enthusiast

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts