Reading mode: Light Dark

MFT, and all the sensor size hype,,, and travel.

Go to last post
David 247

David 247

Senior Member
Messages
3,322
Solutions
1
Reaction score
864
Location
Tarlac, PH
I am always amazed at the sensor wars and all the back and forth about sensor size, IQ and high ISO needs, etc. And yet most of the arguments involve people who don't actually make their livings from photography or possibly don't know how to maximize the quality from the equipment they have.

I stumbled across this article by National Geographic photographer, Jay Dickman from 5 years ago. I found it by chance on the B&H Camera website.

Its called Mirrorless Camera Insights from National Geographic Photographer Jay Dickman. most importantly Jay not only addresses image quality (The article was written 5 years ago) but also ever increasing issues of photographers who have to travel with their equipment and the increasingly stringent airline and other travel regulations that limit size and weight of gear, not only in the US but more so when traveling internationally.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/explor...insights-national-geographic-photographer-jay

Read the article. It explains why he has chosen Olympus and would also apply to Panasonic MFT.

And as an FYI I have had to travel internationally several times over the the past 4 years. The restrictions for carry on are more stringent then ever, but I carry all my Olympus gear plus accessories, my laptop, a change of clothes, medicines and some snacks in a single bag that meets even the most stringent international requirements. I couldn't do it with any Full Frame system. Not because of camera body sizes but because of lens sizes and weights. It is with the lenses that MFT becomes the saving grace for international travel, unless you are comfortable checking your camera gear and having the bags it is in being tossed around with great abandon.... not to mention the possibility of theft.

--
- David
"The only good camera is the one you have with you when opportunity provides."
Through David's Eye: https://throughdavidseye.wordpress.com
 
Last edited:
I hope you put on your flame retardant suit on, cause this is certain to draw the flaming and trolls...:-D
 
shinndigg said:
I hope you put on your flame retardant suit on, cause this is certain to draw the flaming and trolls...:-D
Click to expand...
Never a problem. I'm an ex-Navy photographer. Trolls and verbal flames don't bother me. I've been through worse in the real world.
 
  1. I like m43 cameras so much that I've just bought a mmf3 adapter and got an e-3 off eBay with the zuiko 14-54 and sigma 50-500. Going to see how they work with my em1mkii. Should be a blast!
 
Last edited:
Yep. My travel bag, currently containing a GX8 plus 12–35, 35–100, 100–300, 20 & 42.5mm lenses:

iPhone pic.
iPhone pic.

On flights it goes under the seat in front of me. :-)

-Dave-
 
Last edited:
Hi David

Great article. Interesting he calls the f1.8 lenses pro glass, guess at the time the f1.2 bunch was not available yet.

I am working on a series of articles on my blog to talk about all the claims and theories out there. See my most recent article here

I personally hardly ever use my mobile to take images...wife does.

I am very comfortable in Photoshop and are always amazed by how much one can do in Photoshop. Once done with an image it does not matter much which camera its from.

Best

Siegfried
 
I am going away for a few days from tomorrow. I will take a body and 4 lenses, all in my jacket pockets. My carry on bag is full of clothes - bulky at this time of year.

Kit for the trip: GX9, 14-42PZ, 9mm body cap, 12mm f2, 45mm f1.8.

Try doing that with APS-C or full frame.

Mark
 
I have admired Jay's work with M43 for awhile. I shoot both FF and M43. The cameras are tools. 8 was in Iceland recently and shot both my Em1 II and my D850. The Olympus and 12-100 was a life saver for me. There were times when the weather meant all I could use was the Oly and a high quality zoom. These cameras are very capable. The rest is up to you. When you can match the work of someone like Jay, then maybe you think about "is it enough" but not til then.





42ef13517eeb44389613311824c7ec2b.jpg



0242b164f74c4f458b5ab244b8f6aa77.jpg








quality zoom. And, the camera delivered.
 
avalvo said:
I have admired Jay's work with M43 for awhile. I shoot both FF and M43. The cameras are tools. 8 was in Iceland recently and shot both my Em1 II and my D850. The Olympus and 12-100 was a life saver for me. There were times when the weather meant all I could use was the Oly and a high quality zoom. These cameras are very capable. The rest is up to you. When you can match the work of someone like Jay, then maybe you think about "is it enough" but not til then.

42ef13517eeb44389613311824c7ec2b.jpg

0242b164f74c4f458b5ab244b8f6aa77.jpg

quality zoom. And, the camera delivered.
Click to expand...
Great images, no matter the camera

--
shinndigg
www.pbase.com/shinndigg
 
Mark Thornton said:
I am going away for a few days from tomorrow. I will take a body and 4 lenses, all in my jacket pockets. My carry on bag is full of clothes - bulky at this time of year.

Kit for the trip: GX9, 14-42PZ, 9mm body cap, 12mm f2, 45mm f1.8.

Try doing that with APS-C or full frame.

Mark
Click to expand...
My A7riii + 24-105mm F/4 G gives the same coverage as a m43 12-52.5mm F/2 with 42mp to play with weighs in under three pounds and I consider it compact enough for travel.

cd0fca44b4154ac79f7eb3d22d8444f5.jpg



There is nothing wrong with wanting or preferring smaller kit but honestly unless you are on your deathbed the claims about oh my god the weight of non-equivalent FF kit { always as it does not work when you compare apples to apples :-)} are too much , frankly falls firmly in the drama queen category .



--
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
 
Last edited:
VideoPic said:
Hi David

Great article. Interesting he calls the f1.8 lenses pro glass, guess at the time the f1.2 bunch was not available yet.

I am working on a series of articles on my blog to talk about all the claims and theories out there. See my most recent article here

I personally hardly ever use my mobile to take images...wife does.

I am very comfortable in Photoshop and are always amazed by how much one can do in Photoshop. Once done with an image it does not matter much which camera its from.

Best

Siegfried

--
See my Blog for short articles on the Olympus and Panasonic cameras.
https://myolympusomd.blogspot.com/
Click to expand...
The only pro 1.2 give up most travel and size advantages of MFT in the hope of giving FF look.. may as well go FF.

from a guy that travels 5 months of the year and my MFT comes with me.

i have looked at being FF when I anticipate a situation that would suit it better than MFT, then ask myself if I can’t make do with MFT and truth is most time I can.

that said the recent Oly run to bigger is silly imho, frameless FF are killing the idea that bigger MFT is the answer. Play to strength iof MFT makes sense versus trying to be something that no amount of pretending will make true.

panny did video in MFT and travel quality/size trade off, Oll had picked “pretend we are as good or better than full frame and just as large in weight and size “with the recent pro lenses and if rumors are correct the X. Except that FF is moving on mft size bodies and we are gonna see 1/3 shrink in FF lens size with flange distance advantages as the native mirrorless lens get in the market in more than a trickle.. and prices will NOT be in the OLY 1.2 pro price range for equivalent FF, not even close. So larger Oly pro lenses that are only slightly lighter and smlaller than FF and more expensive when equivalencies is done correctly.. let me know how that ends? I have a guess
 
cerich said:
VideoPic said:
Hi David

Great article. Interesting he calls the f1.8 lenses pro glass, guess at the time the f1.2 bunch was not available yet.

I am working on a series of articles on my blog to talk about all the claims and theories out there. See my most recent article here

I personally hardly ever use my mobile to take images...wife does.

I am very comfortable in Photoshop and are always amazed by how much one can do in Photoshop. Once done with an image it does not matter much which camera its from.

Best

Siegfried
Click to expand...
The only pro 1.2 give up most travel and size advantages of MFT in the hope of giving FF look.. may as well go FF.

from a guy that travels 5 months of the year and my MFT comes with me.

i have looked at being FF when I anticipate a situation that would suit it better than MFT, then ask myself if I can’t make do with MFT and truth is most time I can.

that said the recent Oly run to bigger is silly imho, frameless FF are killing the idea that bigger MFT is the answer. Play to strength iof MFT makes sense versus trying to be something that no amount of pretending will make true.

panny did video in MFT and travel quality/size trade off, Oll had picked “pretend we are as good or better than full frame and just as large in weight and size “with the recent pro lenses and if rumors are correct the X. Except that FF is moving on mft size bodies and we are gonna see 1/3 shrink in FF lens size with flange distance advantages as the native mirrorless lens get in the market in more than a trickle.. and prices will NOT be in the OLY 1.2 pro price range for equivalent FF, not even close. So larger Oly pro lenses that are only slightly lighter and smlaller than FF and more expensive when equivalencies is done correctly.. let me know how that ends? I have a guess
Click to expand...
Great points. I wrote an article recently where I look at the FF arguments. The article suggest that instead of focussing on pixel to pixel comparisons look at the complete system.

It's the camera, sensor and lens as a sum of all parts that will make a great system or not. I have personally not seen a pixel to pixel difference that much that I will switch, I do see size, weight and price difference that will make me stay with M43.

Here you will see the article
 
The GX9 + 12-60 f3.5/5.6 was too big for my pockets. Your combination would be worse. OK, I could travel with the bodycap mounted, but I preferred to have the pancake zoom on the body.

As for weight, it isn't that I can't carry it, but that there are also limits on the reasonable weight for some modes of carry - e.g. too much can pull garment way out of shape (and really even the GX9 is pushing it a bit here). On a bicycle, bar bags have weight limits (and cameras are usually not the sole content).

Mark
 
Many users on these forums have a very single-minded focus on IQ as the primary metric by which cameras should be assessed. This leads to the "FF = best" mentality.

As soon as you start assessing cameras based on their usefulness in the real world, including how they work with requirements such as baggage limits, then it becomes very clear that the "FF = best" mentality leaves a lot to be desired.
 
Marty4650 said:
My (more modest) travel bag. The whole kit, bag included, weighs just over one pound.

All of this...

29968654370_94bb65afbb_b.jpg


Fits inside this tiny Case Logic bag...

29968651400_b2e2200bf5_b.jpg


30179982291_1fa9928204_b.jpg


The GM1, three lenses, three batteries, and a travel charger actually weighs less than my EM1 with a lens on it.
Click to expand...
My Ona shoulder bag kit - with "patent" movable inserting rubber divider:

The G9 with 42.5/1.2 & hood is only there for demonstrating relative size. In fact that lens with hood fitted will fit into one of the GM5-slots. The soft red pouch contains spare batteries and sits on top.

[ATTACH alt="Three GM5 "camera" in compartments"]2108223[/ATTACH]
Three GM5 "camera" in compartments

1c481dd1ae7a49aeb363a1112f6b7f94.jpg

Contents - lenses are self explanatory 42.5/1.2 with fitted hood on GM5 will fit in a compartment
Contents - lenses are self explanatory 42.5/1.2 with fitted hood on GM5 will fit in a compartment

Above G9 with 42.5/1.2 fitted hood plus one GM5 camera - note flexible rubber divider - it can be folded right back to accommodate a single camera with larger lens
Above G9 with 42.5/1.2 fitted hood plus one GM5 camera - note flexible rubber divider - it can be folded right back to accommodate a single camera with larger lens

The flexible insertion rubber divider is another of my "inventions" - it is held by two glued velcro strips and can be adjusted into three, two, or one compartment without needed re-arranging

I have always seen the GM5 as a very small full-function camera and not as a pocketable backup camera. As such I can carry multiple cameras "like a pro" and not need to change lenses in the field. Same control structure/interface. Same batteries.

--
Tom Caldwell
 

Attachments

  • 4aabb8a73bc64b94ba511a7ab0fe7800.jpg
    4aabb8a73bc64b94ba511a7ab0fe7800.jpg
    8 MB · Views: 0
Last edited:
James Stirling said:
Mark Thornton said:
I am going away for a few days from tomorrow. I will take a body and 4 lenses, all in my jacket pockets. My carry on bag is full of clothes - bulky at this time of year.

Kit for the trip: GX9, 14-42PZ, 9mm body cap, 12mm f2, 45mm f1.8.

Try doing that with APS-C or full frame.

Mark
Click to expand...
My A7riii + 24-105mm F/4 G gives the same coverage as a m43 12-52.5mm F/2 with 42mp to play with weighs in under three pounds and I consider it compact enough for travel.

cd0fca44b4154ac79f7eb3d22d8444f5.jpg

There is nothing wrong with wanting or preferring smaller kit but honestly unless you are on your deathbed the claims about oh my god the weight of non-equivalent FF kit { always as it does not work when you compare apples to apples :-)} are too much , frankly falls firmly in the drama queen category .
Click to expand...
Jim, everyone has their own size weight preferences. There is no doubt that what you offer here would suit some, including yourself. But I have found a way to easily cart around three cameras each with a lens that is even more comfortable - see my recent post.

As a pro might carry three "cameras" for convenience under pressure then the "M4/3 pro" can also carry three cameras much more easily. But of course no pro would be seen dead with three GM5 cameras in an Ona bag. Nor would a casual tourist really need more than one camera body with a versatile zoom if they are never under pressure to change lenses in the field.

But sometimes there are even tourists who need more than one lens and they might even be under some pressure to swap lenses in a very inconvenient place.

Every person with a camera has their own needs and there is no point in any of us trying to convince any other that our satisfactory solution fits all for a travelling kit.

--
Tom Caldwell
 
Well, any mirrorless system can be made lite. Take a plain vanilla A7 with a few loxia lenses and you've got yourself a fairly small kit there. Choose the 28mm f2, 35mm 2.8, 55mm 1.8 and even the 85mm 1.8 and you still have a small set up.

Alas though, the M43 I would agree does it better than any other system with far more lens choices that are small (primes and zooms). Add to that a huge back catalog of bodies that are small with touchscreen and excellent IBIS and you're in business. Plus, features like short MFD of most lenses, live bulb, tap to focus and capture- makes photography a breeze.

...and that's why I shoot both systems.
 
VideoPic said:
cerich said:
VideoPic said:
Hi David

Great article. Interesting he calls the f1.8 lenses pro glass, guess at the time the f1.2 bunch was not available yet.

I am working on a series of articles on my blog to talk about all the claims and theories out there. See my most recent article here

I personally hardly ever use my mobile to take images...wife does.

I am very comfortable in Photoshop and are always amazed by how much one can do in Photoshop. Once done with an image it does not matter much which camera its from.

Best

Siegfried
Click to expand...
The only pro 1.2 give up most travel and size advantages of MFT in the hope of giving FF look.. may as well go FF.

from a guy that travels 5 months of the year and my MFT comes with me.

i have looked at being FF when I anticipate a situation that would suit it better than MFT, then ask myself if I can’t make do with MFT and truth is most time I can.

that said the recent Oly run to bigger is silly imho, frameless FF are killing the idea that bigger MFT is the answer. Play to strength iof MFT makes sense versus trying to be something that no amount of pretending will make true.

panny did video in MFT and travel quality/size trade off, Oll had picked “pretend we are as good or better than full frame and just as large in weight and size “with the recent pro lenses and if rumors are correct the X. Except that FF is moving on mft size bodies and we are gonna see 1/3 shrink in FF lens size with flange distance advantages as the native mirrorless lens get in the market in more than a trickle.. and prices will NOT be in the OLY 1.2 pro price range for equivalent FF, not even close. So larger Oly pro lenses that are only slightly lighter and smlaller than FF and more expensive when equivalencies is done correctly.. let me know how that ends? I have a guess
Click to expand...
Great points. I wrote an article recently where I look at the FF arguments. The article suggest that instead of focussing on pixel to pixel comparisons look at the complete system.

It's the camera, sensor and lens as a sum of all parts that will make a great system or not. I have personally not seen a pixel to pixel difference that much that I will switch, I do see size, weight and price difference that will make me stay with M43.

Here you will see the article
Click to expand...
Yup, in the rear view the size of MFT was key along with the IQ, going forward it looks to me like FF Mirrorlesss will be in same ballpark size wise as the high end Olympus products (lens and bodies.. the A7, new Canon and Nikon FF Mirrorless series are darn close to Em1 already, and the 1.4 Oly lenses are as big at 1.8 FF of same focal length or at most a 1/3 less and will be getting smaller as more FF mirrorless mounts are native and take advantage of the flange), have the FF sensor of course and are the same or less in $$ than the Olympus high end. Unless a person wants the crop factor (and some do) there are other options that are getting VERY competitive and I am fairly certain will make Oly regret whatever direction they are going. Remember they get may 18th months of whatever new they roll on the 1X before someone else has virtually the same in their line (history says that Oly seems to write easy to get around patentsor licences the tech very quickly)

Read this review of the new Nikon FF Mirrorless that is on the front page here right now.. he mentions the size and weight etc a few times.. on FF

https://www.dpreview.com/interviews...tm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source

That Oly isn't playing to the strength of MFT is height of Hubris. They should be offering MFT in Pentax Q sized bodies and high quality and small f2.8 primes for that and then EM-5 size bodies as high end MFT where they spend more time and energy giving themselves a strong video offering. The Video/Photography line is completely overlapped now and Olympus has stated they aren't going to be shooting for the Pro video market, yet they state they are for the pro photographer market. That is moronic, the Pro still but not pro video field is closing very fast and any that can only do one is done.. like bad sushi. Don't believe me, believe Reuters.. they have some insights.

https://petapixel.com/2018/11/21/re...ideo-news-into-single-visual-journalist-team/
Oly has some smart people, and will go for the home run, but they are hopelessly out of sync with reality the last 18 months and going forward.

Meanwhile to turkey dinner I brought a E-M1 and got a pic of daughter and niece together and am happy with the snapshot. My point being that MFT is awesome, but from a business perspective I truly believe that Oly is about to get it handed to them because they are making a bad bet. Panasonic is fine and MFT isn't going away, nor will OLy, we will all still be able to make images on MFT that rock for fun (like this) or pro work but there is no way that Oly is gonna break open the real pro market with the direction they are taking. They are gonna make some super fans super happy for sure





b9780eb11bb64bcd85812f9b5b9df178.jpg
 
Last edited:
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