DXO: m4/3 vs. FF -- we have it good!

Started Sep 4, 2019 | Discussions thread
Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 42,258
Re: No, they are not

Gnine wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

Gnine wrote:

Raist3d wrote:

where I do see a problem is the last sentence where you mention bigger, heavier and priced For some models and a range of focal lengths, that’s not quite the case This is unfortunate but it’s the train both Olympus and Panasonic have chosen

They've only gone that route, because the small/light/cheaper -and better quality options as well, are already nicely covered.

No, they are not. They don't use the better sensor, don't have PDAF, have other compromises. That's the problem. Then on top of that at the tier of competitors they look dated.

I think Panasonic may disagree with you here.

Let's examine that claim...

They're nearly 20MP across the board, and off hand, all DFD capable (I think).

They are DFD but they don't have the same version of the DFD. They are also not 20 MP across the board- the GX85, the GX850 still use the 16MP sensor.

But to give you an idea- the DFD of the G9 is a next generation compared to the GX9's or GX850 or GX85.   The AF points of the G9 are more than the GX9.

The build quality of the GX850 and GX9 leave a bit to be desired at their tiers with those back wheels catching dust or something the tmakes them easily jumpy (GX850 did that to me mere months after buying, the GX9 did that to me about 6 months in though not as catastrophic as the random GX850).

This needs to change.  But the point stands- they have smaller cameras that are behind.

Which, from my experience is excellent in all but very small, erratic moving subject against busy background scenarios. Is it the "best"? No it's not -but it is better than plain contrast detect, and more than good enough for most people.

IT is but the point is that the DFD they have, and AF system they have is one generation behind, and aren't as good as what you see on competitive alternatives around.

If all you want is new and shiny, then right at this minute, new and shiny means bigger.

It's not about new and shiny, but about being competitive with the current level of tech. For example, you could get a Fuji X-E3 and in a nice range of focals, you compete in size and weight rather well, and in price.

Ha ha ha ha. So why are Canon the biggest mover of outdated, antiquated, old tech gear? (I'm including DSLR here) The majority of their sales are obviously/more than likely due to brand name recognition. And advertising exposure. They caught onto the numbers game a while back too, and pursued MP at the expense of other attributes. Such as DR.

But Olympus and Panasonic are not Canon :-). There goes your example

But, and it's a big but, we have options. Lots and lots of options. Way more than any Canikon have to offer in mirrorless at the moment.

I am not looking at Canon nor Nikon, but competitors like Fuji and Sony. Lots of options indeed

You had me, until you mentioned Sony. Sony have gone the CaNikon route. They may have a slightly better range of format specific lenses than CaNikon, but not a patch on m4/3, or Fuji. Not a patch. I think their (Sony) philosophy is the same as CaNikon -to try & push people up the ladder into 36*24 product. Which is working -going by the fawning over some of the 36*24 gear available, by more than a few posters here in this very forum. Which is okay, within a very narrow operating range.

The Sony bodies are actually pretty good. The lenses is where they are lacking, but you get some holes filled now with Sigma which has been doing pretty good lately.  And the new two zooms actually (which I admit were a surprise to me), seem very promising and fill more holes.  The point is depending what someone wants, now Sony could be a compelling alternative also.

And Sony has the big advantage that you can use the lenses without an adapter if you ever more to FF, etc.  Granted, that's more of a bonus, more than a "major point."

It's also where I think Fujifilm got it very very right with their expansion into medium format. It's far enough away from APSC, that they don't, or hopefully shouldn't, feel the need to protect, or cripple the smaller format. I think Panasonic have done the same, with 36*24 being far enough distanced from m4/3, to not limit further development. A bit the opposite in fact. I can see them using m4/3 as a test bench for further developments in 36*24. Take the Organic global shutter sensor that's now in production in one of their video cameras. I'd bet my last $$ that will see m4/3 usage, before 36*24. Sooner, rather than later.

I understand all that but my point stands- we don't have small enthusiast options. The EM5 MK3 is supposed to change that. I would sure love Panasonic to do a real GM5 successor but that has been discussed oh so many times and doesn't seem to be happening

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow