Why the M 4/3 system is so under rated by the public .....

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
guy_incognito1 Junior Member • Posts: 41
Re: Why the M 4/3 system is so under rated by the public .....
1

Steppen wolf wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

Steppen wolf wrote:

To address the OP's point I think the reason why M4/3 is less popular than it should be

How popular should it be?

Bearing in mind that most cameras are bought by amateurs - unless you want to get picky with that - and that most amateurs couldn't tell the difference between an m4/3 photo and an FF one - AND that m4/3 is cheaper, smaller and more convenient generally - I'd say that m4/3 should be OUTSELLING FF and APSC.

I'm really surprised that so many manufacturers are making FF (35mm) cameras and that so many people are buying them when their advantages for non-professionals are basically non-existent. And there are many downsides. I've given up using my Sony A7rII for telephoto because I reckon the Olympus EM5.3 is better.

As an amateur with no photography skills, I don't feel this is accurate.  You definitely can tell the difference between MFT and FF for the use cases of my amateur needs.

The fact is that top of the line phone cameras are very capable, especially for viewing on screens as is mostly done these days.

So what is the use case where amateurs like me want to buy an expensive camera?

Mostly, it's because even on screens, you can tell the difference still by the bokeh, sharpness, and lowish-light noise performance.

And these are all things where FF has an edge.

And if your use case is taking pictures of kids during sports or birding, bridge superzooms better fill the need than MFT.

The main benefit of MFT was size, but now with the modern mirrorless, it's not really there for images where you care about normalish distances, bokeh, and sharpness. Because of the dreaded "e" word everyone here throws fits over.

I can just get an a7c ($1800)  or a7iii (~1500) and slap on a cheap samyang 35/1.8 (~350), put it in auto mode or aperture priority if i'm feeling really ambitious, and take random pictures without caring about background distance and lighting, and if i randomly take a few hundred pictures at least a couple will come out very nicely in terms of sharpness and bokeh, and better than what an MFT or a cell phone could give, and which I can share with people.

Like, are there smaller MFT kits? yes. but they still aren't really pocketable, so why not go for an 1" compact if I wanted more sharpness and zoom and was willing to sacrifice bokeh to have compactness.

Like what is the use case for me, for what pictures would I be taking, where MFT clearly beats out FF, 1" compact, or 1" superzooms?

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