Reading mode: Light Dark

Regrets (or not) on jumping ship from Olympus M4/3

Go to last post
tbcass said:
chipman said:
I shoot wildlife in the ND Badlands. I went from a Pany G9 with 100-400 to Canon R7 with 100-400 + 1.4x TC. I now have a rig that's about the same size, weighs 10% less, costs less, and gives me 60% more pixels and 12% more reach.

I call that a bargain.
Click to expand...
Actually, you have less reach, 560mm vs 800mm equiv in the Panny. The extra 12mp of the R7 cannot make up for that if you crop the R7 to 20mp.
Click to expand...
560 in the lens x 1.6x in the camera. A 20 mp crop is a hair over 2x.

All MFT is 2x in camera.
 
DGrinb said:
Hi Community,

I guess this thread is dedicated to people who are/were using M4/3 systems, especially Olympus or OM System.

I'm still using my lovely Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark 1 (yes, 1). I love it very much for several reasons, like compactness, portability, image quality on low ISO and overall system price. It was revolutionary mirrorless at that time (2013) and I switched to it from Canon 40D with no regrets.

Since then the technology made several leaps in mirrorless world and I feel a lot behind.

Therefore, I'm torn between staying with OM System by obtaining OM-1 or jumping ship to APS-C or FF.

My main concerns are: speed/autofocus function (for airshows), high ISO noise, portability, price, tilt screen (I like it more than flip).

So, if anyone shares their regrets/no regrets while staying or leaving the M4/3 it would be much appreciated.

Cheers,

Dave
Click to expand...
For architecture its pretty darn hard to get a tilt-shift lens for M43

For travel work, it's difficult to beat the lightweight and small size of M43, the IQ and dynamic range don't get stressed as much as the 3rd use...

Landscape shooting, is about the light and you're usually in the harshest, highest dynamic ranges of any genre of photography, the extra 2 stops of dynamic range of FF over M43 is a big plus, the silky look, larger sensor information is all pretty hard to overcome in m43 versus FF, almost everything is a workaround with m43 compared to shooting FF landscape work, you're doing in-camera high res, or running raws through other software, or shooting lots of HDR stacked images, always a lot of work chasing the limitations of the m43 sensor

--
Thanks,
Mike
https://www.travel-curious.com
 
Last edited:
Member said:
At a certain point he compares the OM1 + 12-100 with the Z5 + 24-100. He concludes that the OM has no weight or bulk advantage over the Z5. I made the same comparison before this article was written with the Z7, with much the same results.

Unless you are working with lenses over 200mm, there is no point in buying into the M43 system anymore as the weight and bulk advantage are not there anymore.
Click to expand...
I used a e-pl9 all day with a 14mm lens, and I will let you know it has a weight bulk ratio

advantage over my k-3.
 
River Photography said:
MercedRiver said:
Comparison of micro four-thirds and medium format.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66530441
Click to expand...
same not even going to open the link. shot m43 for 5 years and FF + apsc the last 2.

I know what i see.the most important factor i now realise is just not image quality but auto focus accuracy. and until buying the latest a74 2 months ago you dont really understand how important AF is.

Rp
Click to expand...
Those of us who used M43 for a long while and failed to see that it was falling behind, as others caught up and overtook M43 with lightweight affordable FF are perhaps the harshest critics of the format.

I see it as a good system for extreme long lens work and with little unobtrusive lightweight bodies and lenses, a good option for street photography. But the big middle where most of us are, is now better served with FF. Period.
 
Nigvo said:
River Photography said:
MercedRiver said:
Comparison of micro four-thirds and medium format.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66530441
Click to expand...
same not even going to open the link. shot m43 for 5 years and FF + apsc the last 2.

I know what i see.the most important factor i now realise is just not image quality but auto focus accuracy. and until buying the latest a74 2 months ago you dont really understand how important AF is.

Rp
Click to expand...
Those of us who used M43 for a long while and failed to see that it was falling behind, as others caught up and overtook M43 with lightweight affordable FF are perhaps the harshest critics of the format.

I see it as a good system for extreme long lens work and with little unobtrusive lightweight bodies and lenses, a good option for street photography. But the big middle where most of us are, is now better served with FF. Period.
Click to expand...
It's interesting that this conversation isn't happening on the micro Four Thirds forum, where it would actually be of interest. I can't see that here on the open forum it will be of great interest to many. Perhaps it started there and has been moved. That at least allows some former and current mFT users to comment, who would otherwise be shut out of the conversation. I see a lot of old friends from that forum here, often under new IDs.

For myself, I remain a dual system user, with Panasonic mFT and Nikon FF. No amount of denialism will cover the fact that mFT covers a more restricted shooting envelope than FF, but within its own envelope is difficult to beat for compactness, convenience and ability to be taken almost everywhere.
 
River Photography said:
DGrinb said:
Thank you. I will go through the whole article, but it's kind of known fact the noise is less on FF.
Click to expand...
not even going to read . the first few lines are just drivel.
Click to expand...
Once brand loyalty gets to ridiculous levels, drivel is what results. I remember a guy called 'Don B', who used to frequent the mFT forums and came up with the most absurd demonstrations to show that mFT cameras easily beat FF cameras on most of the things being talked about here. As the song goes, a man hears what he wants to hear
and disregards the rest.
 
bobn2 said:
Nigvo said:
River Photography said:
MercedRiver said:
Comparison of micro four-thirds and medium format.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66530441
Click to expand...
same not even going to open the link. shot m43 for 5 years and FF + apsc the last 2.

I know what i see.the most important factor i now realise is just not image quality but auto focus accuracy. and until buying the latest a74 2 months ago you dont really understand how important AF is.

Rp
Click to expand...
Those of us who used M43 for a long while and failed to see that it was falling behind, as others caught up and overtook M43 with lightweight affordable FF are perhaps the harshest critics of the format.

I see it as a good system for extreme long lens work and with little unobtrusive lightweight bodies and lenses, a good option for street photography. But the big middle where most of us are, is now better served with FF. Period.
Click to expand...
It's interesting that this conversation isn't happening on the micro Four Thirds forum, where it would actually be of interest. I can't see that here on the open forum it will be of great interest to many. Perhaps it started there and has been moved.
Click to expand...
cant remember where it started.
bobn2 said:
That at least allows some former and current mFT users to comment, who would otherwise be shut out of the conversation. I see a lot of old friends from that forum here, often under new IDs.
Click to expand...
:-)
bobn2 said:
For myself, I remain a dual system user, with Panasonic mFT and Nikon FF. No amount of denialism will cover the fact that mFT covers a more restricted shooting envelope than FF, but within its own envelope is difficult to beat for compactness, convenience and ability to be taken almost everywhere.
Click to expand...
true , but same can be said with the sony apsc cameras , best part of all is the lens are interchangeable with FF body, 3rd party lens are cheap and good quality. win win in my book. i have a samyang 24 2.8 that weights 68 grams ;-) attach that on my a6300 and mft is no smaller.

Rp
 
Last edited:
River Photography said:
true , but same can be said with the sony apsc cameras , best part of all is the lens are interchangeable with FF body, 3rd party lens are cheap and good quality. win win in my book. i have a samyang 24 2.8 that weights 68 grams ;-) attach that on my a6300 and mft is no smaller.
Click to expand...
I don't think that Sony APS-C quite got there with respect to lens choice. I have a mFT kit of GX80, 12-32, 35-100 and one extra lens (either 20/1.7 or 56/1.4) which will fit in a little belt case, which I use when motorcycling. For that, when I see a shot opportunity, I can just stop, hop off (usually in that order) and take some photos whilst my FF kit simply couldn't. My Nikon Z mount kit it perhaps getting there, and Nikon has done some compact APS-C lenses, but they don't quite get to the level of the 12-32 and 35-100. Plus, of course the Z50 doesn't have the RF style form factor. The Sony APS-C are better in that regard.
 
bobn2 said:
River Photography said:
DGrinb said:
Thank you. I will go through the whole article, but it's kind of known fact the noise is less on FF.
Click to expand...
not even going to read . the first few lines are just drivel.
Click to expand...
Once brand loyalty gets to ridiculous levels, drivel is what results. I remember a guy called 'Don B', who used to frequent the mFT forums and came up with the most absurd demonstrations to show that mFT cameras easily beat FF cameras on most of the things being talked about here. As the song goes, a man hears what he wants to hear
and disregards the rest.
Click to expand...
what was his gallery images like ? thats the only thing that impresses me when deciding what a camera and photographer is capable of.

Rp
 
River Photography said:
bobn2 said:
River Photography said:
DGrinb said:
Thank you. I will go through the whole article, but it's kind of known fact the noise is less on FF.
Click to expand...
not even going to read . the first few lines are just drivel.
Click to expand...
Once brand loyalty gets to ridiculous levels, drivel is what results. I remember a guy called 'Don B', who used to frequent the mFT forums and came up with the most absurd demonstrations to show that mFT cameras easily beat FF cameras on most of the things being talked about here. As the song goes, a man hears what he wants to hear
and disregards the rest.
Click to expand...
what was his gallery images like ?
Click to expand...
He had a lot more in his gallery than you do, some of them quite good.
 
bobn2 said:
River Photography said:
bobn2 said:
River Photography said:
DGrinb said:
Thank you. I will go through the whole article, but it's kind of known fact the noise is less on FF.
Click to expand...
not even going to read . the first few lines are just drivel.
Click to expand...
Once brand loyalty gets to ridiculous levels, drivel is what results. I remember a guy called 'Don B', who used to frequent the mFT forums and came up with the most absurd demonstrations to show that mFT cameras easily beat FF cameras on most of the things being talked about here. As the song goes, a man hears what he wants to hear
and disregards the rest.
Click to expand...
what was his gallery images like ?
Click to expand...
He had a lot more in his gallery than you do, some of them quite good.
Click to expand...
as i said in the post above. looking back auto focus plays a big part in image quality, im really quite stunned over the years and looking back at images taken that you think are good , you accept and are happy what the camera is producing because its better than the previous camera. this even applies to sony, pentax ,canon,nikon. then i buy my first current model camera the a74 and its on another level completely, i have taken great images with all other brands but the pure af consistency of the a74 blows my mind. i go back and can now see all the other cameras hit and misses even though at the time every image looked good.

Rp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I
What I want from a future m4/3 camera
2 3
Replies
56
Views
21K
ahaslett
ahaslett
V
Orkney (Scotland) with M4/3
Replies
2
Views
6K
19andrew47
19andrew47
PhotonBeam
OM-3 Differences From OM-1 mkii
2
Replies
30
Views
19K
MJ_Photo38
MJ_Photo38
R
R5 Mk II AF Scenarios
Replies
17
Views
8K
Zeee
Z
the bluesman
if you can only have one, OM-1 or the OM-3
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
1K
jjbinx
J

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