Cafe Racer
Senior Member
I criticised the OM-3 design for being lazy and bland, and lacking the desirable analogue dials. Maybe a lot of other people share my opinion despite what influencers have to say.
Last edited:
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Why people are switching to MFT! By Duade Paton
- Thread starter Chizuka
- Start date
James Stirling
Forum Pro
I have not seen anything from ambassadors who point out any significant issues. They would quickly get the boot if they did. Though I don't expect them to they are promoting the gear in hand .
As I say I am not picking on OM every brand has its ambassadors for me the most annoying are the YT clickbait channels that go way over the top , Sony seems to get the most raves from these guys , real life use does not always match their claims. You know to dodge them if the video title is X brand camera/lens destroys brand Y . It is simply BS
That QVC channel is bonkers they can talk about a pair of shoes for an hour as if it is a cure for cancer
I guess it must pay them to do it as it has been going for many yearsAs someone who had a film OM4ti back in the day, I agree with you 100%. This was a superb camera : small, light and very well built. It also has advanced metering options at the time.
Without analogue dials and a decent EVF, there is no appeal . A wasted opportunity instead of being aimed at serious photographers.
Cafe Racer
Senior Member
I also think it was a wasted opportunity. OMDS had the chance to create a design that would make people reconsider the Fuji options but instead went for what I assume they believed was the safe option.
Last edited:
Maybe yours - sorry if you cannot get results with M43 and the associated glass, quality issues and standards are 100% on you. If you need FF to get satisfactory results, this speaks more about your skills as a photographer not meeting a high criteria of standards - not the camera.https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4804979I'm pretty sure "results" can be achieved with m4/3rds kit!I think he's more of a "results" guy than a "fun" guy LOL.I'd like to see a video from him entitled, why I switched to m4/3rds!I use Canon full frame alongside M43 for wildlife. I enjoy both setups. If I want to get good images, I take the full frame setup. If I just want to have some fun and image quality doesn't matter, then I take the M43. The OM-1 + 150-400 is my toy setup. Very fun to use, just not meant for serious results. Both have their place - for me at least. Sometimes I like to have fun. Sometimes I want results.Why didn't Duade Paton switch to m4/3rds? His gear list on his website shows full frame Canon gear! A wildlife shooter that uses full frame Canon gear! Surely that must be too big and heavy for him, with less telephoto reach!
But if I could only keep one...my heart says M43 (I like fun LOL), but logically, full frame is the better answer. The main issue is that OM-1 video performance is straight trash. The recording modes suck, the image is super soft unless you shoot H265 (forced to grade - and OM's official log conversion lut isn't even close to accurate) the bird AF sucks, and there isn't even 4K120. R5 is a true hybrid with both excellent stills and video quality. So yeah, if I had to keep one, it would be the full frame setup. If the OM-1 had 4K120 and good video AF and good video quality, then I'd pick the OM-1.
Most people that have experienced the glory of big primes and full frame do end up being a "results" kinda guy. I'm the anomaly.
I think this series is pretty representative of peak M43 "results" LOL
If you cannot get publishable results with M43 as well as large print, the fault is your skills, approach and ability. Not the camera. Plenty of serious work made for serious applications that demand serious quality made with M43 gear. There is no reason one cannot get the same level of printable quality as a high quality low grain medium format film rig - m43 offers this but with a far larger shooting envelope. This is before we even get to software advances that render the FF two stop gap a rather moot point.
That’s not to say one might want or need more but that M43 cannot produce quality that is good enough to sit on the pages of the most prestigious publications or museum walls is simply a redundant opinion in the actual real world or photography. The right photographer deems any camera a serious tool. It is the amateur that cannot deliver who might not have the skill to get work of high standards from M43, but that is a very different conversation that has nothing to do with gear….
Pulitzer Prize-winning photojournalists,
Larry C. Price,
Jay Dickman
Peter Baumgarten
seem to get results with M43
Daniel J. Cox,
Bob Krist,
Ira Block,
Annie Griffiths,
Daniel Fox
David Alan Harvey
All National Geographic who use M43 to make outstanding images.
Alex Majoli (Magnum Photos)
Peter Turnley (Newsweek, LIFE, affiliated with Magnum)
David Alan Harvey (magnum)
Thomas Dworzak (magnum and former president of magnum)
Matt Black (Magnum)
Last edited:
absoluutbeginner
Leading Member
Hi James .Don't worry they are happy to destroy lighter gear as well
Luggage workers on the platform are low paid and do not care much about your equipment , so good luck with the very heavy protected case .
I see falling bags from the aircraft belt loaders a bit less than years ago but anyhow …i do not want my camera equipment in the bulk of the aircraft anyway .. also because you pay a lot for overweight .
While i can store in a good camera bag 3 cameras (E-MII, OM-1 and E-M1X ) the 150-400 Pro , 40-150 Pro , 300mm Pro and 12-40 Pro and still have room to spare . And stow that bag in overhead bin ….so safe and secure .
Try that with any other brand ….. goodluck on safari .
J
jjbinx
Guest
That’s got to be 7Kg before we count the batteries and chargers and the bag itself - isn't that over the carry-on weight limit ?Hi James .Don't worry they are happy to destroy lighter gear as well
Luggage workers on the platform are low paid and do not care much about your equipment , so good luck with the very heavy protected case .
I see falling bags from the aircraft belt loaders a bit less than years ago but anyhow …i do not want my camera equipment in the bulk of the aircraft anyway .. also because you pay a lot for overweight .
While i can store in a good camera bag 3 cameras (E-MII, OM-1 and E-M1X ) the 150-400 Pro , 40-150 Pro , 300mm Pro and 12-40 Pro and still have room to spare . And stow that bag in overhead bin ….so safe and secure .
jj
Last edited:
Box Brownie
Veteran Member
Hi James .Don't worry they are happy to destroy lighter gear as well
Luggage workers on the platform are low paid and do not care much about your equipment , so good luck with the very heavy protected case .
I see falling bags from the aircraft belt loaders a bit less than years ago but anyhow …i do not want my camera equipment in the bulk of the aircraft anyway .. also because you pay a lot for overweight .
That is quite a 'load out', can I ask which make & model bag you use?
James Stirling
Forum Pro
The software is usable on every format and even if NR was a free lunch it isn't , you can easily remove noise you cannot add real detail.Maybe yours - sorry if you cannot get results with M43 and the associated glass, quality issues and standards are 100% on you. If you need FF to get satisfactory results, this speaks more about your skills as a photographer not meeting a high criteria of standards - not the camera.https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4804979I'm pretty sure "results" can be achieved with m4/3rds kit!I think he's more of a "results" guy than a "fun" guy LOL.I'd like to see a video from him entitled, why I switched to m4/3rds!I use Canon full frame alongside M43 for wildlife. I enjoy both setups. If I want to get good images, I take the full frame setup. If I just want to have some fun and image quality doesn't matter, then I take the M43. The OM-1 + 150-400 is my toy setup. Very fun to use, just not meant for serious results. Both have their place - for me at least. Sometimes I like to have fun. Sometimes I want results.Why didn't Duade Paton switch to m4/3rds? His gear list on his website shows full frame Canon gear! A wildlife shooter that uses full frame Canon gear! Surely that must be too big and heavy for him, with less telephoto reach!
But if I could only keep one...my heart says M43 (I like fun LOL), but logically, full frame is the better answer. The main issue is that OM-1 video performance is straight trash. The recording modes suck, the image is super soft unless you shoot H265 (forced to grade - and OM's official log conversion lut isn't even close to accurate) the bird AF sucks, and there isn't even 4K120. R5 is a true hybrid with both excellent stills and video quality. So yeah, if I had to keep one, it would be the full frame setup. If the OM-1 had 4K120 and good video AF and good video quality, then I'd pick the OM-1.
Most people that have experienced the glory of big primes and full frame do end up being a "results" kinda guy. I'm the anomaly.
I think this series is pretty representative of peak M43 "results" LOL
If you cannot get publishable results with M43 as well as large print, the fault is your skills, approach and ability. Not the camera. Plenty of serious work made for serious applications that demand serious quality made with M43 gear. There is no reason one cannot get the same level of printable quality as a high quality low grain medium format film rig - m43 offers this but with a far larger shooting envelope.
This is before we even get to software advances that render the FF two stop gap a rather moot point.
You can certainly produce excellent results with m43 lens I agree ,in a lot of photographic arenas it is the message or impactful nature of the image that matters. A lot of incredibly powerful imagery is not technical demanding it is about being in the right place at the wrong time :-(
We often see these statements about winning x award without putting a timetable on it ,would you consider something you did 40yrs ago with different gear as having any relevance to what you do today especially given the ages of most people on your list
As an a example Larry C Price last one a Pultzer in 1985 using Nikon Film cameras he is now 70yrs old
Jay Dickman last won a pultzer prize in 1983 on a film camera, he is now 76yrs
Peter Baumgarten has never one a Pultzer prize, and his "award winning " mantle is not made clear what or when he won
He is a great wildlife photographer and environmentalist who produces amazing work . He has used multiple brands including Panasonic and Fuji before ending up with OM he is I think 66yrs
Bob Krist last won an award in 2008 which he had won 3 times before back to 1997 these awards are from the Society of American Travel Writers he is 73yrs old
https://bobkrist.com/about
Another 76yr old
https://irablock.com/Bio/1
https://alphauniverse.com/artisans/block/
His gear listed in the above article in 2019
73yrs old , and has produced some amazing imagery about women issues going back decades
Too common a name
Is 80yrs old and was removed from National Geo for personal misconduct
He famously used Olympus P&S cameras in his documentary work a youngster of only 54yrs
69yrs , has been a photographer decades
The point of all this is that it seems almost all of these photographers had their glory award winning days long long before m43 in many cases decades before. Using multiple other brands. I am sure other brands pull the same stunts and you get some pro photographers who jump from brand to brand . Andy Rouse a UK wildlife shooter was a Nikon promoter , a Canon promoter, an Olympus promoter and now a Sony promoter, whether this is a better gear or better rewards chase who knows
It is 2025 and I think a fair appraisal of the professional photography market would have north of 96% using larger sensor brands than m43. If you consider m43 diminished share of the market today and the embedded DSLR users
A recent study admittedly only 1000 photographers but still showed that 36% of pro shooters still use DSLR's . Only 1% used Olympus/OM , 2% Panasonic ( probably due to those who also shoot video ) . The D750 was the joint second most used camera by pros with the 5D III/IV and 6d all in the top 10
--
Jim Stirling:
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." - Thomas Paine
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post
Last edited:
Very interesting and instructive.The software is usable on every format and even if NR was a free lunch it isn't , you can easily remove noise you cannot add real detail.Maybe yours - sorry if you cannot get results with M43 and the associated glass, quality issues and standards are 100% on you. If you need FF to get satisfactory results, this speaks more about your skills as a photographer not meeting a high criteria of standards - not the camera.https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4804979I'm pretty sure "results" can be achieved with m4/3rds kit!I think he's more of a "results" guy than a "fun" guy LOL.I'd like to see a video from him entitled, why I switched to m4/3rds!I use Canon full frame alongside M43 for wildlife. I enjoy both setups. If I want to get good images, I take the full frame setup. If I just want to have some fun and image quality doesn't matter, then I take the M43. The OM-1 + 150-400 is my toy setup. Very fun to use, just not meant for serious results. Both have their place - for me at least. Sometimes I like to have fun. Sometimes I want results.Why didn't Duade Paton switch to m4/3rds? His gear list on his website shows full frame Canon gear! A wildlife shooter that uses full frame Canon gear! Surely that must be too big and heavy for him, with less telephoto reach!
But if I could only keep one...my heart says M43 (I like fun LOL), but logically, full frame is the better answer. The main issue is that OM-1 video performance is straight trash. The recording modes suck, the image is super soft unless you shoot H265 (forced to grade - and OM's official log conversion lut isn't even close to accurate) the bird AF sucks, and there isn't even 4K120. R5 is a true hybrid with both excellent stills and video quality. So yeah, if I had to keep one, it would be the full frame setup. If the OM-1 had 4K120 and good video AF and good video quality, then I'd pick the OM-1.
Most people that have experienced the glory of big primes and full frame do end up being a "results" kinda guy. I'm the anomaly.
I think this series is pretty representative of peak M43 "results" LOL
If you cannot get publishable results with M43 as well as large print, the fault is your skills, approach and ability. Not the camera. Plenty of serious work made for serious applications that demand serious quality made with M43 gear. There is no reason one cannot get the same level of printable quality as a high quality low grain medium format film rig - m43 offers this but with a far larger shooting envelope.
This is before we even get to software advances that render the FF two stop gap a rather moot point.
You can certainly produce excellent results with m43 lens I agree ,in a lot of photographic arenas it is the message or impactful nature of the image that matters. A lot of incredibly powerful imagery is not technical demanding it is about being in the right place at the wrong time :-(
We often see these statements about winning x award without putting a timetable on it ,would you consider something you did 40yrs ago with different gear as having any relevance to what you do today especially given the ages of most people on your list
As an a example Larry C Price last one a Pultzer in 1985 using Nikon Film cameras he is now 70yrs old
Jay Dickman last won a pultzer prize in 1983 on a film camera, he is now 76yrs
Peter Baumgarten has never one a Pultzer prize, and his "award winning " mantle is not made clear what or when he won
He is a great wildlife photographer and environmentalist who produces amazing work . He has used multiple brands including Panasonic and Fuji before ending up with OM he is I think 66yrs
Bob Krist last won an award in 2008 which he had won 3 times before back to 1997 these awards are from the Society of American Travel Writers he is 73yrs old
https://bobkrist.com/about
Another 76yr old
https://irablock.com/Bio/1
https://alphauniverse.com/artisans/block/
His gear listed in the above article in 2019
73yrs old , and has produced some amazing imagery about women issues going back decades
Too common a name
Is 80yrs old and was removed from National Geo for personal misconduct
He famously used Olympus P&S cameras in his documentary work a youngster of only 54yrs
69yrs , has been a photographer decades
The point of all this is that it seems almost all of these photographers had their glory award winning days long long before m43 in many cases decades before. Using multiple other brands. I am sure other brands pull the same stunts and you get some pro photographers who jump from brand to brand . Andy Rouse a UK wildlife shooter was a Nikon promoter , a Canon promoter, an Olympus promoter and now a Sony promoter, whether this is a better gear or better rewards chase who knows
It is 2025 and I think a fair appraisal of the professional photography market would have north of 96% using larger sensor brands than m43. If you consider m43 diminished share of the market today and the embedded DSLR users
A recent study admittedly only 1000 photographers but still showed that 36% of pro shooters still use DSLR's . Only 1% used Olympus/OM , 2% Panasonic ( probably due to those who also shoot video ) . The D750 was the joint second most used camera by pros with the 5D III/IV and 6d all in the top 10
--
Jim Stirling:
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." - Thomas Paine
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post
This makes no sense as this software could be used on FF or APS-C to maintain their advantage.Maybe yours - sorry if you cannot get results with M43 and the associated glass, quality issues and standards are 100% on you. If you need FF to get satisfactory results, this speaks more about your skills as a photographer not meeting a high criteria of standards - not the camera.https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4804979I'm pretty sure "results" can be achieved with m4/3rds kit!I think he's more of a "results" guy than a "fun" guy LOL.I'd like to see a video from him entitled, why I switched to m4/3rds!I use Canon full frame alongside M43 for wildlife. I enjoy both setups. If I want to get good images, I take the full frame setup. If I just want to have some fun and image quality doesn't matter, then I take the M43. The OM-1 + 150-400 is my toy setup. Very fun to use, just not meant for serious results. Both have their place - for me at least. Sometimes I like to have fun. Sometimes I want results.Why didn't Duade Paton switch to m4/3rds? His gear list on his website shows full frame Canon gear! A wildlife shooter that uses full frame Canon gear! Surely that must be too big and heavy for him, with less telephoto reach!
But if I could only keep one...my heart says M43 (I like fun LOL), but logically, full frame is the better answer. The main issue is that OM-1 video performance is straight trash. The recording modes suck, the image is super soft unless you shoot H265 (forced to grade - and OM's official log conversion lut isn't even close to accurate) the bird AF sucks, and there isn't even 4K120. R5 is a true hybrid with both excellent stills and video quality. So yeah, if I had to keep one, it would be the full frame setup. If the OM-1 had 4K120 and good video AF and good video quality, then I'd pick the OM-1.
Most people that have experienced the glory of big primes and full frame do end up being a "results" kinda guy. I'm the anomaly.
I think this series is pretty representative of peak M43 "results" LOL
If you cannot get publishable results with M43 as well as large print, the fault is your skills, approach and ability. Not the camera. Plenty of serious work made for serious applications that demand serious quality made with M43 gear. There is no reason one cannot get the same level of printable quality as a high quality low grain medium format film rig - m43 offers this but with a far larger shooting envelope. This is before we even get to software advances that render the FF two stop gap a rather moot point.
Please see subsequent reply showing most of the above received their rewards prior to M43 being launched
Clutching at straws
James Stirling
Forum Pro
I am not a nature shooter so my travel gear is smaller and lighter than your kit listed below a lot lighterHi James .Don't worry they are happy to destroy lighter gear as well
Luggage workers on the platform are low paid and do not care much about your equipment , so good luck with the very heavy protected case .
Folk buying high end tele lenses can afford it
That sound like a lot of weight for a carry on.
HicHic
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,673
- Reaction score
- 3,559
In some cases, yes. But for this situation, you are wrong. It's a procapture moment using autofocus. Anyone who shoots wildlife knows that this kind of shot is 95% camera and 5% user. All I have to do is frame it up, half press, and then fully press after the moment is done. The camera does all the rest - getting the moment and getting it in focus. Unless you're suggesting that I manually focus this entire 0.5 second sequence to get the shot, then your point is moot. Actually, if I had to manually focus it, then that just means the AF system is inadequate, further proving my point. So either way - camera fail.
Last edited:
Presently the camera market dominated by new full-frame cameras from SONY LUMIX NIKON and CANON. However higher prices may force people to review all their options. OM SYSTEM offers smaller sensor cameras with some highly-rated lenses. For me OM SYSTEM an alternative to Fuji APS-C which has limitations in terms of long-range zoom lenses; only one Fuji XT camera with no replacement this year. The camera industry needs OM SYSTEM / LUMIX M43 because they have achieved a loyal customer base. M43 as the right choice for many photographers including bird-watchers. US tariffs may impact the entire camera market. so who knows what happens next?
MyReality
Veteran Member
All you had to do was look at DPR's objective test of photos online comparing M4/3 and FF. Digital Camera World's test of the OM-1 II. They said it gave some older FF frame cameras a " run for the money" in good light.
James Stirling
Forum Pro
I have never used any Fuji gear but they have zoom lenses going up to a FF equiv of 916mm and at F/8 ( m43 equiv 459mm F/6.1 ) plus a number of 40mp sensors . There is also the 500mm F/5.6 which is equivalent to a m43 382mm F4.28 also usable on 40mp bodies. I have seen a few mentions here about the Fuji AF not being top notch but as I say no personal experience
--
Jim Stirling:
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." - Thomas Paine
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post
Last edited:
UsherFellig
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,341
- Reaction score
- 1,597
I don't understand what this list is meant to represent. To take just one name, Peter Turnley's Insta states right up at his profile, "Uses @Leica_camera for 45 years." The posted images include numerous recent photos of Turnley camera in hand. No image shows an m43 camera. In recent portraits it is Leica down the line. (There are also photos of Turnley at work with film cameras decades ago, I'm linking only recent images.)Maybe yours - sorry if you cannot get results with M43 and the associated glass, quality issues and standards are 100% on you. If you need FF to get satisfactory results, this speaks more about your skills as a photographer not meeting a high criteria of standards - not the camera.https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4804979I'm pretty sure "results" can be achieved with m4/3rds kit!I think he's more of a "results" guy than a "fun" guy LOL.I'd like to see a video from him entitled, why I switched to m4/3rds!I use Canon full frame alongside M43 for wildlife. I enjoy both setups. If I want to get good images, I take the full frame setup. If I just want to have some fun and image quality doesn't matter, then I take the M43. The OM-1 + 150-400 is my toy setup. Very fun to use, just not meant for serious results. Both have their place - for me at least. Sometimes I like to have fun. Sometimes I want results.Why didn't Duade Paton switch to m4/3rds? His gear list on his website shows full frame Canon gear! A wildlife shooter that uses full frame Canon gear! Surely that must be too big and heavy for him, with less telephoto reach!
But if I could only keep one...my heart says M43 (I like fun LOL), but logically, full frame is the better answer. The main issue is that OM-1 video performance is straight trash. The recording modes suck, the image is super soft unless you shoot H265 (forced to grade - and OM's official log conversion lut isn't even close to accurate) the bird AF sucks, and there isn't even 4K120. R5 is a true hybrid with both excellent stills and video quality. So yeah, if I had to keep one, it would be the full frame setup. If the OM-1 had 4K120 and good video AF and good video quality, then I'd pick the OM-1.
Most people that have experienced the glory of big primes and full frame do end up being a "results" kinda guy. I'm the anomaly.
I think this series is pretty representative of peak M43 "results" LOL
If you cannot get publishable results with M43 as well as large print, the fault is your skills, approach and ability. Not the camera. Plenty of serious work made for serious applications that demand serious quality made with M43 gear. There is no reason one cannot get the same level of printable quality as a high quality low grain medium format film rig - m43 offers this but with a far larger shooting envelope. This is before we even get to software advances that render the FF two stop gap a rather moot point.
That’s not to say one might want or need more but that M43 cannot produce quality that is good enough to sit on the pages of the most prestigious publications or museum walls is simply a redundant opinion in the actual real world or photography. The right photographer deems any camera a serious tool. It is the amateur that cannot deliver who might not have the skill to get work of high standards from M43, but that is a very different conversation that has nothing to do with gear….
Pulitzer Prize-winning photojournalists,
Larry C. Price,
Jay Dickman
Peter Baumgarten
seem to get results with M43
Daniel J. Cox,
Bob Krist,
Ira Block,
Annie Griffiths,
Daniel Fox
David Alan Harvey
All National Geographic who use M43 to make outstanding images.
Alex Majoli (Magnum Photos)
Peter Turnley (Newsweek, LIFE, affiliated with Magnum)
David Alan Harvey (magnum)
Thomas Dworzak (magnum and former president of magnum)
Matt Black (Magnum)
With camera from October 2024, on a project shooting a candidate in the US election. This is Leica, not an m43 camera:
Self-portrait taken in April 2024 with "my new Leica M11-P camera!" With detailed discussion by Turnley noting that he doesn't usually discuss his cameras, but making an exception here with a very interesting narrative of his history with Leicas analogue and digital:
From June 2024, with Leica:
In Havana, March of 2024:
Portrait taken in 2023 by Charles Hahn:
Regardless of this thread discussion, which unfortunately contains unreliable dubious assertions about the camera choices of professionals, Turnley's Insta page is full of wonderful work worth a deep-dive. Nothing discernibly made with m43, but such a refreshing and inspiring browse.
https://www.instagram.com/peterturnley/?hl=en
Last edited:
No dubious assertions, just an understanding that work is and can be produced to exceptional standards with M43 gear. There are enough examples that back this up not just below but with even basic insight against one’s own experience- providing you know what you’re doing…I don't understand what this list is meant to represent. To take just one name, Peter Turnley's Insta states right up at his profile, "Uses @Leica_camera for 45 years." The posted images include numerous recent photos of Turnley camera in hand. No image shows an m43 camera. In recent portraits it is Leica down the line. (There are also photos of Turnley at work with film cameras decades ago, I'm linking only recent images.)Maybe yours - sorry if you cannot get results with M43 and the associated glass, quality issues and standards are 100% on you. If you need FF to get satisfactory results, this speaks more about your skills as a photographer not meeting a high criteria of standards - not the camera.https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4804979I'm pretty sure "results" can be achieved with m4/3rds kit!I think he's more of a "results" guy than a "fun" guy LOL.I'd like to see a video from him entitled, why I switched to m4/3rds!I use Canon full frame alongside M43 for wildlife. I enjoy both setups. If I want to get good images, I take the full frame setup. If I just want to have some fun and image quality doesn't matter, then I take the M43. The OM-1 + 150-400 is my toy setup. Very fun to use, just not meant for serious results. Both have their place - for me at least. Sometimes I like to have fun. Sometimes I want results.Why didn't Duade Paton switch to m4/3rds? His gear list on his website shows full frame Canon gear! A wildlife shooter that uses full frame Canon gear! Surely that must be too big and heavy for him, with less telephoto reach!
But if I could only keep one...my heart says M43 (I like fun LOL), but logically, full frame is the better answer. The main issue is that OM-1 video performance is straight trash. The recording modes suck, the image is super soft unless you shoot H265 (forced to grade - and OM's official log conversion lut isn't even close to accurate) the bird AF sucks, and there isn't even 4K120. R5 is a true hybrid with both excellent stills and video quality. So yeah, if I had to keep one, it would be the full frame setup. If the OM-1 had 4K120 and good video AF and good video quality, then I'd pick the OM-1.
Most people that have experienced the glory of big primes and full frame do end up being a "results" kinda guy. I'm the anomaly.
I think this series is pretty representative of peak M43 "results" LOL
If you cannot get publishable results with M43 as well as large print, the fault is your skills, approach and ability. Not the camera. Plenty of serious work made for serious applications that demand serious quality made with M43 gear. There is no reason one cannot get the same level of printable quality as a high quality low grain medium format film rig - m43 offers this but with a far larger shooting envelope. This is before we even get to software advances that render the FF two stop gap a rather moot point.
That’s not to say one might want or need more but that M43 cannot produce quality that is good enough to sit on the pages of the most prestigious publications or museum walls is simply a redundant opinion in the actual real world or photography. The right photographer deems any camera a serious tool. It is the amateur that cannot deliver who might not have the skill to get work of high standards from M43, but that is a very different conversation that has nothing to do with gear….
Pulitzer Prize-winning photojournalists,
Larry C. Price,
Jay Dickman
Peter Baumgarten
seem to get results with M43
Daniel J. Cox,
Bob Krist,
Ira Block,
Annie Griffiths,
Daniel Fox
David Alan Harvey
All National Geographic who use M43 to make outstanding images.
Alex Majoli (Magnum Photos)
Peter Turnley (Newsweek, LIFE, affiliated with Magnum)
David Alan Harvey (magnum)
Thomas Dworzak (magnum and former president of magnum)
Matt Black (Magnum)
With camera from October 2024, on a project shooting a candidate in the US election. This is Leica, not an m43 camera:
Self-portrait taken in April 2024 with "my new Leica M11-P camera!" With detailed discussion by Turnley noting that he doesn't usually discuss his cameras, but making an exception here with a very interesting narrative of his history with Leicas analogue and digital:
From June 2024, with Leica:
In Havana, March of 2024:
Portrait taken in 2023 by Charles Hahn:
Regardless of this thread discussion, which unfortunately contains unreliable dubious assertions about the camera choices of professionals, Turnley's Insta page is full of wonderful work worth a deep-dive. Nothing discernibly made with m43, but such a refreshing and inspiring browse.
https://www.instagram.com/peterturnley/?hl=en
Larry Price
https://larrycprice.photoshelter.com/index/G0000PRcYGl5xxBQ
https://larrycprice.photoshelter.com/index/G00003YAweghfiQc
https://larrycprice.photoshelter.com/index/G0000BW8Ddb4tCtw
Jay Dickman
https://jaydickman.net/Recent-Work/19
https://www.jaydickman.net/National-Geographic/Antarctica/1
Matt Black
https://www.magnumphotos.com/newsroom/politics/american-geography/
Alex Majoli
https://www.magnumphotos.com/arts-culture/alex-majoli-on-the-set-of-mad-men/
Image from this body made the cover of Time Magazine ….
https://www.magnumphotos.com/arts-culture/society-arts-culture/alex-majoli-home/
https://www.magnumphotos.com/arts-culture/alex-majoli-scene-theatricality-life/
https://www.magnumphotos.com/arts-culture/travel/alex-majoli-moscow-of-his-mind/
Jerome Sessini
https://www.magnumphotos.com/newsroom/politics/forgotten-france/
https://www.magnumphotos.com/newsro...-lifelong-addiction-jerome-sessini-baltimore/
https://www.magnumphotos.com/newsroom/jerome-sessini-maidan-five-years-on/
https://www.tesniward.co.uk/image-gallery/
one does not need to dig far to see results produced from mentioned photographers using M43
Of course if you have examples of your own work that exceeds the above, or refutes that serious quality can be attained with M43 - post away…
The actual point of my post is that work of very high calibre is produced by photographers that have very high standards.
As someone who has shot FF for 15 years, the claims that M43 is a “toy” and serious cannot be achieved, only puts a dubious question mark over the skills of those making these claims.
I can put current M43 print results up against any of my FF work and everyone here would fail a blind test…
If M43 was not enough to achieve serious results, I would not have replaced my main FF kit with M43.
Last edited:
That it is available on every format does not take away from the benefits afforded to smaller formats. It was these advances that allowed me to replace my high res FF with M43 - The reason being all of my output meets or exceeds the output ceiling required to deliver prints well beyond practical need.The software is usable on every format and even if NR was a free lunch it isn't , you can easily remove noise you cannot add real detail.Maybe yours - sorry if you cannot get results with M43 and the associated glass, quality issues and standards are 100% on you. If you need FF to get satisfactory results, this speaks more about your skills as a photographer not meeting a high criteria of standards - not the camera.https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4804979I'm pretty sure "results" can be achieved with m4/3rds kit!I think he's more of a "results" guy than a "fun" guy LOL.I'd like to see a video from him entitled, why I switched to m4/3rds!I use Canon full frame alongside M43 for wildlife. I enjoy both setups. If I want to get good images, I take the full frame setup. If I just want to have some fun and image quality doesn't matter, then I take the M43. The OM-1 + 150-400 is my toy setup. Very fun to use, just not meant for serious results. Both have their place - for me at least. Sometimes I like to have fun. Sometimes I want results.Why didn't Duade Paton switch to m4/3rds? His gear list on his website shows full frame Canon gear! A wildlife shooter that uses full frame Canon gear! Surely that must be too big and heavy for him, with less telephoto reach!
But if I could only keep one...my heart says M43 (I like fun LOL), but logically, full frame is the better answer. The main issue is that OM-1 video performance is straight trash. The recording modes suck, the image is super soft unless you shoot H265 (forced to grade - and OM's official log conversion lut isn't even close to accurate) the bird AF sucks, and there isn't even 4K120. R5 is a true hybrid with both excellent stills and video quality. So yeah, if I had to keep one, it would be the full frame setup. If the OM-1 had 4K120 and good video AF and good video quality, then I'd pick the OM-1.
Most people that have experienced the glory of big primes and full frame do end up being a "results" kinda guy. I'm the anomaly.
I think this series is pretty representative of peak M43 "results" LOL
If you cannot get publishable results with M43 as well as large print, the fault is your skills, approach and ability. Not the camera. Plenty of serious work made for serious applications that demand serious quality made with M43 gear. There is no reason one cannot get the same level of printable quality as a high quality low grain medium format film rig - m43 offers this but with a far larger shooting envelope.
This is before we even get to software advances that render the FF two stop gap a rather moot point.
My current M43 delivers detail vs the mainstay DSLR's you have posted. These are not delivering more detail in fact they delivery softer results due to having AA filters - (my OM-1 is sharper as it relates to pixel level detail, vs the RP I use as an everyday carry.
Yes it is higher resolution sensors that will give you more native detail. However using topaz upscaling I am easily able to meet the resolution of the 42MP sensors I previously used. If you crop - this may provide some benefit, however all practical print sizes are met with current upscaling software to the point that everyone here would simply fail a blind test. It is not until you are printing excessively large that the benefits of a high res native sensor would provide any tangible benefit.
My point entirely - again if you cannot produce publishable results against the majority of demands you are the problem. The actual applications that require more are highly niche. I have yet to see any results posted here by naysayers that would benefit
Yes many professionals make superior work with lesser gear. That M43 exists on the market edge has nothing to do with the price of eggs to the points I am making. the output celing has a limit, I see no benefit in a camera that is only good at offering redundancy past this ceiling - these "benefits" only operate as hypotheticals and have little bearing on real world results.We often see these statements about winning x award without putting a timetable on it ,would you consider something you did 40yrs ago with different gear as having any relevance to what you do today especially given the ages of most people on your list
As an a example Larry C Price last one a Pultzer in 1985 using Nikon Film cameras he is now 70yrs old
Jay Dickman last won a pultzer prize in 1983 on a film camera, he is now 76yrs
Peter Baumgarten has never one a Pultzer prize, and his "award winning " mantle is not made clear what or when he won
He is a great wildlife photographer and environmentalist who produces amazing work . He has used multiple brands including Panasonic and Fuji before ending up with OM he is I think 66yrs
Bob Krist last won an award in 2008 which he had won 3 times before back to 1997 these awards are from the Society of American Travel Writers he is 73yrs old
https://bobkrist.com/about
Another 76yr old
https://irablock.com/Bio/1
https://alphauniverse.com/artisans/block/
His gear listed in the above article in 2019
73yrs old , and has produced some amazing imagery about women issues going back decades
Too common a name
Is 80yrs old and was removed from National Geo for personal misconduct
He famously used Olympus P&S cameras in his documentary work a youngster of only 54yrs
69yrs , has been a photographer decades
The point of all this is that it seems almost all of these photographers had their glory award winning days long long before m43 in many cases decades before. Using multiple other brands. I am sure other brands pull the same stunts and you get some pro photographers who jump from brand to brand . Andy Rouse a UK wildlife shooter was a Nikon promoter , a Canon promoter, an Olympus promoter and now a Sony promoter, whether this is a better gear or better rewards chase who knows
It is 2025 and I think a fair appraisal of the professional photography market would have north of 96% using larger sensor brands than m43. If you consider m43 diminished share of the market today and the embedded DSLR users
A recent study admittedly only 1000 photographers but still showed that 36% of pro shooters still use DSLR's . Only 1% used Olympus/OM , 2% Panasonic ( probably due to those who also shoot video ) . The D750 was the joint second most used camera by pros with the 5D III/IV and 6d all in the top 10
Speakling of results - I yet to see results from anyone talking to FF's superiority show any evidence they produce "superior" results
The loudest voices here, have very little to say when it comes to showing the photos that relate to their words.
Larry Price
https://larrycprice.photoshelter.com/index/G0000PRcYGl5xxBQ
https://larrycprice.photoshelter.com/index/G00003YAweghfiQc
https://larrycprice.photoshelter.com/index/G0000BW8Ddb4tCtw
Jay Dickman
https://jaydickman.net/Recent-Work/19
https://www.jaydickman.net/National-Geographic/Antarctica/1
Matt Black
https://www.magnumphotos.com/newsroom/politics/american-geography/
Alex Majoli
https://www.magnumphotos.com/arts-culture/alex-majoli-on-the-set-of-mad-men/
Image from this body made the cover of Time Magazine ….
https://www.magnumphotos.com/arts-culture/society-arts-culture/alex-majoli-home/
https://www.magnumphotos.com/arts-culture/alex-majoli-scene-theatricality-life/
https://www.magnumphotos.com/arts-culture/travel/alex-majoli-moscow-of-his-mind/
Jerome Sessini
https://www.magnumphotos.com/newsroom/politics/forgotten-france/
https://www.magnumphotos.com/newsro...-lifelong-addiction-jerome-sessini-baltimore/
https://www.magnumphotos.com/newsroom/jerome-sessini-maidan-five-years-on/
https://www.tesniward.co.uk/image-gallery/
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum