The M43 problem - It too good to abandon

HicHic said:

mmartel said:

HicHic said:

High ISO Fail said:

Sam Bennett said:

Thomas Kachadurian said:

Everyone keeps claiming M43 dead, but for me it's not the lack of new stuff.

Click to expand...

Are they though? I think there's still the usual forum trolls pushing this tired claim, but I'm not hearing that a lot outside of forums. If you look at YouTube, there's a lot of positivity going around - including people coming back or into the system for the first time. This is very different than what we've seen even a year ago. I feel like the tide has really turned and the trolls are behind the curve.

HicHic said:

My M43 problem is that it's just so perfect for so many scenarios. I toyed with getting a Nikon z5II, but then I look at the lenses and they are both expensive for the quality level I want, and heavy.

MY tiny 42.5 f1.7, 20mm f1.7 and 75mm f1.8 just keep making great images. The 40-150 f4 is just so easy to carry around.

And the bottom line is I never don't have enough data to do exactly what I need final output wise.

Click to expand...

Needless to say, I agree with all of this. I've really never been happier as an MFT user. In fact, the only gear debate in my head right now is if I should unload my L-Mount gear!

HicHic said:

I am concerned that if my cameras die I won't be able to replace them, but I'm not worried about features I don't have. I'm seriously considering buying an OM-5 II just to be sure I have one for the next several years.

Click to expand...

FWIW, I'm not really concerned. I also don't really buy that OMS' is somehow going to be put in a position where they're the only camera manufacturer keeping MFT afloat. We don't see a lot of LUMIX-related activity here since this is primarily a photography-centric forum and they've been slow with releases recently, but if you look at the market LUMIX bodies still retain their value which says that someone is buying them - likely filmmakers or small content creators who simply don't hang out on this forum.

Other evidence that MFT is fine is you still have tons of third party manufacturers producing new lenses for the system. Why would they bother if the system was dying?

Click to expand...

[ " tons of third-party manufacturers " ] you say?
How reassuring.

Let’s unpack that charming little fairy tale.
Remember Sigma? The company with real optical clout that actually did make serious lenses for many mounts? They tinkered with a few M43-mount pieces (basically APS-C designs change with a different mount) and then publicly stepped away and no more MFT lens program from them.
Hardly the [ " vote of confidence " ] you’re implying.
Tamron? They flirted with the format once, produced a lone MFT option, and then.....… crickets FOREVER.
Voigtländer, Samyang (Rokinon) and the like? A handful of manual lenses here and there, nice niche bits, but new product lines? still gone FOREVER.
What’s left, then? A smattering of small Chinese manufacturers re-boxing APS-C designs with an M43 mount thrown on as an “option.” Handy for budget shoppers, sure.
But calling that “tons of third-party manufacturers producing new lenses” is a bit of a stretch. It’s like calling a samll 7-11 a COSTCO.

Click to expand...

The bar is pretty low nowadays. Fanboys will basically accept anything at this point as "signs of life". That includes all the Chinese junk nobody wants from Meike, YongNuo, Mitakon, etc.

All of the real manufacturers like Sigma have pulled out - but let's pretend that never happened, right? LOL.

Meanwhile, Sigma is making sharp wide open 200/2s for E/L mount (not the soft crap that Laowa sells - but evidently good enough for some users here), 500/5.6, 300-600/4, 35/1.2, 135/1.4, etc.

Click to expand...

"Beautiful plumage, eh, major?"

I mean, you raise a good point. But it's a two way street and Sigma pulling out... Does anyone seriously think that changes the trajectory for m43 either way?

Sigma made, what, one native m43 lens in all the years? Zero? Someone help me out.

The only remotely appealing glass AFAIK were the APS-C duo of the somewhat obese short portrait 30mm f1.4 and the gem of the lineup, the longish portrait 56mm f1.4. Wait, the 150-600 OMDS lens is a Sigma. Does that mean they left? Or they're still here?

Which begs the question: What exactly did Sigma really ever do for us m43 losers, at the end of the day, behind their own brand? Not a lot. So their departure doesn't really upset me much.

Now Viltrox not making native glass for us... Well, that DOES sting a little, ngl...

How's my copium?

PS: I own the Sigma 30mm f1.4 and it's a decent lens even if it is chonky. I use it more than my P42.5 f1.7 due to its better working length for indoor casual portraits of family.

Click to expand...

They probably only ever made 1 lens because it didn't sell well. It's also possible that Olympus had some agreement with Sigma to have them manufacture lenses, but have them Olympus branded - like the 75/1.8. I don't know which other ones are from Sigma, but my guess would be the 20/1.4, 25/1.2, 45/1.2, and the two 100-400 and 150-600 zooms. I guess those ones because those are all still made in Japan today, despite JIP no longer having access to Olympus' manufacturing facilities (JIP's manufacturing is in Vietnam).

Click to expand...

Exactly. Some of the lenses you mention, Sigma sells for other mounts much cheaper. If they were to sell them under Sigma brand, they could never charge much more for them just adapted with an m43 mount.

But under Olympus or now OM brand, they do sell at a huge premium. A premium that Sigma and OM can share for mutual benefit.

cba_melbourne said:

HicHic said:

mmartel said:

HicHic said:

High ISO Fail said:

Sam Bennett said:

Thomas Kachadurian said:

Everyone keeps claiming M43 dead, but for me it's not the lack of new stuff.

Click to expand...

Are they though? I think there's still the usual forum trolls pushing this tired claim, but I'm not hearing that a lot outside of forums. If you look at YouTube, there's a lot of positivity going around - including people coming back or into the system for the first time. This is very different than what we've seen even a year ago. I feel like the tide has really turned and the trolls are behind the curve.

cba_melbourne said:

My M43 problem is that it's just so perfect for so many scenarios. I toyed with getting a Nikon z5II, but then I look at the lenses and they are both expensive for the quality level I want, and heavy.

MY tiny 42.5 f1.7, 20mm f1.7 and 75mm f1.8 just keep making great images. The 40-150 f4 is just so easy to carry around.

And the bottom line is I never don't have enough data to do exactly what I need final output wise.

Click to expand...

Needless to say, I agree with all of this. I've really never been happier as an MFT user. In fact, the only gear debate in my head right now is if I should unload my L-Mount gear!

cba_melbourne said:

I am concerned that if my cameras die I won't be able to replace them, but I'm not worried about features I don't have. I'm seriously considering buying an OM-5 II just to be sure I have one for the next several years.

Click to expand...

FWIW, I'm not really concerned. I also don't really buy that OMS' is somehow going to be put in a position where they're the only camera manufacturer keeping MFT afloat. We don't see a lot of LUMIX-related activity here since this is primarily a photography-centric forum and they've been slow with releases recently, but if you look at the market LUMIX bodies still retain their value which says that someone is buying them - likely filmmakers or small content creators who simply don't hang out on this forum.

Other evidence that MFT is fine is you still have tons of third party manufacturers producing new lenses for the system. Why would they bother if the system was dying?

Click to expand...

[ " tons of third-party manufacturers " ] you say?
How reassuring.

Let’s unpack that charming little fairy tale.
Remember Sigma? The company with real optical clout that actually did make serious lenses for many mounts? They tinkered with a few M43-mount pieces (basically APS-C designs change with a different mount) and then publicly stepped away and no more MFT lens program from them.
Hardly the [ " vote of confidence " ] you’re implying.
Tamron? They flirted with the format once, produced a lone MFT option, and then.....… crickets FOREVER.
Voigtländer, Samyang (Rokinon) and the like? A handful of manual lenses here and there, nice niche bits, but new product lines? still gone FOREVER.
What’s left, then? A smattering of small Chinese manufacturers re-boxing APS-C designs with an M43 mount thrown on as an “option.” Handy for budget shoppers, sure.
But calling that “tons of third-party manufacturers producing new lenses” is a bit of a stretch. It’s like calling a samll 7-11 a COSTCO.

Click to expand...

The bar is pretty low nowadays. Fanboys will basically accept anything at this point as "signs of life". That includes all the Chinese junk nobody wants from Meike, YongNuo, Mitakon, etc.

All of the real manufacturers like Sigma have pulled out - but let's pretend that never happened, right? LOL.

Meanwhile, Sigma is making sharp wide open 200/2s for E/L mount (not the soft crap that Laowa sells - but evidently good enough for some users here), 500/5.6, 300-600/4, 35/1.2, 135/1.4, etc.

Click to expand...

"Beautiful plumage, eh, major?"

I mean, you raise a good point. But it's a two way street and Sigma pulling out... Does anyone seriously think that changes the trajectory for m43 either way?

Sigma made, what, one native m43 lens in all the years? Zero? Someone help me out.

The only remotely appealing glass AFAIK were the APS-C duo of the somewhat obese short portrait 30mm f1.4 and the gem of the lineup, the longish portrait 56mm f1.4. Wait, the 150-600 OMDS lens is a Sigma. Does that mean they left? Or they're still here?

Which begs the question: What exactly did Sigma really ever do for us m43 losers, at the end of the day, behind their own brand? Not a lot. So their departure doesn't really upset me much.

Now Viltrox not making native glass for us... Well, that DOES sting a little, ngl...

How's my copium?

PS: I own the Sigma 30mm f1.4 and it's a decent lens even if it is chonky. I use it more than my P42.5 f1.7 due to its better working length for indoor casual portraits of family.

Click to expand...

They probably only ever made 1 lens because it didn't sell well. It's also possible that Olympus had some agreement with Sigma to have them manufacture lenses, but have them Olympus branded - like the 75/1.8. I don't know which other ones are from Sigma, but my guess would be the 20/1.4, 25/1.2, 45/1.2, and the two 100-400 and 150-600 zooms. I guess those ones because those are all still made in Japan today, despite JIP no longer having access to Olympus' manufacturing facilities (JIP's manufacturing is in Vietnam).

Click to expand...

Exactly. Some of the lenses you mention, Sigma sells for other mounts much cheaper. If they were to sell them under Sigma brand, they could never charge much more for them just adapted with an m43 mount.

But under Olympus or now OM brand, they do sell at a huge premium. A premium that Sigma and OM can share for mutual benefit.

Click to expand...

Yeah it works out for both ends. People will pay more for an OEM branded lens, so it's more beneficial for Sigma to sell to Olympus/JIP. Sigma makes great lenses, so it's not a bad thing that these lenses are actually by Sigma. I do wonder though...the copies of 100-400 Olympus lenses I've seen have not been great. I haven't seen as many decentered copies from the Sigma branded ones. Since they're not Sigma branded, Sigma won't take any reputation hit for looser QC and higher tolerances. It would be cheaper for Sigma to manufacture them if they weren't held to the same standards. Olympus/JIP won't be testing every lens they receive from Sigma. I'd be surprised if they actually test any at all after the initial launch phase, so these would slip by. Most users don't test for decentering themselves, and M43 users in particular are generally not the pixel peeping types. We'll never know.

mmartel said:

Allow me to recap a couple of my points and invite you to respond:

1. Sigma offered us m43 basement-dwelling losers VIRTUALLY NOTHING compelling under their own brand name. The 56mm f1.4 is the only truly appealing lens I can think of.

Click to expand...

I'll respond if you want, seeing as you have overlooked the fantastic 60mm again, .

The Sigma A 60mm f/2.8 DN ART was a fabulous lens when Sigma stuck a m4/3 mount on it in 2013. It is very different to the Olympus 60mm, offering faster auto-focus and more contrast, and beating it handsomely for resolution across the board, according to Lenstip. Indeed, the Sigma 60mm is one of the sharpest of m4/3 lenses ever tested by them. All of this some six years before the 56mm came along into a greatly enlarged m4/3 system.

I have both the Oly and the Sigma, and only use the Oly when chasing insects. In all other respects I much prefer the Sigma. I suspect Sigma introduced the 30mm and 19mm due to the success of the 60mm, and hoped to ride on the coat-tails of that success but could not replicate it. Personally I think the Sigma 60mm, at a 'like new' price of €134 on MPB at the moment here on their European site, is one of the best bangs for your bucks in our current m4/3 world. AND it's a 12 year-old product.

Lenstip had this to say about the lens when they reviewed it:

11. Summary

Pros:

• Solid-looking casing of high build quality,
• Brilliant image quality in the frame centre,
• Very good image quality on the edge of the frame,
• Very low chromatic aberration,
• Well-corrected spherical aberration,
• Imperceptible distortion,
• Good correction of astigmatism,
• Moderate vignetting,
• Noiseless autofocus,
• Sensational price/quality ratio,
• Very good standard accessory kit.

Cons:

• What a pity it isn’t a tad faster…

I stopped believing in Santa Claus somewhere around 1978 but Sigma might make me start to believe in him again. Why? If several months ago somebody told me that for the price of about 200 USD you can get a lens produced completely in Japan, made mostly of metal, with outstanding resolution right from the maximum relative aperture, a device correcting most of the basic optical aberrations very well, with a hard case and a hood included in box (something that other brand name producers add only to lenses costing several thousands USD) and two-year warranty period which can be optionally extended to three years, I would tell them they were off their rocker. Sigma made that pipe dream come true – because of their product I do feel it’s high time I started to believe in Santa Claus again…

I understand that this lens was not built for m4/3, and is just an APC lens with a m4/3 mount stuck on it, but for many users the Sigma 60 was an essential short telephoto and portrait lens for a long time, and at an exceptional price. As one of the many basement-dwelling users who bought it, and still use it, I'd just like you to recognise it as a decent offering from Sigma, who you seem to take delight in vilifying.

jeffharris said:

SonyX said:

jeffharris said:

Smaller size and less weight are of HUGE importance.

GX8, 12-40mm f2.8, 35-100mm f2.8, 7-14mm f4. 2 lenses in the Patagonia Atom 8L sling pack.

Click to expand...

if it would be a "HUGE importance" - lenses would be 12-32/3.5-5.6, 35-100/4-5.6

jeffharris said:

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Compare FF 70-200 f2.8 to M4/3 35-100 f2.8 lenses to get the point.



HUGE difference.

Click to expand...

That lens does the job of a full frame 70-200 f/5.6. At that point, just mount the Tamron 28-200 f/2.8-5.6.

unhappymeal said:

jeffharris said:

SonyX said:

jeffharris said:

Smaller size and less weight are of HUGE importance.

GX8, 12-40mm f2.8, 35-100mm f2.8, 7-14mm f4. 2 lenses in the Patagonia Atom 8L sling pack.

Click to expand...

if it would be a "HUGE importance" - lenses would be 12-32/3.5-5.6, 35-100/4-5.6

unhappymeal said:

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Compare FF 70-200 f2.8 to M4/3 35-100 f2.8 lenses to get the point.



HUGE difference.

Click to expand...

That lens does the job of a full frame 70-200 f/5.6. At that point, just mount the Tamron 28-200 f/2.8-5.6.

Click to expand...

The 35-100mm is constant f2.8, not f5.6.

Why would I want a variable aperture lens when I use constant aperture lenses? That makes no sense.

DrHook59 said:

mmartel said:

Allow me to recap a couple of my points and invite you to respond:

1. Sigma offered us m43 basement-dwelling losers VIRTUALLY NOTHING compelling under their own brand name. The 56mm f1.4 is the only truly appealing lens I can think of.

Click to expand...

I'll respond if you want, seeing as you have overlooked the fantastic 60mm again, .

Click to expand...

Allow me to correct my past error and address the Sigma 60mm f2.8 you've proposed as a Sigma winner for m43 in addition to the 56mm f1.4, which I highlighted.

DrHook59 said:

The Sigma A 60mm f/2.8 DN ART was a fabulous lens when Sigma stuck a m4/3 mount on it in 2013. It is very different to the Olympus 60mm, offering faster auto-focus and more contrast, and beating it handsomely for resolution across the board, according to Lenstip. Indeed, the Sigma 60mm is one of the sharpest of m4/3 lenses ever tested by them. All of this some six years before the 56mm came along into a greatly enlarged m4/3 system.

Click to expand...

I appreciate the background of the Sigma 60mm f2.8 and that it may have held some appeal for certain people who wanted a bargain long-ish slow-ish prime lens for ... who and what use cases exactly?

For m43 portrait shooters (which some might say is an oxymoron), the APS-C designed Sigma 60mm f2.8 was launched in 2013 and already competed with:

- the impressive O 45mm f1.8 (launched before the Sigma 60mm f2.8)

- the impressive O 75mm f1.8 (launched before the Sigma 60mm f2.8)

After it launched, it also had to compete with:

- Panasonic's 42.5mm f1.7 (which in addition to faster aperture offered IS for Panny shooters) launched in 2015

As far as macro goes, the 60mm f2.8 has an MFD of 50cm which fails to impress me but maybe I need to lower my standards. Anyway, if you were trying to use it for macro, it was up against:

- the Olympus 60mm f2.8 macro (launched at the same time as the Sigma 60mm f2.8)

- the Panasonic 45mm f2.8 macro (launched years before the Sigma 60mm f2.8)

For portraits, the working distance of the Sigma 60mm f2.8 is too long for indoor work and the max aperture of 2.8 means you're getting less background blur than with an O 45mm f1.8 shot wide open.

I suppose the 60mm f2.8 could be considered a poor-man's O 75mm f1.8 (the Sigma 60mm f2.8 was and is still cheaper than an expensive dinner on the town!) and used for indoor sports and outdoor portraits.

But... and here's the BIG but... The 56mm f1.4 has — IMO — totally superseded the 60mm f1.4 in terms of broad m43 user appeal. Virtually the same focal length. Two stops better max aperture for freezing sports action and shallower depth of field portraits. No worse in terms of MFD/macro capability. Virtually the same sharpness per LensTip measurements. The thing even has splash resistance/weather sealing.





In conclusion: The Sigma 56mm f1.4 is and has been the standout gem in the Sigma lineup for years for us mainstream m43 losers and geezers, as a bargain alternative to the more aspirational Oly Pro f1.2 or 42.5mm Nocti f1.2.

The Sigma 60mm f2.8, on the other hand, is a consolation prize for those on who can't afford Sigma's significantly better 56mm f1.4, or even stretch for the Olympus 45mm f1.8, which runs about $30-50 more dear than the 60mm f2.8.

To be clear: I will grant a gracious thank you to Sigma, if you wish, for making the 60mm f2.8 lens for the rare folks like you who have found a welcome place for it in your kit. I will at the same time argue that if Sigma had never launched it all, far fewer m43 users would have missed out much compared to the 56mm f1.4 — a lens which is Sigma's standout, defining contribution to the m43 system.

Finally, I will also add that I am, in fact, an owner of the good-but-not-remarkable Sigma short-portrait 30mm f1.4 and have many family portraits I'm happy with.

However, if Sigma had never made this glass-wasting budget alternative to the PL 25mm f1.4 available, I would have settled for an O25mm f1.8 or gone for a second round of the "are you feeling lucky" P25mm f1.7 sweepstakes. The resulting shots would be close enough to what I get with the Sigma 30mm f1.4 that I likely wouldn't miss it at all.

--
"Gentlemen, it has been a privilege playing with you tonight." - Titanic musician before their final song

Another vote for the PL 25/1.4. Even 30mm is starting to get a bit tele for indoor work. Mind I have a decent copy, and Roger found it has startling copy variation, even for an MFT lens. (Although he didn't test the 25/1.7).

My adapted Zuiko 50/2 macro continues to stand the test of time as the reference lens for Four Thirds body testing and the first decent lens I ever bought. Flat field, better sharpness at a distance than many macro lenses, reasonably fast AF at a distance (but oh so painfully slow as a macro).

IMHO it has magic rendering - bit like the PL 25/1.5 but with a bit less LoCA.



A

--
Infinite are the arguments of mages. Truth is a jewel with many facets. Ursula K LeGuin
Please feel free to edit any images that I post

jeffharris said:

unhappymeal said:

That lens does the job of a full frame 70-200 f/5.6. At that point, just mount the Tamron 28-200 f/2.8-5.6.

Click to expand...

The 35-100mm is constant f2.8, not f5.6.

Why would I want a variable aperture lens when I use constant aperture lenses? That makes no sense.

Click to expand...

You'd prefer to not have two extra stops towards the wider end? That makes no sense.

That Tammy is equivalent in the tele and much faster/wider in the wide.

jeffharris said:

unhappymeal said:

jeffharris said:

SonyX said:

jeffharris said:

Smaller size and less weight are of HUGE importance.

GX8, 12-40mm f2.8, 35-100mm f2.8, 7-14mm f4. 2 lenses in the Patagonia Atom 8L sling pack.

Click to expand...

if it would be a "HUGE importance" - lenses would be 12-32/3.5-5.6, 35-100/4-5.6

jeffharris said:

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Compare FF 70-200 f2.8 to M4/3 35-100 f2.8 lenses to get the point.



HUGE difference.

Click to expand...

That lens does the job of a full frame 70-200 f/5.6. At that point, just mount the Tamron 28-200 f/2.8-5.6.

Click to expand...

The 35-100mm is constant f2.8, not f5.6.

Why would I want a variable aperture lens when I use constant aperture lenses? That makes no sense.

Click to expand...

--
Alex

mmartel said:

Click to expand...

mmartel said:

I will grant a gracious thank you to Sigma, if you wish, for making the 60mm f2.8 lens for the rare folks like you who have found a welcome place for it in your kit.

Click to expand...

Yay!