MFT vs Mirrorless

Started Apr 7, 2018 | Discussions
lds2k
OP lds2k Regular Member • Posts: 138
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless
3

richj20 wrote:

lds2k wrote:

Why go to a MFT when today's APC mirrorless camera body and lens combination are the same size or smaller than the current high performance MFT?

Hmmm... is there an APC system that reaches out to 800mm and weighs under 4 pounds?

- Richard

Richard, You almost made my point. I coincide that as lenses get faster the size and weight advantage of mirrorless vs APC disappears however,  you're still left with a larger sensor in the APC and I have always believed that sensor size rules.

-- hide signature --

lds

 lds2k's gear list:lds2k's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon 85mm F1.8G Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 25mm F1.8 +17 more
sbu Regular Member • Posts: 199
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless
1

lds2k wrote:

richj20 wrote:

lds2k wrote:

Why go to a MFT when today's APC mirrorless camera body and lens combination are the same size or smaller than the current high performance MFT?

Hmmm... is there an APC system that reaches out to 800mm and weighs under 4 pounds?

- Richard

Richard, You almost made my point. I coincide that as lenses get faster the size and weight advantage of mirrorless vs APC disappears however, you're still left with a larger sensor in the APC and I have always believed that sensor size rules.

Yes it’s mindblowing that others put handling, features and lens catalog before the ability to pixel peep at 100% magnification.

 sbu's gear list:sbu's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 25mm F1.8 Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 ASPH
lds2k
OP lds2k Regular Member • Posts: 138
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless
1

Donald B wrote:

I think you need to visit a camera shop to see side by side lens and then geat back to us with a realistic view , have you seen a canon 70 200 beside a oly 40 150 pro lens lately ?

Don

This threat is getting hard to follow the different thoughts and points... I said previously that I coincided that the advantage of lens size and weight were lost as lenses got faster and faster but when all is said and done you're still left with a bigger APC sensor in the camera and I believe that sensor size is the only thing that matters. That's why everyone who follows this stuff has one one on medium format as it begins to creep into the discussion with the new Hasselblad X1D.

-- hide signature --

lds

 lds2k's gear list:lds2k's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon 85mm F1.8G Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 25mm F1.8 +17 more
Martin.au
Martin.au Forum Pro • Posts: 13,248
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless
2

lds2k wrote:

Donald B wrote:

I think you need to visit a camera shop to see side by side lens and then geat back to us with a realistic view , have you seen a canon 70 200 beside a oly 40 150 pro lens lately ?

Don

This threat is getting hard to follow the different thoughts and points... I said previously that I coincided that the advantage of lens size and weight were lost as lenses got faster and faster but when all is said and done you're still left with a bigger APC sensor in the camera and I believe that sensor size is the only thing that matters. That's why everyone who follows this stuff has one one on medium format as it begins to creep into the discussion with the new Hasselblad X1D.

Rather than imagining what you want, why don't you simply grab the weights and sizes of a typical M4/3s kit, and an APS-C kit that gives you the advantage of the extra sensor size, and see what happens?

Here you go. I'll list my common travel kit.

E-M1 II

Pana 100-400 f4-6.3

Oly 9-18 f4-5.6

Oly 12-40 f2.8

60mm f2.8 macro

= 2.28 kg

Now, you put together an APS-C kit with something similar that can take advantage of the extra size of the APS-C sensor.

D50

200-500 f4-f6.3

12-24 f4-5.6

16 - 50 f2.8 (used 17-50 f2.8 )

80 mm f2.8 macro (used 70mm f2.8 )

= 3.9kg

Perhaps it's time to revisit your premise?

This may help with discussions on equivalence.

^^^ This graph plots the sizes and weights for a bunch of cameras showing the typical increase in size and weight per stop of IQ improvement.

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ +7 more
Astrotripper Veteran Member • Posts: 6,775
Another illustration
2

Another telling illustration.

MFT kits with telephoto lenses reaching 200mm equivalent or more - Panasonic only

The kits on the far left represent stuff that is not possible with current APS-C mirrorless systems.

The kits on the far right represent stuff that is only partly possible with Fuji, as neither Sony nor Canon have anything there.

And that's only half the choices you have, as this is Panasonic only.

 Astrotripper's gear list:Astrotripper's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM5 Olympus E-M1 II +17 more
Slaginfected Contributing Member • Posts: 514
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless

richj20 wrote:

lds2k wrote:

Why go to a MFT when today's APC mirrorless camera body and lens combination are the same size or smaller than the current high performance MFT?

Hmmm... is there an APC system that reaches out to 800mm and weighs under 4 pounds?

Make a trip to Japan and have a look at the cameras being carried around by the Japanese people. It is either some DSLR gear, usually the bigger stuff if, or some mirrorless, and then, believe it or not, in many cases Sony E / APS-C with small lenses. MFT can be seen, but I encountered it more often for example in Berlin than anywhere in Japan. I also have seen some serious Sony FE setups.

So if you stand there and ask whether your setup is possible with a different system: Possibly not. If you look at the whole picture, things are maybe not as relevant as you may think. That is also the reason why I think OP is right: Sony has quite the nice offerings, and cameras which give you decent quality while still fitting into the handbag are more than welcome. And no, it is not like MFT has nothing in that regard; I just noticed how things are. The why is something someone else has to answer for.

Thorgrem Contributing Member • Posts: 702
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless

Slaginfected wrote:

richj20 wrote:

lds2k wrote:

Why go to a MFT when today's APC mirrorless camera body and lens combination are the same size or smaller than the current high performance MFT?

Hmmm... is there an APC system that reaches out to 800mm and weighs under 4 pounds?

Make a trip to Japan and have a look at the cameras being carried around by the Japanese people. It is either some DSLR gear, usually the bigger stuff if, or some mirrorless, and then, believe it or not, in many cases Sony E / APS-C with small lenses. MFT can be seen, but I encountered it more often for example in Berlin than anywhere in Japan. I also have seen some serious Sony FE setups.

So if you stand there and ask whether your setup is possible with a different system: Possibly not. If you look at the whole picture, things are maybe not as relevant as you may think. That is also the reason why I think OP is right: Sony has quite the nice offerings, and cameras which give you decent quality while still fitting into the handbag are more than welcome. And no, it is not like MFT has nothing in that regard; I just noticed how things are. The why is something someone else has to answer for.

Just for fun you should go and find the sales of mirror less in Japan. Year after year Olympus outsales Sony

 Thorgrem's gear list:Thorgrem's gear list
Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm 1:1.8 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8
richj20 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,043
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless
1

lds2k wrote:

richj20 wrote:

lds2k wrote:

Why go to a MFT when today's APC mirrorless camera body and lens combination are the same size or smaller than the current high performance MFT?

Hmmm... is there an APC system that reaches out to 800mm and weighs under 4 pounds?

- Richard

Richard, You almost made my point. I coincide that as lenses get faster the size and weight advantage of mirrorless vs APC disappears however, you're still left with a larger sensor in the APC and I have always believed that sensor size rules.

I agree completely, and were it not for the size/weight factor, I would use one of the big Sigma Zooms on my Sony -- one reason being to provide more cropping room with the larger sensor.

However, as long as I can get fairly close to wildlife I am not dissatisfied with the resolution of the smaller sensor.

- Richard

-- hide signature --
 richj20's gear list:richj20's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Leica 100-400mm F4.0-6.3 ASPH Sony a7R II
lds2k
OP lds2k Regular Member • Posts: 138
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless

Thorgrem wrote:

Slaginfected wrote:

richj20 wrote:

lds2k wrote:

Why go to a MFT when today's APC mirrorless camera body and lens combination are the same size or smaller than the current high performance MFT?

Hmmm... is there an APC system that reaches out to 800mm and weighs under 4 pounds?

Make a trip to Japan and have a look at the cameras being carried around by the Japanese people. It is either some DSLR gear, usually the bigger stuff if, or some mirrorless, and then, believe it or not, in many cases Sony E / APS-C with small lenses. MFT can be seen, but I encountered it more often for example in Berlin than anywhere in Japan. I also have seen some serious Sony FE setups.

So if you stand there and ask whether your setup is possible with a different system: Possibly not. If you look at the whole picture, things are maybe not as relevant as you may think. That is also the reason why I think OP is right: Sony has quite the nice offerings, and cameras which give you decent quality while still fitting into the handbag are more than welcome. And no, it is not like MFT has nothing in that regard; I just noticed how things are. The why is something someone else has to answer for.

Just for fun you should go and find the sales of mirror less in Japan. Year after year Olympus outsales Sony

You just made  left turn in the discussion. I wasn't thinking about the business side of things although I suppose my question did imply the potential end of life of MFT.

-- hide signature --

lds

 lds2k's gear list:lds2k's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon 85mm F1.8G Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 25mm F1.8 +17 more
alcelc
alcelc Forum Pro • Posts: 10,680
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless

lds2k wrote:

richj20 wrote:

lds2k wrote:

Why go to a MFT when today's APC mirrorless camera body and lens combination are the same size or smaller than the current high performance MFT?

Hmmm... is there an APC system that reaches out to 800mm and weighs under 4 pounds?

- Richard

Richard, You almost made my point. I coincide that as lenses get faster the size and weight advantage of mirrorless vs APC disappears however, you're still left with a larger sensor in the APC and I have always believed that sensor size rules.

I suppose you noted that Panasonic's 100-400 be the largest and heaviest lens of M43?

If taking the similar reach, I think the following might be a better representation on the size of the M43 vs APSC mirrorless system:

Panasonic GX8 & 100-300 f/4-5.6 (Eq AoV of 200-600 to FF)

Sony A6500 & 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 (eq AoV of 150-600 to FF)

Fuji XT-2 & 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 (eq AoV of 150-600 to FF)

BTW, GX8 is an exceptionally larger size camera in M43's standard (before the G9...). I suppose a G85 might see an overall smaller package than GX8.

In terms of weight, yes some higher end M43 can be similar or even heavier/larger than those of APSC (a reason for Sony can't get rid of the 4K overheating issue?).

e.g. GX8 is 487g, A6500 is 453g and XT-2 is 507g.

However, the size and weight advantage is on the lens because we can't trick the law of physics much.

Panasonic 100-400 is 985g. 100-300 f/4-5.6 is 520g.

Sony 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 is 1395g whereas Fuji 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 is 1375g...

-- hide signature --

Albert

 alcelc's gear list:alcelc's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS +9 more
Mark9473 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,727
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless
4

lds2k wrote:

I believe that sensor size is the only thing that matters.

Good for you, you know what to do then. Why then did you start this thread? It shouldn't matter to you what other people choose, nor should we care about your choice.

That's why everyone who follows this stuff has one one on medium format as it begins to creep into the discussion with the new Hasselblad X1D.

Everyone? It would be better if you just spoke about yourself.

-- hide signature --

Mark

 Mark9473's gear list:Mark9473's gear list
Canon G1 X II Panasonic Lumix DMC-G6 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Panasonic G85 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +21 more
dougjgreen1 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,068
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless
1

alcelc wrote:

I suppose you noted that Panasonic's 100-400 be the largest and heaviest lens of M43?

Albert

It's nowhere near the largest and heaviest M43 lens.  The Olympus 300mm f4 is much larger and heavier.

 dougjgreen1's gear list:dougjgreen1's gear list
Olympus Stylus XZ-10 Nikon 1 V2 Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-PL7 +17 more
sbu Regular Member • Posts: 199
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless
4

Mark9473 wrote:

lds2k wrote:

I believe that sensor size is the only thing that matters.

Good for you, you know what to do then. Why then did you start this thread? It shouldn't matter to you what other people choose, nor should we care about your choice.

That's why everyone who follows this stuff has one one on medium format as it begins to creep into the discussion with the new Hasselblad X1D.

Everyone? It would be better if you just spoke about yourself.

This thread is obviously a camoflaged trolling attempt. OP hasn’t even posted any of his work to illustrate why he needs big sensor. It’s probably all spec sheet driven debating.

 sbu's gear list:sbu's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 25mm F1.8 Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 15mm F1.7 ASPH
lds2k
OP lds2k Regular Member • Posts: 138
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless
1

Mark9473 wrote:

lds2k wrote:

I believe that sensor size is the only thing that matters.

Good for you, you know what to do then. Why then did you start this thread? It shouldn't matter to you what other people choose, nor should we care about your choice.

I started this thread because I use several different cameras and for a long time MFT was part of that. Now I'm not sure what the fate of MFT is and I wanted to know what you thought

That's why everyone who follows this stuff has one one on medium format as it begins to creep into the discussion with the new Hasselblad X1D.

Everyone? It would be better if you just spoke about yourself.

-- hide signature --

Mark

-- hide signature --

lds

 lds2k's gear list:lds2k's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon 85mm F1.8G Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 25mm F1.8 +17 more
Martin.au
Martin.au Forum Pro • Posts: 13,248
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless
2

lds2k wrote:

Mark9473 wrote:

lds2k wrote:

I believe that sensor size is the only thing that matters.

Good for you, you know what to do then. Why then did you start this thread? It shouldn't matter to you what other people choose, nor should we care about your choice.

I started this thread because I use several different cameras and for a long time MFT was part of that. Now I'm not sure what the fate of MFT is and I wanted to know what you thought

I think you’re ignoring posts that refute your claims.

 Martin.au's gear list:Martin.au's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-50mm 1:3.5-6.3 EZ +7 more
Mark9473 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,727
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless

lds2k wrote:

Mark9473 wrote:

lds2k wrote:

I believe that sensor size is the only thing that matters.

Good for you, you know what to do then. Why then did you start this thread? It shouldn't matter to you what other people choose, nor should we care about your choice.

I started this thread because I use several different cameras and for a long time MFT was part of that. Now I'm not sure what the fate of MFT is and I wanted to know what you thought

I am very certain that every digital camera on the market today will be obsolete and/or defective 15 years from now. MFT shares that fate with all others.

-- hide signature --

Mark

 Mark9473's gear list:Mark9473's gear list
Canon G1 X II Panasonic Lumix DMC-G6 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Panasonic G85 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +21 more
sybersitizen Forum Pro • Posts: 12,410
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless

lds2k wrote:

I started this thread because I use several different cameras and for a long time MFT was part of that. Now I'm not sure what the fate of MFT is ...

What are you sure of?

and I wanted to know what you thought

I personally have no thoughts on that at all ... but if I wanted what MFT specifically offers, I would buy it and use it regardless of other people's opinions.

007peter
007peter Forum Pro • Posts: 12,190
Rise of Fuji X + Sony = is because M43 unable to answer that question
5

Woo, your valid question is going to raise a butt load of hurt feeling here 😈😯😯😯

M43 makes most sense when it stay Small & Beautiful, at affordable price.

But when M43 started to chase after Expensive Pro marker with LARGER & HEAVIER Body, it has essentially given up on its unique selling points and also its reasons to exist.

If I want BIG, its cheaper to stick with DSLR.

If I want the PRO LOOK, Canon & Nikon DSLR has the most "PRO" credentials.

When I examine the physical difference between $2000 Pro mirrorless market, Sony A7 III is smaller than both APS-C Fuji H1, Panasonic Gh5 and Gh5s yet offering superior Lowlights and Dynamic Range smaller sensor can't match.

I see the rise if Fuji X System & Sony A6xxx (to a lesser extend) as M43 ability to answer your questions. There is obviously a large amount of people not sold on the M43 Cool aids

nevada5
nevada5 Forum Pro • Posts: 13,095
Re: Rise of Fuji X + Sony = is because M43 unable to answer that question
3

007peter wrote:

Woo, your valid question is going to raise a butt load of hurt feeling here 😈😯😯😯

M43 makes most sense when it stay Small & Beautiful, at affordable price.

But when M43 started to chase after Expensive Pro marker with LARGER & HEAVIER Body, it has essentially given up on its unique selling points and also its reasons to exist.

If I want BIG, its cheaper to stick with DSLR.

If I want the PRO LOOK, Canon & Nikon DSLR has the most "PRO" credentials.

When I examine the physical difference between $2000 Pro mirrorless market, Sony A7 III is smaller than both APS-C Fuji H1, Panasonic Gh5 and Gh5s yet offering superior Lowlights and Dynamic Range smaller sensor can't match.

I see the rise if Fuji X System & Sony A6xxx (to a lesser extend) as M43 ability to answer your questions. There is obviously a large amount of people not sold on the M43 Cool aids

Yeah I'm one in that small amount of people who is sold on the M43 Cool aids.

What do you suggest I do?

-- hide signature --

Stay thirsty, my friends.
I got some batteries that were given out free of charge.
I’m reading a book about anti-gravity. I just can’t put it down.

 nevada5's gear list:nevada5's gear list
Sony RX100 II Canon PowerShot S120 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 II ASPH Mega OIS +4 more
n3eg
n3eg Senior Member • Posts: 2,391
Re: MFT vs Mirrorless
2

My reasons for MFT over FF Mirrorless:

Lenses are smaller in diameter to cover a smaller image circle

Lenses are shorter for the same reach and FOV

Larger lenses are adaptable down to MFT, the reverse is not possible

Camera size, if you're not using a pro model MFT camera

IBIS is easier to achieve as the sensor size decreases

Total system weight is less

One-handed shooting is easier

Smaller front elements on lenses = cheaper filters, easier to point through fences/slots

I've used this format since it was called 110 film

(Just a few...)

-- hide signature --

It ain't easy being me, but someone's gotta do it.

 n3eg's gear list:n3eg's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Kodak Pixpro S-1 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 25mm F1.8 +59 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads