Help with Micro 4/3 lens and mounts

Aquaholic wrote:

Even though I have somewhat recently purchased a used GH4 for some video work, I am still a bit confused on what lenses will work with what manufacturers. I am considering buying the Panasonic Leica 8-18mm f/2.8-4 ASPH but I am also toying with the idea of getting the new Sony a7 III. This is a full frame camera so will the Leica 8-18mm still work on it or do I need another Sony equivalent lens? Still trying to figure out the mount system with micro 4/3.

m4/3 lenses (in general, that is Olympus and Panasonic, and some other manufacturers) are not at all compatible with Sony cameras (and why would you think they might be?)

However, a wide range of lens can be adapted to m4/3, and a smaller subset of those can be adapted and retain pretty much full functionality with the right adapter.

For example, just about any legacy and fully manually operated lens made in the past 60+ years can likely be made to work with m4/3 cameras, and some of these lenses are of particular interest to videographers.

The same is true, to a degree, with adapting lenses to Sony.

However, native lenses from Sony and m4/3 are not physically compatible for a range of reasons ranging from the electronics connections and communications, the flange distance and the image circle and sensor size.

hindesite, I was under the impression that the Sony camera was also a micro 4/3. Not sure where I got that but just thought it was. Guess cause it was mirrorless and not referred to as a DSLR I defaulted to Micro 4/3. Seems like I heard that Sony had fit a full frame sensor into a micro 4/3 camera. But now that I say it out loud you are right, why would I think that.

So mirrorless is not necessarily micro 4/3 and visa versa I guess.

Old fart coming over from DSLR I guess. Still learning.

Many thanks,
Houston

Aquaholic wrote:

hindesite, I was under the impression that the Sony camera was also a micro 4/3. Not sure where I got that but just thought it was. Guess cause it was mirrorless and not referred to as a DSLR I defaulted to Micro 4/3. Seems like I heard that Sony had fit a full frame sensor into a micro 4/3 camera. But now that I say it out loud you are right, why would I think that.

So mirrorless is not necessarily micro 4/3 and visa versa I guess.

Mirrorless is a whole range of cameras that do not use that flippy mirror thing.

Olympus and Panasonic pioneered that system camera design with the 4/3 inch size sensor. Sony variously use FF and APS-C sized sensors with totally different mount design and distance from mount to sensor. Other makers like Canon also have her own ideas that also make them incompatible with the vast range of M4/3 bodies and  lenses available.

M4/3 was designed from ground up to be a digital camera system, the rest seem to be coming at it with various constrictive overheads it seems.

Basically M4/3 is only M4/3 and the other makers have other names for their offerings.

Regards.............Guy

Old fart coming over from DSLR I guess. Still learning.

Many thanks,
Houston

Guy Parsons wrote:

Mirrorless is a whole range of cameras that do not use that flippy mirror thing.

Olympus and Panasonic pioneered that system camera design with the 4/3 inch size sensor. Sony variously use FF and APS-C sized sensors with totally different mount design and distance from mount to sensor. Other makers like Canon also have her own ideas that also make them incompatible with the vast range of M4/3 bodies and lenses available.

M4/3 was designed from ground up to be a digital camera system, the rest seem to be coming at it with various constrictive overheads it seems.

Basically M4/3 is only M4/3 and the other makers have other names for their offerings.

Regards.............Guy

Guy,

Thank you for the very nicely layman's explanation of the M4/3 format.

Many thanks,
Houston

gary0319 wrote:

Others have already addressed the incompatibility of the Sony body/ m43 lens situation. My question is why you are considering an A7iii full frame....for stills shooting, for travel?

Between Olympus and Panasonic, the Micro 4/3 family must have over 20 bodies, and almost 100 lenses to choose from. What is the allure of the A7iii? Just curious.

That is a good question Gary. More than likely it is not for the best reasons as it pertains to the numbers, but more because of a gut feeling. The real truth of the matter is that in today's digital world, all the equipment, be it lenses, bodies, lights, and accessories that are within the same class, are all a good choice. It really comes down to what YOU feel the best about when it comes down to laying down the cash. Because have no fear, next year, there will be something better.

Not sure if that answers your question but it is the best I have, at least for now.

Many thanks,
Houston

Aquaholic wrote:

hindesite, I was under the impression that the Sony camera was also a micro 4/3. Not sure where I got that but just thought it was.

No, Sony are definitely not m4/3 - one small part of the m4/3 standard is the smaller-than-APSC 4/3 sensor size, which dates back to Olympus (and Panasonic) DSLR days.

These guys (along with Kodak) took a huge bet that these small sensors would improve dramatically over the years after their launch, and they sure got that right. Their second bet was that live view would work, and then EVFs really changed the game. Now they are working on AF, which still needs some improvement.

Ironically, in early 35mm film days Olympus developed half frame film cameras (size was important to them, and their main market, even back then). This was actively killed by Kodak vetoing the idea and refusing to make film available.

Guess cause it was mirrorless and not referred to as a DSLR I defaulted to Micro 4/3. Seems like I heard that Sony had fit a full frame sensor into a micro 4/3 camera.

Can't be done. Seems that threads here suggesting such will be locked (at least, the last one I saw was) - though I guess locking is better than disappearing the whole thread.

But now that I say it out loud you are right, why would I think that.

So mirrorless is not necessarily micro 4/3 and visa versa I guess.

Not quite - m4/3 is ALWAYS mirrorless. Canon and Nikon also make mirrorless, but they seem to be deliberately avoiding shaking up their market until it is forced on them - which might be too late for Nikon, I'm sure Canon will be fine once everybody thinks Canon invented it (even though it has been around for 10 years now).

Old fart coming over from DSLR I guess. Still learning.

Well, going back to DSLRs, there is zero compatibility between brands (and in the early days these guys went to extreme lengths to ensure this, even changing the bayonet and focus and zoom rotation direction.

What has really set m4/3 apart is that there are 2 manufacturers (and others) using the same lens mount, the effect on development has been huge. Compare that to the glacial pace of innovation in the DSLR space.

I jumped on m4/3 in the very early days, and still have the first two m.zuiko lenses and the body they came with. I now have a huge collection of very inexpensive (many free) lenses from most manufacturers and going back 60 years which I regularly use with my m4/3 bodies.