Would we pay more for a tiny M4/3 body?

I can see the appeal you're making.

I used to be think I wanted the smallest body with the features I needed and was willing to run with a Nikon J5 for travel, video, and walkabout family shooting and D5100 for staged shots.

But what I concluded is that I really want one body and lens system with good image and video quality that can do it all in as compact size as possible without compromising the features and handling I care about most:

- EVF and tilt touchscreen

- hotshoe AND on body tiltable flash with at least 1/160s sync

- dual top control dials for manual mode shooting

- 2160p30 video

- Ibis

- good enough AF-C autofocus capability and deep buffer

- a grip or grip option sufficient for moderate f4-5.6 tele lenses (e.g. 100-300mm or 75-300mm) for a 1-2 hour shoot

- in body charging

I personally want one body that does it all and GX85/9 are closest for me right now in the market.

I'd pay more for weathersealing, a high res image mode, real pre-burst (a la G9), better evf, and better video autofocus.

But not for a smaller size than the GX85/9. Jacket pocket with small prime or 12-32mm zoom is fine for me. I have average size hands and don't really care about a smaller/lighter body. 400g is acceptable and small rangefinder with some built in grip with optional add-on grip works for me.

So, I'm sitting here with an EM1-II w/ Oly 12-100, PEN-F w/Grip w/PL 12-60, a PL 8-18 as a support lens and a GX850 w/PL 15mm.F1.7.

So, what's my favourite.. the GX850 w/PL 15mm F1.7.  It's a matter of how and what you shoot.  I think of myself as a contemplative photographer who shoots in A mode 95% of the time photographing landscape, architecture and street.

For my needs, a GX850 with an EVF as good as the PEN-F would be perfect. It's about our style, what we photograph the most and appropriat equipment that suits the needs.

Seriously, for my needs, a GX850 with a VF would be perfect. Your needs may vary.  Good thing is that we have choice. My perfect kit for what I do is the EM1-II/ Olympus 12-100, PL 8-18 and the GX850 (hopefully with a VF someday) w/PL 15mmF1.7.  Add the PL 50-200 someday for the long end.

We, as the m43 fans, are so fortunate with what is avalyaibe from simple street/architecture/landscape, to action, video to BIF. Happy camper to be in this system!!

For me, I simply can't use a small gm type body as anything but point and shoot. My hands are small but very clumsy.  The gx8 and g85 are as small as I can handle and make adjustments..

For pocketable, wide angle,, good light shooting with great HDR, I have my Samsung Galaxy S xxxx

StefanSC wrote:

In the grand scheme of things, it's not the bodies that add up the weight, it's the lenses.

Well, partly. But when using the small primes and zooms (I still consider the 12-40 to be a small lens) you are still stuck with "ridiculously" (relatively speaking) large up to date bodies à la G9. Luckily there is still the E-M5/10 line or the E-PLs or the Pen-F.

They just need an update ... a new GM and GX of course also would be interesting.

Regards

JakeJY wrote:

Tom Caldwell wrote:

To make a camera that matches the convenience of the 1-inch cameras, the lenses need to be designed to retract significantly into the body. Maybe this may become a possibility in the future with a global shutter sensor and elimination of the shutter mechanism. Then maybe a dedicated lens can be made that does that. But even in that case, I'm not sure how much more people would pay.

All retracting lens cameras tend to suffer form dust on sensor and of course are limited to the focal capabilities of their fixed lens. The fixed lens makes removing the dust outside a specialised repair shop nigh on impossible.

My idea actually is not a fixed lens camera, but rather an ILC.

I'm talking about a specially designed MFT lens that retracts into the body, using the space that would have been taken up by the shutter mechanism. Then maybe the section sticking out can be made half the thickness (roughly 0.5 inches thick) vs a 12-32mm or 14-42 PZ. Then a GM camera with such a lens attached would truly be pocketable.

An MFT lens that retracts into the camera body would simply cease to be an MFT mount lens. It would not anymore be compatible with other MFT cameras. It would have to be named an MMFT (mini micro) or NFT (nano four thirds) mount lens or anything else. With all consequences, such as a very low resale value, as it would only fit onto your fictive GM10 body. The one and only advantage that I can see over a completely new mount, would be that the whole range of MFT lenses would still fit onto such GM10.

No, if we start talking not 100% MFT compatible lenses, we may as well consider a new smaller mount altogether. But then, why not a new sensor format too. Something like a 1" sensor ILC. That would even make IBIS possible in a GM5 sized camera. These 1" point and shoot cameras are very popular and sell well, why not turn 1" into a proper ILS system. A system designed without compromises to be the smallest there is or ever was. Just fantasizing :). It may actually happen...... but unfortunately it will most likely be integrated into a phone.

I haven't been too keen on the small stuff. I prefer larger and even heavier, it's more comfortable to me. I also like fast glass and a heavier body balances better, maybe that's part of it. But I did find a reason to like a very tiny camera, front facing screens. Maybe video too.

When I do a lot of holding the camera out in front of me it will help to be smaller and lighter. Not what I would call my main camera but it's still worth having around. I just bought a GX850 specifically for the front facing screen, blogs or vlogs or whatever the kids call em now. It will work well for video too.

Can't say im too keen to spend a lot down the road on higher end options though, there's not much else they could tempt me with on a tiny model. I got the GX850 for just under $300 used so im definitely not in it for top end small bodies. But that's me, maybe others are.

I love my GM1/5, and I would be delighted if Panasonic upgrade the GM line.

But I seriously doubt it would sell well if the price is high.

As you rightly said, the perception that a real camera should be big is too strong among the public.

This perception has been reinforced with the smartphone wave. Many smartphones users who want to get serious with photography are looking for DSLR sized body, to feel a "real" upgrade.

Paying premium for smaller things is sadly not a trend in our consumer culture.

Panasonic tried, but it didn't worked well.

The fact that they're heading to FF monsters now is telling.

and the sensor is fantastic (20MP, very sensitive, very good colors).

The firmware has been improved several times, but in general autofocus and video not matching the current DFD and 4k models. No IBIS.

BUT - it is not only very small, it is also very cheap while not looking or handling cheap.

cba_melbourne wrote:

JakeJY wrote:

Tom Caldwell wrote:

To make a camera that matches the convenience of the 1-inch cameras, the lenses need to be designed to retract significantly into the body. Maybe this may become a possibility in the future with a global shutter sensor and elimination of the shutter mechanism. Then maybe a dedicated lens can be made that does that. But even in that case, I'm not sure how much more people would pay.

All retracting lens cameras tend to suffer form dust on sensor and of course are limited to the focal capabilities of their fixed lens. The fixed lens makes removing the dust outside a specialised repair shop nigh on impossible.

My idea actually is not a fixed lens camera, but rather an ILC.

I'm talking about a specially designed MFT lens that retracts into the body, using the space that would have been taken up by the shutter mechanism. Then maybe the section sticking out can be made half the thickness (roughly 0.5 inches thick) vs a 12-32mm or 14-42 PZ. Then a GM camera with such a lens attached would truly be pocketable.

An MFT lens that retracts into the camera body would simply cease to be an MFT mount lens. It would not anymore be compatible with other MFT cameras. It would have to be named an MMFT (mini micro) or NFT (nano four thirds) mount lens or anything else. With all consequences, such as a very low resale value, as it would only fit onto your fictive GM10 body. The one and only advantage that I can see over a completely new mount, would be that the whole range of MFT lenses would still fit onto such GM10.

Well it'll be a kit lens like the 12-32mm so resale value is largely irrelevant (lenses like that only sell for around $100-150 brand new unkitted). And the last point is exactly my point. The camera still works with all MFT lenses and it's still an ILC (a significant advantage vs 1-inch compacts).

The 12-32mm actually has a similar unique incompatibility in that it can't be manually focused other than with new Panasonic bodies (I believe it's the only MFT lens like this).

And if a sensor makes such a shutterless camera possible, I don't see why it can't be used in other cameras, so perhaps there would be cameras in other lines that can use the same lens (or other lenses designed in similar ways).

No, if we start talking not 100% MFT compatible lenses, we may as well consider a new smaller mount altogether. But then, why not a new sensor format too. Something like a 1" sensor ILC. That would even make IBIS possible in a GM5 sized camera. These 1" point and shoot cameras are very popular and sell well, why not turn 1" into a proper ILS system. A system designed without compromises to be the smallest there is or ever was. Just fantasizing :). It may actually happen...... but unfortunately it will most likely be integrated into a phone.

This sounds like a slippery slope argument. A new mount or new sensor format has a lot more other consequences than a dedicated lens.

Give me a 20mp sensor with 17mm built in and optimized lens. On a smart phone style body. Sleek with a large LCD and with all the aps and sharing we know and love on our smartphones. This will be my small travel everyday and family photo camera. It will sit next to a more serious camera in the bag .

Tom Caldwell wrote:

Pixnat2 wrote:

I love my GM1/5, and I would be delighted if Panasonic upgrade the GM line.

But I seriously doubt it would sell well if the price is high.

As you rightly said, the perception that a real camera should be big is too strong among the public.

This perception has been reinforced with the smartphone wave. Many smartphones users who want to get serious with photography are looking for DSLR sized body, to feel a "real" upgrade.

Paying premium for smaller things is sadly not a trend in our consumer culture.

Panasonic tried, but it didn't worked well.

The fact that they're heading to FF monsters now is telling.

Well said Frederic. I am glad I bought a few GM bodies when the going was good - I am happy.

But if M4/3 has no room for a quality version the smallest type that it can make and mount all M4/3 then I wonder if M4/3 is heading to box itself into a corner of ever larger, ever more sophisticated, and more expensive camera bodies. Then it stuggles to compete with low end FF camera bodies.

The reason I went for m43 myself wasn't so much for the bodies as for the lenses. Sure, an EM 1.2 is pretty much the same size (if not larger) than a FF Sony A7, but the lenses are much more compact. I have the PL 100-400 zoom, which few would perhaps describe as "small", but it's TINY compared to the monster that is an FF 800mm zoom.

Chris

Tom Caldwell wrote:

Pixnat2 wrote:

I love my GM1/5, and I would be delighted if Panasonic upgrade the GM line.

But I seriously doubt it would sell well if the price is high.

As you rightly said, the perception that a real camera should be big is too strong among the public.

This perception has been reinforced with the smartphone wave. Many smartphones users who want to get serious with photography are looking for DSLR sized body, to feel a "real" upgrade.

Paying premium for smaller things is sadly not a trend in our consumer culture.

Panasonic tried, but it didn't worked well.

The fact that they're heading to FF monsters now is telling.

Well said Frederic. I am glad I bought a few GM bodies when the going was good - I am happy.

Me too Tom, I keep them with great care

But if M4/3 has no room for a quality version the smallest type that it can make and mount all M4/3 then I wonder if M4/3 is heading to box itself into a corner of ever larger, ever more sophisticated, and more expensive camera bodies. Then it stuggles to compete with low end FF camera bodies.

Exactly. There's a lot of confusion presently, because it's diffcult to grasp which direction m4/3 is heading .

"Bigger" seems the trend for m4/3, while "smaller" seems the trend for FF.

Those d@mn smartphones have brought a lot of chaos in the photography market! Every camera makers seem to launch test products to evalutae if it could stop their market shares shrinking.

We live in a "trial" era, and it's hard to predict what will come out of it.

I am using the GM 1 since early 2012.  In the meantime I tried other similar  sized cameras like the E-PL 7 and RX 100 III as well as the D 750 (in a state of madness).

Well - they all came and went again but the GM 1 is a keeper.

It simjply delivers the best results in almost every light situation and it manages to works as a discret pocket camera as well as a system camera in my photobag.

As long as you are not doing sports photography or have a need for flash the GM 1 is the next to perfect small camera solution and I would buy it again instantly  if Pana would do a relaunch. GM 1 is the perfect M 43 camera and makes most sense of the system.

Cheers,

Tom

cba_melbourne wrote:

These 1" point and shoot cameras are very popular and sell well, why not turn 1" into a proper ILS system. A system designed without compromises to be the smallest there is or ever was. Just fantasizing :). It may actually happen...... but unfortunately it will most likely be integrated into a phone.

Nikon already tried, and failed.

StefanSC wrote:

This ain't gonna make me a lot of friends, but here we go:

In the grand scheme of things, it's not the bodies that add up the weight, it's the lenses.

And on this front, m43 has been missing the mark lately.

Agreed.

I had the GM5 + 12-32mm which made a super small combo, but just about any other lens and it became unwieldy. If I wanted something that small now I would buy the LX100 ii. However, I find the GX80 much easier to use (with the smaller lenses).