To much lens weight.

[Gato Amarillo]

I've used m43 from the beginning, something like 15 years now. Over that time I have bought, and sold, three full frame kits. Sony A99, Nikon D800, Sony A7r.

Judging from a print on the wall the improvement in image quality was tiny, and I have printed up to 30x40 in the last year or so. The cost in size, weight, and price of lenses to make the most of the FF sensors was daunting.

I admit I like the high MP sensors - they look great at 100% on the computer monitor - but that doesn't always translate to a better finished photo. And if I'm leaving the kit at home because it's more than I want to carry then there is no photo at all.

Gato

 

[j tokarz]

It wasn’t 1walk. My mind started to work a dozen walks ago . Last week was when I had had enough. It’s all gone now.

 

[j tokarz]

I’ve had them all. Last year I took some pictures in snowdonia, micro 43rds. Sony A7R3 and my Panasonic G9. Printed 40x30 inches. TO ME, in isolation. NO DIFFERENCE. That’s when my mind started to think of all the hype of full frame.

 

[Mackiesback]

I’ve had them all. Last year I took some pictures in snowdonia, micro 43rds. Sony A7R3 and my Panasonic G9. Printed 40x30 inches. TO ME, in isolation. NO DIFFERENCE. That’s when my mind started to think of all the hype of full frame.

Maybe we can drop the repeated use of the term "hype" when discussing full frame cameras. It reminds of people who can't say the word "mirrors without putting "flappy" in front of it.

Full frame has it's features and benefits, its pros and cons, just like all formats do. There are trade-offs with all formats, and everybody has a sweet spot. Shoot whatever makes you happy and don't worry about the rest. Its all good.

 

[BBbuilder467]

When hiking in rough terrain, it's the size and bulk that bothers me wore than weight.

The smaller the backpack, the easier it is to maneuver and maintain balance on rugged trails.

 

[j tokarz]

I don’t agree with you. To me and a lot of other people the word HYPE is a real word. I fall to see hardly any difference in picture quality, even when printed large. I swallowed all of the HYPE until I woke up to the present state of my mind. Each to his own.

 

[richj20]

n/t

 

[Dennis]

Did you ever wonder why, whenever people on DPR or reviews recommend to buy the biggest and most expensive camera and lens yet they never discuss the weight issue?

I figure it's probably the same reason why you're recommending m43 but not discussing the small sensor issue:

For the person recommending it, it's not an issue.

 

[tbcass]

No. For me no benefit with full frame. I don’t and never have pixel peeped. Noise doesn’t bother me. I go for content not straight lines and no noise pictures. For me micro 43rds is KING. I love my G9 , all its small lenses and great picture quality. I also have a Fuji X-H2 for when I walk around cities. FULL FRAME for ME is all hype.

Then I contend that a 1" sensor bridge camera like the Sony RX10iv is perfect for you. I own a 42mp FF camera but I rarely use it anymore since I bought an RX10iv.

 

[John Crowe]

I don't mind expending the energy to get the image quality that I want.

I once did a 7km/4 mile hike through a dense forest to an elevated vantage point with a 35mm, 4x5, and 6x6 cameras plus lenses, plus a heavy tripod. The results were worth it and I learned how the three formats compared.

I am down to one full frame DSLR and plan my outings so that I don't take all twelve lenses!

I have been photographing seriously for 40 years now and I have never understood the complaints about the weight of equipment. I suppose it is part and parcel of the immediate gratification and short attention spans promoted by society today.

 

[Bob A L]

You mean like light weight, lighter, smaller lenses, more dof, less expensive, super image quality, great colors, or what?

 

[sybersitizen]

I’ve had them all. Last year I took some pictures in snowdonia, micro 43rds. Sony A7R3 and my Panasonic G9. Printed 40x30 inches. TO ME, in isolation. NO DIFFERENCE. That’s when my mind started to think of all the hype of full frame.

Maybe we can drop the repeated use of the term "hype" when discussing full frame cameras.

It would be nice to drop it when discussing any cameras. The word 'hype' could be applied to anything that a particular person considers unimportant and overstated - including the size and weight reduction obtained with smaller formats. But the term isn't conducive to friendly conversation when differences of opinion exist.

 

[Bob A L]

Guess I'll have to look up the meaning of hype. But in line with what I always thought to be the meaning, FF fever and hype fit hand and hand.

 

[Fogel70]

Went for a long akward walk today. Armed with a FULL FRAME nikon and 3 lenses. When i got home i then sold ALL my full frame stuff. Just keeping my Panasonic G9 and armada of SMALL but lovely lenses. The wieght of the full frame stuff over trees logs rocks etc was too much. It spoilt my day. Its not the bodies, but the huge weighty long lenses. What do other people think of lens sizes and weight.

FF do not have to weight more than MFT.

I use a FF camera that is lighter than G9, and there are many small light FF lenses.

 

[Dennis]

You mean like light weight, lighter, smaller lenses, more dof, less expensive, super image quality, great colors, or what?

Oh, I keep forgetting, m43 delivers small, light, cheap cameras with no compromise!

And FF is all hype

 

[KENTGA]

I'll be 82 next week and 15 or more years ago I could hike with a Canon body plus extra lenses but a few years ago I bought my wife and I Sony RX 100 VI cameras and that's what I now use as a small walk around went i walk around. The Sony weighs 10 or 12 ounces. Great little cameras.

Kent

--
Here is a link to some of my travels since 2006. Feel free to comment.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/108062364@N04/albums
KENTGA = Kent from Georgia (metro Atlanta)

 

[Fogel70]

I'll be 82 next week and 15 or more years ago I could hike with a Canon body plus extra lenses but a few years ago I bought my wife and I Sony RX 100 VI cameras and that's what I now use as a small walk around went i walk around. The Sony weighs 10 or 12 ounces. Great little cameras.

Kent

I have a camera in my smartphone that do not add any extra weight at all. That is the low weight option for many people.

 

[PhotoTeach2]

On a flat walk, no problem. Floundering about over huge rocks and slippery paths with that heavy lot banging about. Had enough. Like I said. Camera bodies no problems. It’s the HUGE lenses that @@sed me off. Huge lens especially the monster Canon stuff. Just had enough. No fun with having sweat dripping off my chin. Each Ty hit own. This is just MY experience. Anyway, love the m43rds system.

But with either of your "systems" ... what do/did you have that could not be achieved with either the FZ1000-II or RX10-IV, (combined with Raynox 5072) to give a range between 12 and 600mm-EFL (extendable in-camera to 4800mm with digital-zoom) @ f/2.4-4 ???

 

[rsn]

One of the reasons the major manufactures switched over to mirrorless was because of weight. I have the Canon 5D mk4, no light weight camera itself, and the usual series of L lenses to support it.

About two weeks ago, I went shooting into our coastal forests here in BC armed with said camera, the 24mm f1.4 l ii lens and Godox flash. For the first hour and a half I wasn't bothered by the weight, after that I was.

Using my 5D mk 4 with the Sigma 150 - 600 sport lens is only a tripod affair.

But there are some advantages to weight as well.

1. Weight acts a stabilizer reducing camera/lens motion.

2. Being post chemotherapy, the weight reduces the shake in my hands acquired from chemotherapy.

I did purchase the Fuji X T1 for a rural project with the amazing small lenses available for it. And I did purchase the Fuji X 100f for street and travel photography, again appreciating the lightness of the camera compared to shooting street with my heavyweight camera and lens.

But you know, and I can't really explain this, I'm beginning to like the heavier equipment. I did go through a phase of not liking it. And I can't really explain why. I have immense respect for the Canon camera and the lenses I have acquired for it. Most of the lenses are substantial.

I don't know why but I like the feeling of holding something substantial, that the equipment has gone through evolutions of development. But overall I think the trend to smaller and lighter is a good thing.

 

[James Stirling]

Sell your G9 with the armada of lovely lenses and just use your phone. Then you'll really be mobile.

Yes, mobile with no camera.

I think you would need a very low end or very old mobile to have no camera on board

A M43 setup weights the same as a bottle of water or a smartphone with a portable battery pack.

That rather depends There are plenty of large heavy and expensive m43 options especially if you actually compare truly to equivalent lenses in other formats. Which many m43 users avoid doing like the plague .

Given the sensor size the E-M1X is comically large. Stick on any of the F/1.2 primes. You would need to be comparing it to a 2l bottle of water or a 1980's mobile phone

The Olympus 25mm F/1.2 does the same job { diagonal AOV, DOF/subject isolation and of course the most important same total light gathering } As a FF 50mm F/2.4 whilst there are plenty excellent F/1.8 50mm lenses most smaller lighter and cheaper than the Olympus lens. The closest to F/2.4 is the Sony 50mm F/2.5 .



The A7c is limited in features and holds little appeal for me . Unfortunately all the smaller m43 options are also limited in a number of ways, with lower level build quality and lesser feature sets. So every option is a compromise that damn perfect camera is as ever elusive

For those bemoaning the weight of FF gear there is the two stop difference between m43 and FF . The Sony 1" sensor cameras are genuinely tiny and the difference is only 1 stop between them and m43 and this advantage is often sacrificed as just with other formats the smallest m43 zoom lenses are slow

The smallest current m43 camera { I think } the E-M10 IV with the smallest m43 zoom the Panasonic 12-32mm F/3.5-5.6 . Next to the Sony RX100 V , which has an amazing feature set that outperforms the E-M10V in many areas from AF points to FPS . Though we have one and my wife loves it the handling is for me is woeful however it's 8.8-25.7mm F/1.8-2.8 does the same job { diagonal AOV, DOF/subject isolation and of course the most important same total light gathering } as a m43 12-35mm 2.4-3.8 , which negates any sensor size noise advantage . If size and weight is the absolute goal the Sony RX100 models are very difficult to beat.



I see you are one the "new" crop of m43 users who joined in the past month . Nice to see such enthusiasm for m43 in a new poster ;-)



--
Jim Stirling:
“It is one thing to show a man that he is in error, and another to put him in possession of truth.” Locke
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post