Full-Frame, what am I missing?

[ikolbyi]

As someone who is heavily invested in both MFT (OMS & Panny) and FF (Panny), I wanted to share an image of the two systems side-by-side for those who continuously discuss MFT & FF systems as if MFT is now a cancer or dead system (my interpretation on this forum commentary).

The grass is not necessarily greener on the other (FF) side, it all comes down to how you use the system and what you are trying to photograph.

The below sample is of a static image with natural lighting. Something I saw in my yard after a heavy rainstorm so I brought out both cameras for a quick and dirty comparison. I am noting now the setting are different between the cameras because the systems are different. Different focus distances, lenses, sensors, etc .... but I tried my best to make the image comparison identical. Images processed through DXO v7.






Lumix G9.2




Lumix S1R.2



Which one do you prefer?

 

[Bobapingu]

that we must constantly question whether m4/3 is good enough ...

Along with endless m43 vs FF posts started by m43 users typically with skewed "testing " . Who then take offence when corrected , not this OP . m43 sensor size is much closer to 1" sensors or APS than FF though the same folk take offence when this is pointed out

This is this forums version of navel gazing…..which generally digresses similarly to comparison of the size other anatomical parts residing below the navel.

I think the whole thread is odd as there is no one who would seriously suggest M43 IQ is as good as APS-C - never mind FF.

M43 is fine for some usage though I am sure.

I rest my case…

You've on fire tonight, Gary.

 

[Jorginho]

All I am saying is that when I shot these side by side I saw the EM1.2 being a bit better with Hires mode. There seems to be a reluctance to accept here that pixelshift overcomes the downside of a smaller sensor. There is I think ample evidence for that with good reason, but of course the huge downside is that nothing can move in the frame so it is restricted to landscapes where nothing moves, stilllife that kind a stuff. And I think that was the subject here.

D800E bs EM1.2 etc...the northrups showed a similar outcome with an Om1 vs a modern FF cam jsut 2 yrs ago and it simply makes sense.

 

[Jorginho]

To each their own. I could directly compare the D800e with the EM1.2 and the EM1.2 in situation where it could was a bit better than the D800e. Which to this day is a very solid FF sensor I think. I do expect the G9.2 to outclass my Em1.2 in pixelshift mode but may be it is not too significant.

There is no image quality criteria where any m43 camera does better than the D800e sensor, not DR , not noise, not colour depth . From a technological angle of course things are very different but not image quality.



For the believers in miracles who think the OM-1 sensor was a huge jump over previous m43 sensors ( it wasn't )

With pixelshift it does! Of course. You shift it for blue red and green. SO true colours. You add another four shots to double the resolution without adding noise.

I do not believe in any miracle, I took the D800E to Scotland for landscape shooting in 2015 for a reason!

 

[Jorginho]

To each their own. I could directly compare the D800e with the EM1.2 and the EM1.2 in situation where it could was a bit better than the D800e. Which to this day is a very solid FF sensor I think. I do expect the G9.2 to outclass my Em1.2 in pixelshift mode but may be it is not too significant.

This Nikon was launched 13 years ago. We need to compare current M43 with current FF or APS -C

There seems to be a great reluctance in this forum to accept that bigger, higher-resolution sensors offer better IQ.

This is basic physics I am afraid.

It can be argued that M43 is sufficient for a lot of uses and has the benefit of lower weight and smaller size however.

This is more correct: most people don’t need the benefits of a modern FF sensor and MFT is more than capable for 90% of their needs.

It appears that 10% who do require a FF are the loudest vocal.

For me turning point was the Em1.2 mostly. I always shot mFT ever since my G1 in 2008. But there was a clear gap between it and even APS-c. But mFt soon after 2008 was to my mind the only viable mirrorless system because of the lens selection. With the EPL5 a clearly better SOny sensor entered the scene, with the Gh4 it retained that IQ but in a much better camera and in the EM1.2 I could see another step up. That is where, to me, I no longer needed a FF cam at all. FF was better, but Em1.2 IQ was (and to this day is) good enough for me. Like I said before, I am the limiting factor.

I am eyeballing a G9MarkII also because of the much better video (butmy GH4 still serves me well here) and better dynamic range, better AF etc. But EM1.2 has served me well for 8,5 yrs now and does to this day.

 

[jjbinx]

To each their own. I could directly compare the D800e with the EM1.2 and the EM1.2 in situation where it could was a bit better than the D800e. Which to this day is a very solid FF sensor I think. I do expect the G9.2 to outclass my Em1.2 in pixelshift mode but may be it is not too significant.

This Nikon was launched 13 years ago. We need to compare current M43 with current FF or APS -C

There seems to be a great reluctance in this forum to accept that bigger, higher-resolution sensors offer better IQ.

This is basic physics I am afraid.

It can be argued that M43 is sufficient for a lot of uses and has the benefit of lower weight and smaller size however.

This is more correct: most people don’t need the benefits of a modern FF sensor and MFT is more than capable for 90% of their needs.

It appears that 10% who do require a FF are the loudest vocal.

And you’re certain that those 90% need the benefits of a modern m4/3 sensor :-D

jj

 

[James Stirling]

To each their own. I could directly compare the D800e with the EM1.2 and the EM1.2 in situation where it could was a bit better than the D800e. Which to this day is a very solid FF sensor I think. I do expect the G9.2 to outclass my Em1.2 in pixelshift mode but may be it is not too significant.

There is no image quality criteria where any m43 camera does better than the D800e sensor, not DR , not noise, not colour depth . From a technological angle of course things are very different but not image quality.



For the believers in miracles who think the OM-1 sensor was a huge jump over previous m43 sensors ( it wasn't )

With pixelshift it does! Of course. You shift it for blue red and green. SO true colours. You add another four shots to double the resolution without adding noise.

Pixel shift is limited in its use case due to the constraints of movement and is of course a composite of multiple shots even modest movement negates the use of it.

You can largely emulate the effect by shooting multiple images and processing them in post , though a lot less convenient

Super resolution - Photoshop’s image stacking technique

News, Photo, Photo Tutorials - Super resolution – The tour de force of image stacks - Discover our photo programs from 5 months to 2 years (Paris & Biarritz)

speos-photo.com

I do not believe in any miracle, I took the D800E to Scotland for landscape shooting in 2015 for a reason!

Sorry, I appreciate that you are a fair poster and understand what is going on, alas there are no shortage of folk here who make all kinds of daft claims

--
Jim Stirling:
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." - Thomas Paine
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post

 

[Asherax]

After reading this thread it seems clear that I need to immediately sell all my MFT camera gear and just buy an IPhone and be done with it.

--
Photography is poetry made visible; it is the art of painting with light!

 

[ahaslett]

After reading this thread it seems clear that I need to immediately sell all my MFT camera gear and just buy an IPhone and be done with it.

Have a look at the original images and ask what they tell you about what you shoot.


Camera not relevant, but I had it with me

If a phone meets all your needs, you should. I take pictures with mine.

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

 

[James Stirling]

Understood CEX to offer a two year warranty?

I was taken aback when they altered it to 5years sometime in 2024. When it was 2 years I purchased a fair amount from them 2015-2020.

Now it's 5 years warranty it's where look first for used cameras lenses, thereafter lce, mpb, park, wex.

Interesting! That's extraordinary

It is isn't it.

and hope they don't quibble too much if there is an issue.

When it was 2 years warranty I returned in any of their stores in person within 14 days of purchasing online. I always purchased online so I'd have 14days to return. If I purchase in store from their 200 stores it's only 2days to return.

I returned something like 50 items to them (from near 300 items I purchased 2015-2020). They always test the return can take upto 4hours. My reason : wasn't what I wanted. Then after testing they refunded straightaway to the way I paid online.

Reckon with 5years warranty should be same. Picked up this year 10-20mm Sigma and Viltrox X0.71 for m4/3 from them 5 years warranty.

It is a site I have never thought to look at, who new searching for cex online could be so rewarding

 

[ikolbyi]

To each their own. I could directly compare the D800e with the EM1.2 and the EM1.2 in situation where it could was a bit better than the D800e. Which to this day is a very solid FF sensor I think. I do expect the G9.2 to outclass my Em1.2 in pixelshift mode but may be it is not too significant.

This Nikon was launched 13 years ago. We need to compare current M43 with current FF or APS -C

There seems to be a great reluctance in this forum to accept that bigger, higher-resolution sensors offer better IQ.

This is basic physics I am afraid.

It can be argued that M43 is sufficient for a lot of uses and has the benefit of lower weight and smaller size however.

This is more correct: most people don’t need the benefits of a modern FF sensor and MFT is more than capable for 90% of their needs.

It appears that 10% who do require a FF are the loudest vocal.

For me turning point was the Em1.2 mostly. I always shot mFT ever since my G1 in 2008. But there was a clear gap between it and even APS-c. But mFt soon after 2008 was to my mind the only viable mirrorless system because of the lens selection. With the EPL5 a clearly better SOny sensor entered the scene, with the Gh4 it retained that IQ but in a much better camera and in the EM1.2 I could see another step up. That is where, to me, I no longer needed a FF cam at all. FF was better, but Em1.2 IQ was (and to this day is) good enough for me. Like I said before, I am the limiting factor.

I am eyeballing a G9MarkII also because of the much better video (butmy GH4 still serves me well here) and better dynamic range, better AF etc. But EM1.2 has served me well for 8,5 yrs now and does to this day.

Of all the cameras I have used/owned, the EM1.3 was my favorite. It has 1 “flaw”, ISO performance (for my use). The OM-1 fixes that issue but I prefer the body of the EM1.3.

I find the larger LUMIX G9.2 & S1R.2 more comfortable to use over my OM-1 despite being physically larger and heavier.
If OM returned to the EM1.3 body style with a 25mp stacked sensor, I could easily reduce the number of cameras I own down to 2.

 

[nikonzednaikonzee]

As someone who is heavily invested in both MFT (OMS & Panny) and FF (Panny), I wanted to share an image of the two systems side-by-side for those who continuously discuss MFT & FF systems as if MFT is now a cancer or dead system (my interpretation on this forum commentary).

The grass is not necessarily greener on the other (FF) side, it all comes down to how you use the system and what you are trying to photograph.

The below sample is of a static image with natural lighting. Something I saw in my yard after a heavy rainstorm so I brought out both cameras for a quick and dirty comparison. I am noting now the setting are different between the cameras because the systems are different. Different focus distances, lenses, sensors, etc .... but I tried my best to make the image comparison identical. Images processed through DXO v7.


Lumix G9.2


Lumix S1R.2

Which one do you prefer?

truth is these images are as good as each other, they depict the same mushroom shot in the same way. the mushroom is in acceptable focus and in both images there is a pleasing fall in focus framing the fungus at its base.

cameras are tools to do a job, in this case it turns out 2 different tools give you similar results.

both images tell the same story, both images have pleasing colours. niether image is stronger than the other in any meaningful way.

this is not a criticism. you have demonstrated very well that the only people that can appreciate a meaningful difference care nothing about images and all about numbers and specs.

--
In lots of ways good photography is similar to learning to play a piano - you can master both in an evening in Havana if you drink too many Piña Coladas.

 

[ChallengerLastCall]

that we must constantly question whether m4/3 is good enough ...

Along with endless m43 vs FF posts started by m43 users typically with skewed "testing " . Who then take offence when corrected , not this OP . m43 sensor size is much closer to 1" sensors or APS than FF though the same folk take offence when this is pointed out

This is this forums version of navel gazing…..which generally digresses similarly to comparison of the size other anatomical parts residing below the navel.

I think the whole thread is odd as there is no one who would seriously suggest M43 IQ is as good as APS-C - never mind FF.

M43 is fine for some usage though I am sure.

Just as I am sure no one would seriously suggest FF is as good as Medium Format, but I suppose it’s got its uses for some.

 

[ChallengerLastCall]

After reading this thread it seems clear that I need to immediately sell all my MFT camera gear and just buy an IPhone and be done with it.

Agreed.

Every time one of these threads pops up several questions come to me. I wonder if as many medium format users go to FF forums to tell them how useless and inconsequential their cameras are?

Second, 99.99998 percent (yes, I made that up) of the photo shooting public, you know, those cell phone users, can’t tell the difference between a cellphone photo and a medium format one, yet we keep having this same debate, repeatedly.

Yes, FF can do more and provide better image quality in certain circumstances, but for most people, they don’t care. That extra 10 percent is unimportant to them.



I just wish the constant comparisons and attacks would stop, they do none of us any good.

 

[ikolbyi]

Too many focus on technology or specifications.

Photography is all about the subject and the story the image tells. Everything else is a tool and how one uses the tool to tell that subject's story.

When I read commentary about people saying xyz can do this and abc can't do that, they lost the meaning of why one photographs a subject.

 

[jjbinx]

Too many focus on technology or specifications.

Photography is all about the subject and the story the image tells. Everything else is a tool and how one uses the tool to tell that subject's story.

When I read commentary about people saying xyz can do this and abc can't do that, they lost the meaning of why one photographs a subject.

What story were you trying to tell with your sample images ?

jj

 

[ikolbyi]

After reading this thread it seems clear that I need to immediately sell all my MFT camera gear and just buy an IPhone and be done with it.

Agreed.

Every time one of these threads pops up several questions come to me. I wonder if as many medium format users go to FF forums to tell them how useless and inconsequential their cameras are?

Fuji GFX 100s: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65613253

Followed by: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65792530

Second, 99.99998 percent (yes, I made that up) of the photo shooting public, you know, those cell phone users, can’t tell the difference between a cellphone photo and a medium format one, yet we keep having this same debate, repeatedly.

Yes, FF can do more and provide better image quality in certain circumstances, but for most people, they don’t care. That extra 10 percent is unimportant to them.

I just wish the constant comparisons and attacks would stop, they do none of us any good.

 

[ikolbyi]

Too many focus on technology or specifications.

Photography is all about the subject and the story the image tells. Everything else is a tool and how one uses the tool to tell that subject's story.

When I read commentary about people saying xyz can do this and abc can't do that, they lost the meaning of why one photographs a subject.

What story were you trying to tell with your sample images ?

jj

The differences between the images are subtle and most non-photogrphers (the consumers) couldn't even tell a difference other than the background. And even there, it was overwhelmingly in favor of MFT ironically.

We the photography community are focusing too much on gear instead of mastering what we own.

 

[nikonzednaikonzee]

Too many focus on technology or specifications.

Photography is all about the subject and the story the image tells. Everything else is a tool and how one uses the tool to tell that subject's story.

When I read commentary about people saying xyz can do this and abc can't do that, they lost the meaning of why one photographs a subject.

What story were you trying to tell with your sample images ?

jj

whether he was trying to tell a story or not, mushrooms are quite transient on this earth and the pictures capture a moment in time of the fungus development. They also tell is that these shrooms grow in twigs. We can get the impression of the countryside perhaps in autumn and after some rain maybe- some people might think these mushrooms like a wet ground.

plenty of inference and story in a simple nature shot

 

[Annie Ng]

The grass is not necessarily greener on the other (FF) side, it all comes down to how you use the system and what you are trying to photograph.

I think all boils down to what we photograph. At the end of day there is something we need to take good photos we love.

For example, a good pet-recognition focus system, lightweight (compact) and lens with moderate focal length is great for me to capture cat photos.

The OM-3 or the slightly larger OM-1.2 fits the bill nicely.



--
Annie

https://smallpotato.photography/

 

[jjbinx]

Too many focus on technology or specifications.

Photography is all about the subject and the story the image tells. Everything else is a tool and how one uses the tool to tell that subject's story.

When I read commentary about people saying xyz can do this and abc can't do that, they lost the meaning of why one photographs a subject.

What story were you trying to tell with your sample images ?

jj

The differences between the images are subtle and most non-photogrphers (the consumers) couldn't even tell a difference other than the background. And even there, it was overwhelmingly in favor of MFT ironically.

We the photography community are focusing too much on gear instead of mastering what we own.

Why did you frame the subject so differently ? *
The image with the lower aesthetic quality ( to my eye ) is the second one because of the tight framing. And that’s why I think that most viewers prefer the first image.

The overwhelming difference between the two is the framing, and that was by your choice. It’s not like the m4/3 camera produced a nicer image preferred by most viewers. You could have made that second image, framed the way it is, with the m4/3 camera and most viewers still would have preferred the first image

jj