Shoot with both M4/3 and Full Frame, or even APS-C

[James Stirling]

I'm interested to know how many of you shoot with both M4/3 and FF or APSC.

I have and use all three. Used least = FF. My FF cameras are too big and heavy -- the lenses are bigger and heavier and when I use a camera I'm most often walking and carrying it.

Could you point to one FF lens that is larger than a m43 lens doing the same job ( diagonal AOV, DOF /subject isolation and total light gathering ).

First lens I bought for my E-PL5 after the pancake kit zoom was the 12mm f/2 -- 130 grams and 43mm length. Nikon makes a 24mm f/2.8 -- 270 grams and 46mm length and a 24mm f/1.8 450 grams and 97mm length. FF lens tend to be bigger and heavier.

Not doing the same job ( diagonal AOV, DOF /subject isolation and total light gathering ). A FF lens equivalent to the 12mm F/2 would be a 24mm F/4 . The m43 equivalent to a FF 24mm F/2.8 would be a 12mm F/1.4

That is the challenge what is considered as a "fast lens" in m43 is a modest FF equivalent and they are seen as lower end options . An example of honestly equivalent from the ( diagonal AOV, DOF /subject isolation and total light gathering ) . Obviolsy being a premium for the system lens the 12mm F/1.4 has much build quality etc





There is no AF 12mm F/0.9 to do the same job as FF 24mm F/1.8 lens

--
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

 

[James Stirling]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

Ah well an opinion always trumps a controlled test

Your “controlled tests” are concerning the optics, which I explicitly said I wasn’t commenting on.

Other reviews of the 50mm F/.8 Z

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_z_50mm_f1_8_s_review

"With autofocusing switched on, focusing is pleasingly quick and almost silent, making it a good lens to use when shooting video."

https://www.lenstip.com/577.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_Z_50_mm_f_1.8_S_Autofocus.html

"The autofocus of the tested lens, when joined with the Nikon Z7, is quiet but not completely noiseless. Fortunately you can hear just a slight whirr of the mechanism so it can hardly be called a flaw."

https://dustinabbott.net/2025/05/nikkor-z-50mm-f1-8-s-review/

"There is a faint “schnick” sound if you put your ear right next to the lens barrel, but if I held the camera at chest level and racked focus here and there, I couldn’t hear anything"

--
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

 

[Sam Bennett]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

Ah well an opinion always trumps a controlled test

Your “controlled tests” are concerning the optics, which I explicitly said I wasn’t commenting on.

Other reviews of the 50mm F/.8 Z

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_z_50mm_f1_8_s_review

"With autofocusing switched on, focusing is pleasingly quick and almost silent, making it a good lens to use when shooting video."

https://www.lenstip.com/577.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_Z_50_mm_f_1.8_S_Autofocus.html

"The autofocus of the tested lens, when joined with the Nikon Z7, is quiet but not completely noiseless. Fortunately you can hear just a slight whirr of the mechanism so it can hardly be called a flaw."

https://dustinabbott.net/2025/05/nikkor-z-50mm-f1-8-s-review/

"There is a faint “schnick” sound if you put your ear right next to the lens barrel, but if I held the camera at chest level and racked focus here and there, I couldn’t hear anything"

Hardly what I would call a “controlled test”.

I was using the 35 and 85 and could actually “feel” the focus mechanisms vibrating, which was a bit alarming given my experience with my Pro MFT lenses.

If you don’t have a problem with that, more power to you. But it didn’t exactly scream “quality” to me. As I said, it’s pretty subjective, so as usual YMMV. Heck, some people may like that since it’s feedback that the lens is working.

 

[CBR1100XX]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

I double checked after your post and they do have a little AF noise, more than most of my m43 lenses. AF wasn't slow but it wasn't as fast as some m43 primes either. Though I had the 50 F1.8S on a Z5, it might be a different story on a Z8 or other newer body.

 

[James Stirling]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

Ah well an opinion always trumps a controlled test

Your “controlled tests” are concerning the optics, which I explicitly said I wasn’t commenting on.

Other reviews of the 50mm F/.8 Z

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_z_50mm_f1_8_s_review

"With autofocusing switched on, focusing is pleasingly quick and almost silent, making it a good lens to use when shooting video."

https://www.lenstip.com/577.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_Z_50_mm_f_1.8_S_Autofocus.html

"The autofocus of the tested lens, when joined with the Nikon Z7, is quiet but not completely noiseless. Fortunately you can hear just a slight whirr of the mechanism so it can hardly be called a flaw."

https://dustinabbott.net/2025/05/nikkor-z-50mm-f1-8-s-review/

"There is a faint “schnick” sound if you put your ear right next to the lens barrel, but if I held the camera at chest level and racked focus here and there, I couldn’t hear anything"

Hardly what I would call a “controlled test”.

No just observations by folk who test dozens of cameras and lenses from many makers

I was using the 35 and 85 and could actually “feel” the focus mechanisms vibrating, which was a bit alarming given my experience with my Pro MFT lenses.

In fairness I don't have any of those lenses so they may be different

If you don’t have a problem with that, more power to you. But it didn’t exactly scream “quality” to me. As I said, it’s pretty subjective, so as usual YMMV.

Heck, some people may like that since it’s feedback that the lens is working.

I can see that all my paid work with digital ( weddings event etc ) was done with DSLR's. After happily giving up paid work I did my nieces wedding using Nikon mirrorless and during the critical part of the ceremony . I forgot that I had put the camera in silent mode which unlike with DSLR's is silent/ I near had a heart attack thinking I had missed the shots , my sister was sitting in the front row just opposite me and I pictured her chasing me around the hall with the cake cutting knife . So silent is not always an advantage

--
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

 

[CBR1100XX]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

Ah well an opinion always trumps a controlled test

Your “controlled tests” are concerning the optics, which I explicitly said I wasn’t commenting on.

Other reviews of the 50mm F/.8 Z

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_z_50mm_f1_8_s_review

"With autofocusing switched on, focusing is pleasingly quick and almost silent, making it a good lens to use when shooting video."

https://www.lenstip.com/577.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_Z_50_mm_f_1.8_S_Autofocus.html

"The autofocus of the tested lens, when joined with the Nikon Z7, is quiet but not completely noiseless. Fortunately you can hear just a slight whirr of the mechanism so it can hardly be called a flaw."

https://dustinabbott.net/2025/05/nikkor-z-50mm-f1-8-s-review/

"There is a faint “schnick” sound if you put your ear right next to the lens barrel, but if I held the camera at chest level and racked focus here and there, I couldn’t hear anything"

Hardly what I would call a “controlled test”.

No just observations by folk who test dozens of cameras and lenses from many makers

I was using the 35 and 85 and could actually “feel” the focus mechanisms vibrating, which was a bit alarming given my experience with my Pro MFT lenses.

In fairness I don't have any of those lenses so they may be different

If you don’t have a problem with that, more power to you. But it didn’t exactly scream “quality” to me. As I said, it’s pretty subjective, so as usual YMMV.

Heck, some people may like that since it’s feedback that the lens is working.

I can see that all my paid work with digital ( weddings event etc ) was done with DSLR's. After happily giving up paid work I did my nieces wedding using Nikon mirrorless and during the critical part of the ceremony . I forgot that I had put the camera in silent mode which unlike with DSLR's is silent/ I near had a heart attack thinking I had missed the shots , my sister was sitting in the front row just opposite me and I pictured her chasing me around the hall with the cake cutting knife . So silent is not always an advantage

I've got a Z5/Z7 II w/50 f1.8S and for m43 a E-M1 III, 25 f1.8 & 1.4 w let me know what you want a comparison on and I'll check them out.

 

[James Stirling]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

Ah well an opinion always trumps a controlled test

Your “controlled tests” are concerning the optics, which I explicitly said I wasn’t commenting on.

Other reviews of the 50mm F/.8 Z

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_z_50mm_f1_8_s_review

"With autofocusing switched on, focusing is pleasingly quick and almost silent, making it a good lens to use when shooting video."

https://www.lenstip.com/577.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_Z_50_mm_f_1.8_S_Autofocus.html

"The autofocus of the tested lens, when joined with the Nikon Z7, is quiet but not completely noiseless. Fortunately you can hear just a slight whirr of the mechanism so it can hardly be called a flaw."

https://dustinabbott.net/2025/05/nikkor-z-50mm-f1-8-s-review/

"There is a faint “schnick” sound if you put your ear right next to the lens barrel, but if I held the camera at chest level and racked focus here and there, I couldn’t hear anything"

Hardly what I would call a “controlled test”.

No just observations by folk who test dozens of cameras and lenses from many makers

I was using the 35 and 85 and could actually “feel” the focus mechanisms vibrating, which was a bit alarming given my experience with my Pro MFT lenses.

In fairness I don't have any of those lenses so they may be different

If you don’t have a problem with that, more power to you. But it didn’t exactly scream “quality” to me. As I said, it’s pretty subjective, so as usual YMMV.

Heck, some people may like that since it’s feedback that the lens is working.

I can see that all my paid work with digital ( weddings event etc ) was done with DSLR's. After happily giving up paid work I did my nieces wedding using Nikon mirrorless and during the critical part of the ceremony . I forgot that I had put the camera in silent mode which unlike with DSLR's is silent/ I near had a heart attack thinking I had missed the shots , my sister was sitting in the front row just opposite me and I pictured her chasing me around the hall with the cake cutting knife . So silent is not always an advantage

I've got a Z5/Z7 II w/50 f1.8S and for m43 a E-M1 III, 25 f1.8 & 1.4 w let me know what you want a comparison on and I'll check them out.

I have the Z7 II, Z9 , 50mm Z F/1.8s m43 OM-1 , E-m5 III a GX8 and GH4 and a wide selection of m43 lenses.

 

[James Stirling]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

I double checked after your post and they do have a little AF noise, more than most of my m43 lenses. AF wasn't slow but it wasn't as fast as some m43 primes either. Though I had the 50 F1.8S on a Z5, it might be a different story on a Z8 or other newer body.

I think with the Z50 II , Z5II and Nikon Z6 III they have upped their AF game to be nearer the top end

 

[CBR1100XX]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

Ah well an opinion always trumps a controlled test

Your “controlled tests” are concerning the optics, which I explicitly said I wasn’t commenting on.

Other reviews of the 50mm F/.8 Z

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_z_50mm_f1_8_s_review

"With autofocusing switched on, focusing is pleasingly quick and almost silent, making it a good lens to use when shooting video."

https://www.lenstip.com/577.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_Z_50_mm_f_1.8_S_Autofocus.html

"The autofocus of the tested lens, when joined with the Nikon Z7, is quiet but not completely noiseless. Fortunately you can hear just a slight whirr of the mechanism so it can hardly be called a flaw."

https://dustinabbott.net/2025/05/nikkor-z-50mm-f1-8-s-review/

"There is a faint “schnick” sound if you put your ear right next to the lens barrel, but if I held the camera at chest level and racked focus here and there, I couldn’t hear anything"

Hardly what I would call a “controlled test”.

No just observations by folk who test dozens of cameras and lenses from many makers

I was using the 35 and 85 and could actually “feel” the focus mechanisms vibrating, which was a bit alarming given my experience with my Pro MFT lenses.

In fairness I don't have any of those lenses so they may be different

If you don’t have a problem with that, more power to you. But it didn’t exactly scream “quality” to me. As I said, it’s pretty subjective, so as usual YMMV.

Heck, some people may like that since it’s feedback that the lens is working.

I can see that all my paid work with digital ( weddings event etc ) was done with DSLR's. After happily giving up paid work I did my nieces wedding using Nikon mirrorless and during the critical part of the ceremony . I forgot that I had put the camera in silent mode which unlike with DSLR's is silent/ I near had a heart attack thinking I had missed the shots , my sister was sitting in the front row just opposite me and I pictured her chasing me around the hall with the cake cutting knife . So silent is not always an advantage

I've got a Z5/Z7 II w/50 f1.8S and for m43 a E-M1 III, 25 f1.8 & 1.4 w let me know what you want a comparison on and I'll check them out.

I have the Z7 II, Z9 , 50mm Z F/1.8s m43 OM-1 , E-m5 III a GX8 and GH4 and a wide selection of m43 lenses.

 

[ahaslett]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

Ah well an opinion always trumps a controlled test

Your “controlled tests” are concerning the optics, which I explicitly said I wasn’t commenting on.

Other reviews of the 50mm F/.8 Z

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_z_50mm_f1_8_s_review

"With autofocusing switched on, focusing is pleasingly quick and almost silent, making it a good lens to use when shooting video."

https://www.lenstip.com/577.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_Z_50_mm_f_1.8_S_Autofocus.html

"The autofocus of the tested lens, when joined with the Nikon Z7, is quiet but not completely noiseless. Fortunately you can hear just a slight whirr of the mechanism so it can hardly be called a flaw."

https://dustinabbott.net/2025/05/nikkor-z-50mm-f1-8-s-review/

"There is a faint “schnick” sound if you put your ear right next to the lens barrel, but if I held the camera at chest level and racked focus here and there, I couldn’t hear anything"

Hardly what I would call a “controlled test”.

No just observations by folk who test dozens of cameras and lenses from many makers

I was using the 35 and 85 and could actually “feel” the focus mechanisms vibrating, which was a bit alarming given my experience with my Pro MFT lenses.

In fairness I don't have any of those lenses so they may be different

If you don’t have a problem with that, more power to you. But it didn’t exactly scream “quality” to me. As I said, it’s pretty subjective, so as usual YMMV.

Heck, some people may like that since it’s feedback that the lens is working.

I can see that all my paid work with digital ( weddings event etc ) was done with DSLR's. After happily giving up paid work I did my nieces wedding using Nikon mirrorless and during the critical part of the ceremony . I forgot that I had put the camera in silent mode which unlike with DSLR's is silent/ I near had a heart attack thinking I had missed the shots , my sister was sitting in the front row just opposite me and I pictured her chasing me around the hall with the cake cutting knife . So silent is not always an advantage

I've got a Z5/Z7 II w/50 f1.8S and for m43 a E-M1 III, 25 f1.8 & 1.4 w let me know what you want a comparison on and I'll check them out.

I have the Z7 II, Z9 , 50mm Z F/1.8s m43 OM-1 , E-m5 III a GX8 and GH4 and a wide selection of m43 lenses.

Side note: that Z9 is just too beastly!

I was shooting with another photographer on Friday (live performance/club night) and I'm there with the E-M1 III/25 F1.4 and they had a Z9/50 F1.2S. My whole setup weighed less than their body or lens by themselves.

Is that the PL 24/1.4 mk i or mk ii?

A

 

[James Stirling]

I recently bought a Pana L Mount S5D. The price was just too good to resist. 999 eur with a 18-40 lens. Actually I traded my GX9 and paid 499 eur

It's great and I get better shots in more challenging light. Low light it has dual gain ISO so beginning at 640 with similar/better results than MFT. But more to the point whne highlights are high and shadows are low, I get more range, depth, colour + the ability to 'improve' in PP

Combined weight about 875g, so Ok for short walks or when I carry a rucksack. The problem comes when adding the 70-300 for more range. That doubles my load...

On the other end of the scale a Pana GM1 with Oly 14-150 and a Lowa 9mm give me more or less the same length at a tiny fraction of the weight

I am very happy I have the S5D. Do i need it ? No but I am enjoying using it

You can see on my Flickr shots with both Panas, the OM1 and my old GX9. Do you see the differences ?

I think that a lot of differences between different sensors or faster lenses within the system are at the extremes. If you want shallower DOF or more subject isolation or shooting at very high ISO's etc/

If you are shooting any lens stopped down in decent light the differences will be small the 45mm F/1.2 wide open will give an obviously different result to the 45mm F/1.8 . If you stop them both down to say F/4 the differences will be very small

 

[James Stirling]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

Ah well an opinion always trumps a controlled test

Your “controlled tests” are concerning the optics, which I explicitly said I wasn’t commenting on.

Other reviews of the 50mm F/.8 Z

https://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_z_50mm_f1_8_s_review

"With autofocusing switched on, focusing is pleasingly quick and almost silent, making it a good lens to use when shooting video."

https://www.lenstip.com/577.10-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_Z_50_mm_f_1.8_S_Autofocus.html

"The autofocus of the tested lens, when joined with the Nikon Z7, is quiet but not completely noiseless. Fortunately you can hear just a slight whirr of the mechanism so it can hardly be called a flaw."

https://dustinabbott.net/2025/05/nikkor-z-50mm-f1-8-s-review/

"There is a faint “schnick” sound if you put your ear right next to the lens barrel, but if I held the camera at chest level and racked focus here and there, I couldn’t hear anything"

Hardly what I would call a “controlled test”.

No just observations by folk who test dozens of cameras and lenses from many makers

I was using the 35 and 85 and could actually “feel” the focus mechanisms vibrating, which was a bit alarming given my experience with my Pro MFT lenses.

In fairness I don't have any of those lenses so they may be different

If you don’t have a problem with that, more power to you. But it didn’t exactly scream “quality” to me. As I said, it’s pretty subjective, so as usual YMMV.

Heck, some people may like that since it’s feedback that the lens is working.

I can see that all my paid work with digital ( weddings event etc ) was done with DSLR's. After happily giving up paid work I did my nieces wedding using Nikon mirrorless and during the critical part of the ceremony . I forgot that I had put the camera in silent mode which unlike with DSLR's is silent/ I near had a heart attack thinking I had missed the shots , my sister was sitting in the front row just opposite me and I pictured her chasing me around the hall with the cake cutting knife . So silent is not always an advantage

I've got a Z5/Z7 II w/50 f1.8S and for m43 a E-M1 III, 25 f1.8 & 1.4 w let me know what you want a comparison on and I'll check them out.

I have the Z7 II, Z9 , 50mm Z F/1.8s m43 OM-1 , E-m5 III a GX8 and GH4 and a wide selection of m43 lenses.

Side note: that Z9 is just too beastly!

So am I

I was shooting with another photographer on Friday (live performance/club night) and I'm there with the E-M1 III/25 F1.4 and they had a Z9/50 F1.2S. My whole setup weighed less than their body or lens by themselves.

I am hopeful when Nikon gets round to a mkIII Z7 they will up the specs as I prefer that size of body myself. The Z8 was not out at the time I got the Z9 or I would probably have went with it

--
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

 

[softmarmotte]

I recently bought a Pana L Mount S5D. The price was just too good to resist. 999 eur with a 18-40 lens. Actually I traded my GX9 and paid 499 eur

It's great and I get better shots in more challenging light. Low light it has dual gain ISO so beginning at 640 with similar/better results than MFT. But more to the point whne highlights are high and shadows are low, I get more range, depth, colour + the ability to 'improve' in PP

Combined weight about 875g, so Ok for short walks or when I carry a rucksack. The problem comes when adding the 70-300 for more range. That doubles my load...

On the other end of the scale a Pana GM1 with Oly 14-150 and a Lowa 9mm give me more or less the same length at a tiny fraction of the weight

I am very happy I have the S5D. Do i need it ? No but I am enjoying using it

You can see on my Flickr shots with both Panas, the OM1 and my old GX9. Do you see the differences ?

I think that a lot of differences between different sensors or faster lenses within the system are at the extremes. If you want shallower DOF or more subject isolation or shooting at very high ISO's etc/

If you are shooting any lens stopped down in decent light the differences will be small the 45mm F/1.2 wide open will give an obviously different result to the 45mm F/1.8 . If you stop them both down to say F/4 the differences will be very small

and that's my point...do you see the differences ?

 

[Ysarex]

I'm interested to know how many of you shoot with both M4/3 and FF or APSC.

I have and use all three. Used least = FF. My FF cameras are too big and heavy -- the lenses are bigger and heavier and when I use a camera I'm most often walking and carrying it.

Could you point to one FF lens that is larger than a m43 lens doing the same job ( diagonal AOV, DOF /subject isolation and total light gathering ).

First lens I bought for my E-PL5 after the pancake kit zoom was the 12mm f/2 -- 130 grams and 43mm length. Nikon makes a 24mm f/2.8 -- 270 grams and 46mm length and a 24mm f/1.8 450 grams and 97mm length. FF lens tend to be bigger and heavier.

Not doing the same job ( diagonal AOV, DOF /subject isolation and total light gathering ). A FF lens equivalent to the 12mm F/2 would be a 24mm F/4 . The m43 equivalent to a FF 24mm F/2.8 would be a 12mm F/1.4

I don't buy that at all -- pure nonsense. No one using a 24mm or 12mm lens wants to shoot portraits with only one eye in focus. Total light gathering is bogus -- what matters is exposure and exposure is per unit area -- f/2.8 is f/2.8 for all formats and that matters.

It's entirely appropriate for there to be some real differences between different formats. Equivalence can be taken to silly and ridiculous extremes. FF lenses tend to be bigger and heavier that lenses for MFT for those of us who do general photography.

That is the challenge what is considered as a "fast lens" in m43 is a modest FF equivalent and they are seen as lower end options . An example of honestly equivalent from the ( diagonal AOV, DOF /subject isolation and total light gathering ) . Obviolsy being a premium for the system lens the 12mm F/1.4 has much build quality etc



There is no AF 12mm F/0.9 to do the same job as FF 24mm F/1.8 lens

 

[CBR1100XX]

Side note: that Z9 is just too beastly!

I was shooting with another photographer on Friday (live performance/club night) and I'm there with the E-M1 III/25 F1.4 and they had a Z9/50 F1.2S. My whole setup weighed less than their body or lens by themselves.

Is that the PL 24/1.4 mk i or mk ii?

A

MkII

 

[Art_P]

Haven't shot FF since my film days.

What I shoot: flowers and bugs in the backyard (macro or near macro) 90 macro

Night time street scenes: sometimes 8-25/4 or 75/1.8, but usually the 12-200 Not shooting action, but usually have two dogs in tow.

Light hiking, with or without dogs 12-200, and if I'm expecting birds 300 + mc-14.

Family, friends and critters usually the 12-200

Occasional concerts. Sure, would be nice to have a fast lens for dimmer venues, but while I've taken a couple fast primes or 12-40/2.8, I'm relying more on the 12-200. Will try to get some shots from last night's show posted tonight.

Ok, FF has an advantage in lower light, but I've been doing ok in less than optimal conditions and only occasionally go to Topaz to clean up an image.

BTW, currently using OM-1, sometimes E-M1/II

--
Art P
"I am a creature of contrast,
of light and shadow.
I live where the two play together,
I thrive on the conflict"

 

[CBR1100XX]

I have the Z7 II, Z9 , 50mm Z F/1.8s m43 OM-1 , E-m5 III a GX8 and GH4 and a wide selection of m43 lenses.

Side note: that Z9 is just too beastly!

So am I

I was shooting with another photographer on Friday (live performance/club night) and I'm there with the E-M1 III/25 F1.4 and they had a Z9/50 F1.2S. My whole setup weighed less than their body or lens by themselves.

I am hopeful when Nikon gets round to a mkIII Z7 they will up the specs as I prefer that size of body myself. The Z8 was not out at the time I got the Z9 or I would probably have went with it

I'm OK with 24MP for most of my non-portrait work so a Z5 II would be a solid body. Whenever it drops in price I'll likely trade my current Z5 for one.

But I'm really hoping for Panasonic or Sigma to create something like the 70-180 F2.8, or maybe a 70-200 F4 that doesn't weigh more than Tamron's F2.8? That plus a G9 III in the S1II body with a few other improvements I felt the G9 II needed could make it so I could standardize on 1 camera body for m43 and FF. Which matters more for me than most due to strength issues so it'll let me shoot more gigs when FF isn't needed and allows for ultra telephoto with my 50-200 F2.8-4 + 1.4TC.

 

[atomgr]

I thought about going back to Nikon since that’s what I was using in my FF dSLR days, and I’ve always liked their ergonomics, colors, etc but after I used their f/1.8 primes it was a non-starter. They feel cheap to me, slow to focus and noisy.

I assume you are talking about DSLR lenses as the Nikon Z F/1.8 lenses are excellent performers both optically and regarding AF . Though some DSLR lenses were not to shabby.

No, I’m referring to the new mirrorless Z primes. Again, I’m not commenting on them optically - just my impression of actually using them. That’s a bit more subjective, but that was my take away. Lumix’ primes are utterly silent which makes sense since they’re optimized for filmmaking, not stills.

I double checked after your post and they do have a little AF noise, more than most of my m43 lenses. AF wasn't slow but it wasn't as fast as some m43 primes either. Though I had the 50 F1.8S on a Z5, it might be a different story on a Z8 or other newer body.

You got an old Body.

 

[James Stirling]

I'm interested to know how many of you shoot with both M4/3 and FF or APSC.

I have and use all three. Used least = FF. My FF cameras are too big and heavy -- the lenses are bigger and heavier and when I use a camera I'm most often walking and carrying it.

Could you point to one FF lens that is larger than a m43 lens doing the same job ( diagonal AOV, DOF /subject isolation and total light gathering ).

First lens I bought for my E-PL5 after the pancake kit zoom was the 12mm f/2 -- 130 grams and 43mm length. Nikon makes a 24mm f/2.8 -- 270 grams and 46mm length and a 24mm f/1.8 450 grams and 97mm length. FF lens tend to be bigger and heavier.

Not doing the same job ( diagonal AOV, DOF /subject isolation and total light gathering ). A FF lens equivalent to the 12mm F/2 would be a 24mm F/4 . The m43 equivalent to a FF 24mm F/2.8 would be a 12mm F/1.4

I don't buy that at all -- pure nonsense.

Quite right never let facts in the way of a good m43 vs FF post







OM-1 200 base ISO , Z6 II 800 ISO 100%



--
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

 

[ahaslett]

Side note: that Z9 is just too beastly!

I was shooting with another photographer on Friday (live performance/club night) and I'm there with the E-M1 III/25 F1.4 and they had a Z9/50 F1.2S. My whole setup weighed less than their body or lens by themselves.

Is that the PL 24/1.4 mk i or mk ii?

A

MkII

How do you find the AF speed? If you had the mk i I before, how much better is it?

(Asking for a friend).