ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 พ.ย. 2020
- Does it matter if Micro Four Thirds is dead?
Despite Olympus exiting the camera business, and Panasonic's unsure focus, Micro Four Thirds is still a reasonable choice to consider. Having compared other camera systems: from Canon, Nikon, and Sony; I explain how Micro Four Thirds and the Olympus OM-D cameras provided the best value when I went looking for a new interchangeable lens camera, even if their future is uncertain.
I was skeptical getting into micro four thirds but I'm glad I did im enjoying the lighter weight and great image image quality and most importantly the ibis.
The only real point that I disagree with is, that I do believe Micro Four Thirds is more than capable for professional work. Sports too.
.
I love the format. I upgraded from EM1 Mark II to the Mark III. I have the 12-40mm, 40-150mm pro, 60mm Macro and 25mm F1.2 pro lens.
I only have m1 mark ii with 12-100mm f4 pro, 60mm f2.8 and pana 25mm f1.7
I just sold my Olympus 12 to 40 and 40 to 150 because I was just not using them at all. Instead I've been using the Panasonic 12 to 35 and the 35 to 100. Great lenses and much smaller. And then I have the 17, 25, 45, and 75 1.8 primes. Excellent lenses. And smaller than the PRO 1.2 lenses.
@@Smoothblue90 i have 2 42.5 f1.2 panasonic need to sell one its my favorite lens i also have the pan 12mm second favorite realy like my om 135mm too would like to try the 75mm
I use MFT, APSC and FF cameras, but my most used, and which I have more fun, is MFT. I use the other two only in very specific situations. For Real state, architecture, Macro, Wildlife and Video (exactly what I do professionally), mft is perfect 95% of the time!
Same for me. I have cameras anf lenses that provide better iq. But my mft set is much more versatile, sturdier and faster. I grab it 95% of the time, too. It is just good stuff. And was not all to expensive.
What do u think for sports? For example surfing?
I used to own 2 x EM1 bodies, and EM1.2 and I now own an EM1X and EM1.3. I also owned a Sony A7III, A9 and A7R4. When Olympus announced the sale of their camera division I was amazed by the number of Olympus owners who seemed to believe their cameras were suddenly going to stop working overnight. I have no problem with keeping my Olympus gear, it has a good many years left in it. If I can justify the cost (and I may do so this time next year), I will probably part exchange my 300mm f4 and purchase a 150 - 400mm f4.5. From what I have read, OM Digital Solutions intend to concentrate on high end cameras - I hope to see a high resolution EVF and rear screen.
“ I was amazed by the number of Olympus owners who seemed to believe their cameras were suddenly going to stop working overnight.”
You should encourage them to think that way and dispose of their gears in fire sales.
Excellent footage, I totally agree with your ideas. A couple of years ago I bought the Olympus pen F, and a 25 mm 1.8, with the 12-40 2.8 pro zoom, it was totally perfect for what I needed and covered all my needs at the time. Latter I bought the 40-150 pro 2.8 zoom and the 12-100 pro 4 .... when the news appeared stating that Olympus would sell it’s camera division, initially was a shock but very soon I thought that such a good system wouldn’t disappear, so I recently on December 2020 bought a new body the OM 1 MKIII, to support my system.
My opinion after three years of use is that this system has cameras of great quality, superb lenses at a reasonable size and weight not like my Nikon equipment that lives in my shelves for more than 3 years and counting ....
The rumours are usually started by and talked about among people who A) don't use the system B) don't understand why others would C) are looking for some attention or wishing to draw attention away from something truly in danger of obsolescence.
Finally a truly honest and objective assessment of m4/3. My hat off. I use all three systems including m4/3 and there's nothing wrong with it. In fact its very good, way more than good enough for most, even for professional use. So thanks for your honesty.
As an owner of the Sony A7r3, and lenses from 16mm to 200mm (after selling my 200-600mm) I prefer my G9 and EM1mk3 most of the time. They are lighter (important to a 70 year old imperfect body) and smaller. The quality is more than acceptable most of the time (noise is easily managed in the latest v4 DxO software). It is good for 55" 4k tv or A2 size printing. But if I need a wider dynamic range (say, dawn landscapes), the Sony has an advantage, and for astro the Sony 20mm f1.8 is fantastic value. I'm very happy with both systems. The two stop depth of field "penalty" is an advantage for M43 in some low light situations, church interiors for example where I can shoot at f5.6 (giving f11 ff equivalent) with reliable 7 stop stabilisation when tripods are not permitted. If I was starting out, M43 would be top of my list.
Agree with your point of view. Refreshing to have a video not only discussion the latest/greatest in tech but also the need and economic.
Good video. I agree with your thoughts on MFT. Not right for everyone, but ideal for me. I have the Panasonic G9. Can get it new for less that £900. 20 FPS, brilliant ergonomics (good battery grip), great menu system and functionality, great selection of lenses (including adapted) great stabilisation. Fantastic value for money. Really happy with it. 🙂
Thanks for the comment. It'll be telling to see what both Panasonic and JIP release in the next 18 months; the G9 has a lot of similarity in spec to the OM-D E-M1X (and beats it in some).
@@NottaPro the g9 got the dumb dfd af lol. Not a camera for professional jobs. Olympus is way better.
Me too my guy. I love my G9.. I actually had the new S5 on pre-order for several weeks but let it go back into the wild. Too early to re-invest in glass, especially the expensive L glass variety. G9 is an amazing value and really solid video cam, as well.
There are trade-offs with depth-from-defocus vs. phase detect, effectively summarized as absolute accuracy vs. speed to closely focused. Depending on what you're shooting, DFD might actually be better--landscapes, still-lifes, even models that are posing; anything where the speed of phase detect doesn't provide a clear advantage.
FWIW, Gerald Undone has a great video where he goes into the Canon R (phase detect) vs. Panasonic (DFD) vs. Sony (hybrid phase/contrast detect) which is the best YoutTube resource I can reference on the different options, for anyone interested in a deeper analysis.
@@NottaPro I've followed Gerald for years.. long before he sort of reached universal acclaim as top camera nerd on youtube. Always great, thoughtful analysis.
Love that 6X7. Wish I had one. I have the Em1 Mkii and really love it.
Good that a lot of people are still interested to use the Micro4/3 format. Its my favourite format for street and travel photography.
The only things that beat it for portability are the M-mount or fixed-lens cameras, although they both have their own limitations.
Thanks for watching; hopefully either OMD or Panasonic reward the continued interest with some exciting new equipment soon...
My fav 2021 MFT outdoor/weatherproof, 5-stop IBIS, system is E-M1 Mk 1 and 14-150mm for $600 used. For indoors/street I have a 17mm f/1.8($300 used). Great handling, great images.
Great video. Lots of information and comparisons to the systems out there. Here what I have been shooting with for the past 5-8 years.
I love my Olympus 4/3rds system. In fact, I have 3 cameras (E-PL2, OMD-M10 and Tough TC-1, which I use exclusively for macro work), and they all take quality photos. However, I too saw that the number and type of lenses were limited. I originally switched form my Canon EOS 1D due to 3 major back surgeries, and with my entire lumbar fused, I needed to drop the weight of the gear I carried.
My solutions to the lack of lenses wound up not being an issue for me. I've been shooting professionally since 1974, and over the years I shot with Olympus OMD, Pentax K1000, Nikon F, and Canon's AE-1 systems. It wasn't until I turned 40 that I switched over to autofocus. I now have more than 30 lenses, from 24mm f/1.4 to a Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 zoom for my EOS system that I can now use on my Olympus 4/3rds system. So instead of finding and buying lenses I already had, I decided to get conversion adapters for all my lenses.
I have no issues shooting manual focus, since I have shot most of my professional journalism career with manual lenses and bodies (It was sometime in 2000-01 that I got my first EOS autofocus film body, along with a Canon Pro90-IS digital). Now I have a wide range of lenses for my 4/3rds system. And because these are real quality glass, I seem to get better quality images than with Olympus lenses or third party lenses. And for my EOS lenses, I bought an adapter that allows me to use all the lens' auto features on my Olympus bodies. So for my Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 throughout and my prime 135mm f/2.8 with soft-focus settings, I can use it in full auto mode, with manual focus assist for sports.
I believe that you should be able to pick up great prime and zoom lenses used on eBay or like my Canon 200 f/2.8 prime lens for my AE-1, I got that new on Amazon. If you already have these lenses laying around, with cheap adapters you can greatly expand your selection of lens. Since my Nikon system was the most complete system, I even have a bellow lens with tilt, teleconverters including one that has a separate aperture and focusing ring on it, macro extenders as well as a 35mm f/1.8 macro lens. I went from 4 decent Olympus lenses to now having every professional lens type I need to shoot any subject.
With a little bit of research and a willingness to shoot manually, you can expand the range of lenses for your 4/3rds system, whether it be Olympus, Sony, or Canon bodies with the right adapters. Except for the EOS to 4/3rds autofocus adapter (that cost me about $250), all the other adapters can be found for $10 to $15.
The only camera system left that I have professional prime lenses for is my 1947 Exakta system (stamped "USSR OCCUP Germany"), and I will be getting an adapter for those lenses, as they are all Carl Zeiss lenses (Some of my Nikon glass I believe are Zeiss as well, if I recall), so I would love to see how much better the Zeiss lens works on my 4/3rds system.
And the other thing that I use is studio lights, with either a wireless remote or sync cord, and my Olympus 4/3rds system works great with it. I will even use an Application on my Mac that allows me to directly load the images to my MacBook Pro so I can see and correct any lighting issues (beats the old days of using Polaroids to test your lighting setup).
Thanks again for this video, and I hope my post helps you expand your lenses, whether you have them sitting around or want to get them cheap at eBay or Amazon.
Wow, lots of good options and suggestions. I haven't used them, but there are some Metabones Speedboosters which help recapture some of the extra light gathering of the EF lenses when they're adapted as well, which helps negate some of the effective aperture/sensor-size penalties of the 4/3 sensor.
When I first got the OM-D E-M5 I tried manual focusing/zone focusing, and gave-up with it; most of the native lenses just don't work well for it; the older lenses give a much more precise feel than the focus-by-wire native lenses (and coupled with mirrorless focusing aides give a lot of flexibility).
Thanks for the informative post!
I was also thinking of buying the vertical battery grip for my EM1 Mark III, this way I have the flexibility of taking it on and off depending on what I'm shooting.
There are two main manufacturers making MFT? Not so. My local camera store told me that these days their second biggest selling manufacturer after Canon is Blackmagic and of course the BMPCC 4K with its MFT mount is their most popular model. Because of history, camera manufacturers like GoPro, I sta360, DJI, and Blackmagic tend to get left off discussions of camera sales.
I have just made a large MFT investment. The Panasonic G9 arrived on the 23rd December, and some of the lenses have arrived, with more to arrive in coming days. The lens selection in MFT is second to none. Huge creative options, way smaller than full frame. Great system, and doing much better than TH-cam clickbait videos want to tell us.
True (although Blackmagic also has cameras with other mounts, e.g. 6K version uses EF; and supposedly Sharp is releasing video cameras as well). There are/were principally two traditional *stills* camera manufacturer, but it's a reasonable thing to highlight other potential uses for the lenses. The principal thesis I wanted to highlight is looking at unique needs and their value proposition, so for someone interested in video there are certainly a number of interesting options.
Not forget DJI drone cams, and Youngnu (?), which sells in mainly China.
I just bought 2 Olympus micro 4/3 cameras and am tempted to shoot real estate with them. I really enjoy the quality you can get out of these cameras, and the lightweight feel can’t be beat. Of course my Canon EF cameras are in a class by themselves, but both systems are a marvel of the age.
I dropped the cash for an em 1mkiii after trading in the mkii. I know it's pricey but I am happy with the performed boost. I can tell the difference in operation speed. The USB C charging socket is nice to as I no longer have to pack my charger unit.
No, no, no... don't buy M43! Sell now immediately- so I can buy it! Great video!
Ehehe, I just bought an "used" Olympus M.300mm, looks like it was never taken out of its box
I feel sorry for that lens; hopefully it'll get some more use now!
I've seen a lot of good stuff about the 300mm, and I wouldn't mind a bit more reach from 40-150mm; but I guess that's how it goes. I did recently find a good deal on a used 1.4x TC, which will help a little with the OM pro lenses.
@@NottaPro well... well... now that I have the 300mm I wouldn't mind the 40-150mm for closer subjects...
I just recently bought a used E-M5ii along with a 25mm f/1.8 for a bargain price to add to my existing M43 gears. And since I'm "notta pro" as well, the weight, size and cost benefits offered by the system outweighs (pun intended) the need to have those high MP and ISO offered by others. As a hobbyist, I'm contended with what I have ATM.
My "X" is a beast, it finally is THE replacement for my beloved E-5 and the grip.
I shoot digital medium frame, full frame, aps-c, and micro 4/3s. I find myself packing the Fujifilm GFX 50R & Panasonic G9 in the same travel or day walk bag. I love taking night shots with the G9 and a stabilized lens at night as I can handhold 1/8 sec shots to get light trails, blurred people, but sharp nighttime cityscapes. Can't do that as well with my xt4 or a7riv.
The nice thing about that combination, is you get a consistent 4:3 ratio. I've looked at the GFX cameras more than once, but haven't figured-out how I would make use of them personally (between the OM-D's multi-shot for high-res vis-a-vis the 100MP body and the Leicas' high-res sensors and portability against the 50R).
I own FF and m4/3. And honestly, if you asked me which one I would keep, m4/3 any day. The compact size of lenses, is just such a nice feature, to me it trumps everything else.
Good discussion and perspective. BTW: Noticed the graphics getting cut off. May need to leave more room to the right of the screen to ensure it shows up in the You Tube video.
In the last year Ive bought lovely used MFT bodies and pro lenses.
I still have my Nikon DSLRs, but the cost of Nikon's mirrorless Z system was not cost effective for me.
So far I love the MFT system for portablility, performance, quality, and cost.
Very valid and very sensible advice. Wish I came across this before 🙏
Thanks for watching!
Very helpful presentation. Thank you.
Your welcome, and thanks for watching.
It looks like OM has, once again discounted all of their cameras to about the same price (they'd ended a bunch of the sales for a spell in the middle of the year, which honestly surprised me); and there's a lot of hope that a new camera will help close some of the performance gap in the E-M1 line with the newer technology from Canon/Nikon/Sony-that'd be a great bonus.
I've been splitting my time with the Leica Q2 and Olympus E-M1X throughout the year as my principal two cameras, and I'm still loving the combination. The E-M1X, between the 40-150/2.8 and 150-400/4.5 lenses cover a wide range and pack small (throwing in the Pani 12-35 and there's a complete system that fits in a Mini Trekker). I'm expecting to get some good usage out of the E-M1X 40-150 in particular now that vaccines availability has opened for younger kids, and youth sports is picking-up again; as much as I love the RF 100-500 also, the Olympus 40-150/2.8 is less conspicuous.
I agree. I really like my olympus EM1 mk ii. I also have a Nikon d500, but find I almost always use my Olympus.
I have been looking at Olys since i got an Olympus Point and shoot ( film ), then saw them making Digital Cameras, first their Bridge then the 4/3 and then their Micro 4/3. I never got into the system because of the smaller sensor. Now that they sold the Camera Division I am thinking of getting a body and some of their f/1.2 glass for nostalgia sake.
As a Lumix AND Fuji shooter I found this important and timely. I am considering dropping m43 even though I do most of my still photography with a G9.
But why?
I like the typically smaller footprint and lenses
I can only agree with you. Every system has its limitations and if you take these into consideration, you can concentrate on the strengths. I use ASC because my system is the best for me in terms of system size and price-performance ratio. Apart from that, the quality of MFT/APS-C is very good and I can live with the exceptions.
Im still using my Original EM5 and It has travelled to Japan, Philippines and Singapore in harsh Humidity and Ive made a ton of videos with this excellent stabilized body. I also use a Panasonic body which is much newer but when I need weather sealing I opt for the olympus which has never let me down yet after thousands of shots and many many hours of video in all kinds of conditions from the soccer fields to the beaches and many bouncy Jeepney and dusty tricycle rides on the many back roads of Asia. I owned Canon which I also like a lot and Fuji which I like for JPEG shots and other than cropping I never waste my life on post process and never had any one notice almost all my shots in every system was JPEG and hardly touched. I prefer capturing the shots and videos rather than days locked up prost processing. To each their own I guess. but I promise that I will not be laying on my death bed wishing I would have spent more time processing however I will regret not going on just One more trip with my MFT stabilized system. Thank you for your exellent opinions however I find that most people will not have your patience to wait and will jump ship several times as it is also fun discovering new challenges with new toys .
Just bought a canon R6 BUT: my EM1 mark II is way more fun to shoot with, provides very good to excellent pictures except in poor lit areas but even there I use the M.Zuiko 25mm f1.2 which gives good results. Plus the smaller size of the sensor allows the use of a multitude of manual lenses including industrial C-mounts.
I've owned some sweet cameras, but the 1X was the best in technical terms, by far. As a package, in use, etc, a real 'photographer's camera'.
Now that I own an S1 full frame... the size and weight of m43 still holds a spot in my kit
I swapped out my Nikon D5 system last year for the Olympus system, no regrets, but then I am not a pixel peeper or bothered about what the anoraks think. It is about time people cracked on with the art of photography and not worrying about the newest kit that is out there. But then what do us real Pros know (29 years as a full time pro)....
i switched from a sony a6000 to a6500 to panasonic G85 MFT in 2021. I absolutely enjoy using it. I'm a novice and I tried to add attachments to the a6500 to make it bigger but it still didn't feel right. The G85 ergonomics is perfect for me and everything works great. The a6500 had really small buttons and the evf was low res. I'm not much of a fan of the point-and-shoot form factor of the Sony A6xxx series. It was a hassle to carry all of my aps-c lenses everywhere. With the G85, i carry everything in a waist pack.
One thing MFT has done well for a while, has been having so many different form factors that complement each other (E-mount kind of has the same thing, and Fuji with its medium format cameras has an SLR-like and a rangefinder-like body as well, for that matter). I never fully understood the complaints about the E-M1X being "too big", as it seems well suited for its purpose; if I want something smaller, I can grab an E-M5, GX85, or something smaller-and pack the lenses that suit the shooting environment.
It's really a shame, in some ways, that the "good enough" mobile phone market has really eaten away at those smaller devices, which ate into the system's strengths.
Just picked up a like new em1 box paper$200 that's crazy plus lens are cheap goes well with my also used Nikon d600 and VR lens and my used Pocket rocket 🚀 RX100 $100
Hi. I bought an Olympus OMD EM-1 Mark II used for 645 and I got a kit lens for it. I'm loving it. I didn't have a camera so I went for the Micro 4/3's. This camera is loaded with features that I'm still playing with. I'm notta pro either so it suits me just fine.
The EM-1MII isn't a bad camera with which to start. It's got a lot of the same features and performance of the newer MIIII and the E-M1X. Grab a weather sealed lens, and you suddenly don't need to worry about inclement weather so much.
Make sure you update the firmware if it's below 3.0 (3.4 is the latest). 3.0 added/improved a number of things, including focusing and general image processing (based on the changelog; I don't know how much of a difference it makes, but it looks like a list for which it'd be worth installing the update!).
@@NottaPro Thanks for the response. The first thing I did when I received it was to upgrade it to the latest firmware. Yeah, I'm looking into the pro lenses. That 40-150mm lens looks tempting. Down the line, I'll probably upgrade to the one you have, the EM1-x. I like the feel of a substantial body. Olympus is the only camera company that has cameras and lenses that won't necessarily break the bank and are of good quality.
Отличное видео. Спасибо.
Used Olympus for a long time have E510 E30 omd mk111 plus several pro lenses And I love both ,but needing two shoulder ops it’s m43 for the foreseeable future.
Don’t care which camera company is best or which goes bust .just enjoy your cameras
I'm looking to buy whatever replaces the Panasonic G9. If value for money is the main criterion, I'd be looking at pro/semi pro full frame DSLRs. As the market moves to FF mirrorless, there's going to be a lot lightly used enthusiast-owned bodies and lenses for sale.
I'm amazed by the value to be had right now, with some very solid cameras discounted new (and even selling below their used prices on occasion, like the OM-D E-M1 MII). I expect I'll eventually find my way to the Canon RF system as I referenced in the video, but am really impressed with the current line of MFT and trying to see what use I might have for both. I really hope MFT stays a live and can continue to improve their sensors, IS, and AF. If either JIP or Panasonic could source or design a generationally better imaging sensor for their next camera that would be exciting, given the quality IS they already have.
As a new purchaser of the G9, I can highly recommend it. Fantastic camera. I love it.
is the em1x autofocus improved in 2021? I'm holding on to z5 should bI sell and buy em1x?
Personally, I haven't found much difference in the AF between firmware versions; but I'd also say it's pretty good. Not *as* good as the Canon R6, but I haven't seen enough of a difference to choose one or the other based on the AF capabilities. I touch on the subject-tracking AF a little in the R6 vs OM-D E-M1X video.
its a shame 12mm 42.5mm 100-400mm panasonic lenses won't do pro capture low. On Olympus cameras
Did you pre-order the 150-400mm with the m1x? 😊
:)
On one hand, that would go against the argument I made of MFT as a value proposition... but I'd be lying if I said no. It's going to be interesting to see how it compares on the OM-D E-M1X against Canon's RF system at a similar price point.
@@NottaPro unless you print humongous, none of the ff will be able to match this combo 😉
Depending upon what you are shooting, IBIS in M43 negates the two stop penalty on noise. I have a G9 and an EM1MK3, and can comfortably shoot hanheld at one second for still subjects or subjects where motion blur is useful (e.g urban night scenes, building interiors), whereas my Sony A7R3 is not in my experience very good with stabilization. The Sony is of course better in other ways - focusing for example - so it depends on a user's requirements.
Agreed, generally speaking, the IBIS on the E-1x seems to be better on the telephoto lenses on the Canon R6 as well; although that's most apparent with poor/lazy form (and is likely being exaggerated by the added weight/length of the lenses).
I forget from who (unfortunately), but I saw some pretty amazing hand-held night shots with the E-M1mk3 which made me reconsider my M10M as my definitive night camera. Unfortunately, it doesn't help when you need to bump the shutter speed for action shots, but it's been helpful with he 40-150 and x2tc (f/5.6) for perched birds. I expect it'll be helpful with the 150-400, and keeping the shutter speed tied to the subject's need, rather than driven by lens/shooter stability.
M43 was one of my considerations as a hybrid shooter. Unfortunately I can't pick one up now due to budget reasons. Picked up an XT4 instead with a Fringer adapter to use my EF glass.
If Panasonic could do AF-C with adapters, I would have gone for a GH5 or G9. One thing I hope Panasonic does is to release f/2 zooms. f/2.8 is just too dark for crop sensor bodies once you shoot indoors, at least in my use case shooting indoor sports/gym/workouts.
f/2.8 definitely seems to be the sweet spot for fast glass with respect to price/light gathering for zooms. Panasonic does have a 10-25 f/1.7 for M43, but it's not cheap, and I'm guessing isn't helpful depending on how close you can get and how much environment you're looking to capture (I recall all too well the pain of shooting indoor sports with slow teles, even before today's absurd ISOs and most importantly, flicker-detection/sync!).
pen F mark2 with IS, and no crop 4K. wish
Just bought the em1x
But the em1x low pro capture
Is greyed out
And the portrait buttons don't work are off how do you turn these on
How do you turn these on
Low pro capture needs an Oly lens (or a manual focus lens, at which point you're giving-up the inter-frame refocusing low-speed gives you).
Regarding the portrait buttons, did you flip the "lock" switch? There's a switch below the LCD (held horizontally), try setting it so that it points to the dot (neither "lock" nor "c-lock") and see if that unlocks the portrait buttons.
@@NottaPro yep hit the switch
And its a shame 12mm 42.5mm 100-400mm panasonic lenses won't do pro capture low. On Olympus
Sharp will come soon! We can look forward to see it!
Maybe sharp will put the samsungs new sensor in
You mention the weight of the bodies, but that's not the issue. When you add full frame lenses, particularly tele and super tele, there is a big difference.
Good point. There are some incongruous numbers when looking at the lenses I do mention, comparing the (announced) RF 70-200 f/4 at 695g/4.69" and the Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 at 880g/6.3"; but it looks better comparing the Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 357g/3.94". The RF lens also looks to be exceptionally small compared to the Sony and Panasonic L-mount versions--but those have in-lens stabilization.
You forgot another BIG rise of a little dog contender. FujiFilm...... with X mount APS-C and medium format with GFX.
The Fuji line-up definitely has a lot of options; I'm glad they're continuing to expand the X100 line-up, now on their fifth iteration I believe. If they released a waterproof version, I'd finally be able to replace my Leica X-U!
The way Fujifilm are working is the smartest. If I wasn't using Olympus already, I'd move to them. There's no future for "full-frame" cameras when you see what is possible to get in terms of portability and image quality from the FX line, and commerical quality from their GFX line. Why bother with something that's the same size and weight as a GFX 50s but not as good?
@@NottaPro the x100v is weatherproof including a filter
The X-U is IP68 rated, so usable down to 15m in the ocean, with effectively the same APS-C sensor and lens performance of the X2 (similar to the earliest X100 cameras). What I'm looking for would be a cross between the X100 series with the FinePix XP series... it looks like I might just be waiting for the Olympus Tough line to catch-up to where the X-U was though--assuming it's still around.
They have some problems too, UK division going through huge restructuring.
2021 wont be a phoenix year for any camera maker, quite the opposite unfortunately.
m43 will not die, at least not while: a) sensor technology continues to evolve, b) size and weight matter (I just picked up my old D700 w/ 17-35 f/2.8 zoom.. holy hell that thing is an anchor. I should have massive biceps!), and c) smartphones with sensors 1/5 the size of m43 continue to push the viability of pea-sized CMOS sensors leveraging AI and new sensor tech driving exceptional low light and dynamic range. I'm excited to see what Panasonic does with the GH6.
Well im a EM1 MK1 user come from Canon FF EOS 100 film and Nikon FF D700 digital. I change in 2014 cause of the weight of FF and the quality of Olympus products (i use an OM2 spot program too when i use film camera).
I'm looking to upgrade my Mk1 then and look for Em1X or Em1 MK3 or Pana G9. The choice of the camera is difficult cause we have to think so many thing like the capacities of the body in terms of focusing, colorimetry, quality of the image, ergonomics. One of te thing i think is important is the viewfinder and i'm very interrogative about the magnification of the Em1X at 0.84 instead of the Em1 Mk3 at 0.74 i believe.
Cause i think a too big magnification like 0.84 is not suitable wih the capacities of the eye to look in just one time the whole scene.
What a pity all the camera do not use the possibilties like the G9 to change the magnification between 0.83 0.75 and 0.70 or something ike that ...I think this this the best for picture need precision on tripod for example and 0.75 and 0.70 for otherpictures and depending on person use glasses or not !...
But as i say a body need to be choosen to be suitable with the lenses we put on it and i 'm not decided between Oly 40-150 2.8 and Pana 50-200 2.8/4. I dont take the oly few years ago cause the balance with the EM1 MK1(with grip) ...and take the pana 100-300. If the quality of the image isnt so bad the ergonomis of the pana is poor against Oly.
Then i would be happy to take the Em1X but the magnification seem to be an important problem for me.
The EM1 mK3 with grip is the same i think that the Em1 MK1.
The G9 seem good for the viewfinder but not a good as Oly for the other characteristics...
Well what do u think about all that ?
Thanks for ur great video and sorry for my english ...im french...
You don't want to hear me even attempt to speak French, so don't worry about the English.
I've never noticed an issue with magnification of the EVFs; personally, I've always wanted larger magnification, like on a Leica M3, to help with focusing. That does seem like it's less important now though, because of things like focus-peaking not to mention autofocus itself...the G9 feature sounds interesting, but on that regard I don't have much advice
I don't have prescription glasses, but on a tripod, I tend to use the flip-out screen on the E-M1X, which may also be helpful with your concern regarding magnification. Personally, I've become a big fan of the Oly Pro lenses, with the function-buttons and often manual-focus clutches. Even so, I've got the E-M1X EVF set to one of the two styles which actually reduces the magnification slightly, so as not to cover it with the info displays (shutter speed, aperture, etc.; which are listed below it, rather than overlayed on the bottom of the potential image).
With respect to the two OMD cameras (E-M1X/E-M1 Mark III), you're basically choosing based on ergonomics. The M1X has subject tracking, the E-M1 has a sky-focusing mode and only one of its two SD slots supports UHS-II; but otherwise they're pretty much the same once you get past the body.
Between the OMDs and G9, again ergonomics should be the deciding factor, based on your preference; but you may also want to choose based on which set of lenses you have/prefer. The G9 will support Dual IS with appropriate Panasonic lenses (but not Olympus); the OMD cameras will support Sync IS and pro-capture with Olympus lenses.
If you're leaning towards the OMDs, but want to tweak the magnification ratio, you could look for after-market adapters. I see a few for *magnifying*, but not so much for *reducing*. If you're concerned with framing, you could also use a fixed (non-live) viewfinder mounted in the shoe.
I pretty much always convert from raw images, so the in-built JPEG engines aren't that interesting to me; but both are adequate I'm sure. For moving subjects, the OMDs will undoubtedly have better autofocus. If you currently have the OM-D E-M1 and like it, and prefer Olympus lenses anyway, I'd say stick with either the E-M1X or the newer E-M1 based on whether you like the size of the E-M1X or want the option of the E-M1 and adding a grip when you want it.
Agree with most, except with the statement that m43 is not for professionals. If wedding photographers can use m43 successfully for years, any professional photographer can.
That's true. I wasn't so much discouraging pros from using it (I expect they're more than aware enough of their own needs than to be taking blind advice) than to encourage hobbyists or those just starting to explore an ILC to not be discouraged by a lot of the naysayers. Pros were shooting with the Nikon D3 and Canon 1Ds, and I remember a story about an embedded journalist that just used point-and-shoot digitals. DXOMark averages the D3 sensor out on par with the OM-D E-M1 MII; although looking at how it breaks down it's clear they're are trade-offs between them.
Just picked up a em1x with 1500 shuter actions
Not bad, that's barely been used!
@@NottaPro 1st track meet
With a Tamron 70-300mm via VILTROX adapter
Tracking worked video worked
Selling all my gear for the 12-100mm
2 stops noisier than Canon is 3 to 4 stops noisier than Nikon or Sony....I have tried Olympus several times but the IQ ...specifically noise performance and dynamic range are what has always resulted in me moving on...
The DXOMark "sports" (max ISO for their benchmark minimum DR and SNR) doesn't show much difference between the current Canon cameras and Nikon/Sony cameras; within a stop for the Z7/D850 on the low-end to the A7 III on the high-end, with the R5/R6, Z6, and newer Sony cameras about mid-way between those.
The most recent M43 camera I find in their database is the OM-D E-M1 MII, which they rate at ISO-1312 as the highest that meats the DR/SNR requirements, while the Z7 scores 2668 (1-stop) and the A7III scored 3730 (1.5-stop). The A7R4 and R6 are about 3400. Admittedly, when I made the statement, it had been based on subjective, visual observation, of raw files--and not a scientific analysis--but it seems that the DXO analysis agrees with what I was seeing, or slightly more generous to M43. I suspect part of the difference is I was looking at "usable in a pinch" and there's a bit more obvious divergence further up the ISO ramp (such as a full-stop for the R6 compared to the R5, IMO); and I haven't done an exhaustive comparison there with all of the cameras, but the R6 looks to be on-par with the best current Sony 35mm sensors.
@Notta Pro
I understand your position and enjoyed your video, but high ISO noise is very apparent with m43 vs Nikon or Canon FF.
Please don’t try to gaslight the shortcomings of the system with silly arguments (DXO says...) when it is easily disproven with actual side by side comparisons.
Thanks for watching! From what I can tell, based on samples I can find online (and was supported by the DXO Mark measurements), there isn't much difference between recent Canon and Sony sensors (including Sony sensors in Nikons). Some of their cameras do better with high ISO while others may do better elsewhere--e.g. higher resolution. There's probably a full-stop in usable ISO between Canon's R5 and R6.
Bamboojled, I'm not sure if you're suggesting that the delta is greater than 2 stops for M43, or with my suggestion that Canon and Sony doing about as well at this point (I'll readily admit Canon had previously been doing poorly in comparison). IMO, 2 stops is a pretty big spread (25600 vs 6400).
Agreed that MFT is an absolutely worthwhile investment in 2021. Here a some points to consider:
1) For most photographic situations in the field, MFT does virtually everything FF does with a more manageable form factor.
2) MFT is 100% viable for professional use for a wide range of photo missions, especially nature/wildlife and street, although you can shoot just about anything you need and get results that are as good as FF in most situations (and certainly more than "good enough" for most uses almost all of the time). Also, MFT is better than FF for video (Breaking Bad was partially shot with a Lumix GH4).
3) You actually have more control over DoF with MFT, as you have more range to play with. I've never had a problem getting super shallow DoF with MFT in cases where I want that--more often I'm looking to increase DoF and that's much easier with MFT. The fad of using ridiculously shallow DoF to "isolate the subject" has gotten ridiculous to the point where some shots look as silly as over-saturated landscapes. If I want to go to extremes, my f/0.95 can give me paper thin DoF.
4) Re ergonomics, it's a matter of personal preference and although I have two Olympus cameras, I much prefer the ergonomics of Lumix cameras and the G9 is my primary tool. With the battery grip (which I have on most of the time, but it's nice to be able to shed that when you want to go lighter/smaller/less conspicuous), it's similar in size and weight to the M1X but the grip is much deeper and fits very securely in my hand in either orientation (and has redundant controls). Also, it's a lot cheaper and the performance of two cameras is similar enough that it's really a matter of personal preference. I'd considered an A7 iii before going for the G9 and I'm now ever more glad I did. Although the G9 body is larger than the A7, the lenses are much smaller--having a de facto 200-800 that fits in my hand is incredible. It's always best to rent/borrow and "test drive" any system before taking the plunge with any gear.
5) Another advantage of MFT over any other system is that, in addition to a you can use virtually any lens ever made via adapters (and re manual lenses, real photographers don't need auto-anything). Re native MFT lenses, there are no bad lenses in the ecosystem--there are relatively inexpensive "kit" lenses but they're all good enough for most purposes and the high-end ones are world-class. In addition to the ones you mentioned, the Panasonic-Leica offerings are extraordinary and easily capable of resolving well enough for the 80MP pixel-shift feature common to the G9 and M1X.
6) I've never had a problem with high-ISO noise, but DxO PhotoLab 4's DeepPRIME noise reduction is a game-changer. I can easily shoot at 6400 and expect great results, but 12,800 can also work and even 25,600, depending on the scene. Another consideration is that with MFT, you can often leave the tripod at home, due to superior image stabilization (especially the high-end models)
7) If you want to avoid hassle of changing lenses (or need one-handed operation), a 1" bridge camera (Lumix FZ1000 of if you need weather sealing a Sony RX-10 Mk iv) can deliver more than "good enough to print" results almost as often as MFT or FF. Just throwing that in there.
8) Both of the parents of MFT, Oly and Panny, are committed to its further development. I'm looking forward to the next-gen sensors (33MP and 47MP are supposedly in development). Within a few years, there may well be no reason to even consider FF...
Thanks for the thoughtful comment and suggestions! I'm always curious to hear from people who are shooting both Olympus and Panasonic, since there are a few things from both that just don't work as well across brands, so it's interesting to see a few people commenting that they're using both. I'd be keen to hear if you've run into any of the compatibility/quirky issues, and if you've just worked around them, or if you've stuck to a selection of lenses/bodies that avoid that (things like IS compatibility, on-lens controls).
I agree with the IS, that it really helps in certain situations (long teles, static normal/wide shots).
My problem with bridge cameras--although it's been a while, so I expect this to have improved significantly--is that they're slow (or expensive to the point of removing much of the benefit). That said, there are some cheap Panasonic bridge cameras used that would fit the bill for certain people; so that's a great suggestion, especially for someone who just wants an all-in-one travel camera without worrying much about upgrading.
Finally, I do hope that JIP/OM and Panasonic continue to invest in MFT and we see updated sensors and improved AF (and continued improvement on the IS); but I'm not entirely convinced. JIP doesn't have a great track-record, but I'm optimstic--I'd like to get an OM-D E-M1 Mark IV with higher resolution, better battery life, better object-detect auto focus, weather sealing, IS and portability for hiking and camping; but only time will tell at this point. If Panasonic is serious about continuing to support MFT for Video (e.g. the BGH1), I expect that will be enough to continue to improve ISO performance and push sensor development; although Sony's full-frame sensors (between them and other manufactures, like Nikon) have economy of scale benefits that encourage direct improvements focusing on the 35mm sensors.
@@NottaPro I should've stated that my Oly cameras are not MFT but of course it's always better to use "native" lenses so you get the full benefit of things like Dual IS. My only non- Panny or Lecia MFT lens is the Zhongyi Mitakon Speedmaster 25mm f/0.95, which is full-on manual (no contact points, so no EXIF) but too much fun--sharp, but somewhat "retro" rendering, razor-thin DoF (if I want to play that game), and it practically sees in the dark. Some of my "artsiest" images were shot through that.
I remain a huge fan of the FZ1000 as, when the weather isn't crappy and/or changing lenses isn't a practical option, I can still produce very large-format printworthy images. If I weren't lucky enough to have the budget for multiple systems, I could well make do with the FZ1000. You can currently get a new "Mk I" like mine for under US$600 (with a three-year warranty, though you likely won't need it--no problems so far with mine anyway), which is a huge bargain.
Great non-sensationlised discourse on the MFT system. When I started in photography, I started with Canon, like a LOT of people. Something about Nikon never caught my interest. I think the aesthetics didn't appeal to me. I shot both APS-C and FF for a couple years and realised I loved the images they produced but didn't like the weight of the kit at all. Then I heard about this camera called the Panasonic LUMIX G7. What sparked my interest more than anything was the size and 4K video. I liked it so much I sold all my Canon gear and switched over to Panasonic LUMIX MFT and ran with it for another 3 years. Suffice it to say I loved it for what I was doing at the time, food, and product photography.
Alas, I moved on to other forms of photography, street, reportage, fine art, and portraiture using both digital and film. In doing so, I wanted an even smaller but aesthetically pleasing kit that replicated shooting film and the obvious winner was Fujifilm. So I've been shooting Fujifilm for roughly 3 years and I love it. Here's the irony of it all, I recently went back to MFT just for street photography and picked up a used Olympus O-MD EM10 Mark II with the 17mm f2.8 pancake and a Laowa 17mm f1.8 and I'm in heaven with this kit. So now I have three kits, my street kit, my film kit, and my professional kit. At the end of the day, a camera and lenses are tools to achieve a goal.
MFT is as good a system to do that as any depending on what you're using it for. But that's the truth for any camera system. My motto is #CraftOverGear. Sorry for the length of my comment but my story needed context. Looking forward to future videos.
If you have an EM1X, no other Camera is needed. Maybe a Fujifilm X100V, as I use in parallel to the X. 😁
I agree, all the other cameras are for fun (… or for video).
I've been alternating between the Q2 and the X2 in parallel (and occasionally the X-U if the situation warrants). I'm still disappointed that Leica has discontinued the X line, but, I agree with your comment: a pocketable (for some pockets) camera like the X2/X100V/Ricoh GR lines coupled with the E-M1X are a killer combination-and the weather sealing of the X100V is notable there.
More or less the conclusion I’ve come to as well. With the state of the world’s economy there is no guarantee half the legacy brands will exist in 5 years.
Плюс в карму.
MFT was ridiculed from its inception in 2007, mainly in America. It is a cultural thing, where 'bigger is often seen as better'.
Back then it was the canikon DSLR snobs, who were dismissive of MFT. Ironically canikon DSLRs stopped production first, and they jumped onto the Sony FF mirrorless bandwagon, and continue trashing MFT.
True. Admittedly, I wasn't super fond of the EVF, other than for things like infrared photography; although I've warmed to them as they've gotten better. I also didn't give the weight difference the same level of respect when I was younger, either :/
Before MFT, Four Thirds was competing with APS-C and like you said: in part because they weren't Canikon and in part because APS-C still had the "bigger is better" metric, they didn't get a lot of respect in the Western world (Oly apparently has continued to sell well in Japan). I remember that era, being impressed with the flagships E-1/3/5, but the lens cost and size didn't seem to be delivering on the promises that a smaller sensor should deliver (because of R&D recapture and flange distance, in part, and ignoring DoF equivalence). MFT helped with the latter, while time has helped with the former.
Thanks for watching!
The best thing about micro-43 IMO, is the compact bodies and lenses. The large bodies like the EM-1X and GH series are not very appealing as you can get a full frame for the same pricing. This
At $1700, there isn't a full-frame equivalent to the OM-D E-M1X. At $3,000 it was harder to rationalize. I find the E-M1X actually just a *bit* too small for my hands when held in the standard horizontal orientation. The E-M1X isn't for everyone, either it's too big or not high-res enough or missing the low-light ability of a full-frame camera; but there's definitely a segment for which it's a good tool. That said, a E-M1 m2 or m3 with a vertical grip gives more flexibility if you don't mind the trade-offs (and I think a mark 3 with a grip runs about the same as a E-M1X).
Merci ! - Thanks from Brussels... L u c
Thanks for watching!
E-M1x now < $1K for like new on MPB
Total bargain
Eh.... I am curious how this format wll survive, didn't Olympus just get sold to vulture capitalist group?
Strictly speaking, I think that's an accurate description of Japan Industrial Partners (JIP); although from the articles I've read, they aren't particularly successful. A lot of people are curious, this could either be a big success for them, or--like their success story to date, the Sony Vaio line of PCs--the effective end of Olympus cameras in short order.
You should really be looking straight into your video camera.
For what I do the D800 Nikon will last till I die. (70yr old now).My lumix g9 and Leica/lumix lenses also be in my grave. But as of now this Olympus is on sell till the end of February 2022 for $1,700. I must add this to my coffin. GRINS
Here's to hoping you out live the shutter--but to the sentiment, the D800 was remarkable when it came out, and its capabilities certainly haven't degraded with time. Enjoy the E-M1X if you get it (presumably that's the one on sale for $1,700?)--it's been a blast, especially with longish (40-150) and long (150-400) lenses. We'll see what OM is announcing in a couple days as a successor (it sounds like, more closely to the E-M1 line); it's beginning to sound evolutionary rather than revolutionary, which means the current crop of E-M1 2/3 and E-M1X may still be a quite attractive at their current price points.
Do your homework…plenty professionals using Olympus….especially outside the USA! OH ..Try lighten up a little too.
I dumped my entire Olympus OMG em one system with all of its great lenses and jumped on the Fuji bandwagon. Funny you never mentioned Fuji as a player in your little scenario. I shoot with a Nikon z system for my landscapes but everything else is done with Fuji and I haven't looked back with any sorrow at all. Michael 4/3 is dead drop it.
I'm not sure why that's particularly funny. Where would it fit in? What combination would you put together for covering soccer/assoc. football or hockey?
Someone suggested Fuji on the Q2/M10 video, and more regularly Fuji cameras get compared to the Leicas so it makes sense there; but compared to Oly and Canon, there's generally less-good AF, and most combinations aren't environmentally sealed.
If you're raising it more generally, there are some great Fuji cameras, and the system has some good used options. Last I checked, M43 could still be had for cheaper though, while still getting some nice kit (e.g. E-M5, 40-150 4.5-5.6, and a 25mm for less thess than $500; although those lenses aren't weather sealed).
@@NottaPro where would Fuji fit in????? i hope you are just kidding. you mentioned a "douopoly" of NIkon and Canon, but dude.... you need to get with the times. Right now there are FOUR different companies that are all fighting for the top of the mountain of photography, Nikon, Canon, Sony, and yes Fujifilm. They are all stepping up their game and the consumers have been spraying their money around to ALL those 4 companies pretty liberally. Fuji and Sony are the two that are gathering followers quicker and building up their reputations as the superior systems overall. They are outperforming both Canon and Nikon right now. On a similar note, we are also seeing a general trend of people dropping full frame cameras and picking up Micro 4/3 systems. so , no, Micro 4/3 is not anywhere close to being dead.
I like what Fuji is doing, but they've never had leading market share like Nikon and Canon did in the '80s, '90s, and '00s--until Sony really began showing what mirrorless could do.
The most recent numbers I could find, from a PetaPixel article quoting Techno Systems this month, shows Sony and Canon owning 35% and 30% respectively globally, while Fuji only has 12% of the MILC market (8% for Olympus, and then 7.5% each for Nikon and everyone else).
If you were to look at all ILC, Fuji would drop a little, but as MILCs are really where the industry is moving with regard to camera systems, those shares seem representative of how the companies are doing.
Looking to buy your first camera? The market is shrinking, so I would advise against buying into MFT at this time, because it’s just too risky.
I wouldn’t even recommend Nikon due to its numbers looking shaky. Canon looks best, because of it’s strong leader position and all those EF lenses which are compatible with its RF mount...bargains to be had for decades to come. Sony’s clearly a very safe bet. Fuji sales have been doing well in recent years, so they should be okay but I’d say higher risk than Canon/Sony. Don’t even consider Pentax...it’s release of new cameras has stalled.
Good points, and a fair assessment of the principals in my opinion; however I obviously disagree at points. There's value to be had in MFT, especially with used lenses and even new bodies, that is hard to match. I'm impressed, and neglected to reference, that Canon was really smart about supporting EF and even EF-S lenses on their RF cameras via an adapter, and there is some value in lenses if you go that route, although you lose the portability improvements with the RF lenses or the other mirrorless mounts. The R5 and R6 bodies feel like Canon's first all-in efforts on RF, and I personally wouldn't even look at the earlier R and RP; but I would expect that prices both for the lenses and obviously those bodies will come down over the next couple years. For someone who's looking for a body and a coupe of lenses, the economics of buying used MFT I see as outweighing the systems risky future.
I've always liked Fuji on several levels, but admittedly never ended-up buying one of their digital cameras. Things people would need to be aware of is their use of a unique colour filter (their in X-Trans sensor, compared to a traditional Bayer filter) which may be frustrating if they're interested in working with the raw files outside of the first-party software (from what I've heard, by default even Adobe's products don't always handle this well).
I honestly can't argue with suggesting Sony; they're now the oldest system with a clear future--the AP recently announced that they're switching from Nikon to Sony. Technically, Sony is probably the most advanced in several areas; although I know some people criticize their ergonomics--others I know really love them. It's looking like Nikon vs. Canon we've seen for the previous decades is being replaced by Sony vs. Canon; back to your earlier point, the EF-RF adapter I think will give Canon a unique ability to leverage its more niche EF lenses, like its tilt-shift lenses, that don't have mirrorless-native versions.
I don't think any of that should discourage people from looking at other options, but do agree that anyone buying into MFT should be aware there's significant risk that there won't be an upgrade path. I know someone who bought a digital Pentax K-Mount years ago, and when I spoke with him about the system earlier this year, he said it didn't bother him since it suited his needs and there were plenty of lenses available if he felt he needed to further expand the system. Even the OM-D E-M5 from 2012 has IBIS, usable ISO comparable to what people were shooting on film, weather sealing, and a wide selection of lenses which can be had economically used.
Sony's bodies are ridiculous, are you buying stock or a camera?
Buy what makes you happy. MFT makes me shoot, canon system makes keep it at home. That’s a good investment.
Good comments, everyone was denying that Olypus was dying. M 4/3 is OK if you are already invested, not a good place to start a new system. FF sensors are getting cheaper, and phone resolution is getting better putting the squeeze on M4/3. They do still make sense for video if you already are invested. They are a bad choice for stills at this point in time.
@@WhoIsSerafin that’s really bad advice for someone buying their first camera. If Olympus gets asset stripped (which is what JIT is known for) and Panasonic stops investing in MFT, then there’ll be no investment in new MFT cameras technology. After 10 years you won’t be happy when that person starts hating on you.
sony suddenly becomes the largest shareholder of olympus when olympus launch the 5axia ibis. suddenly everybody has 5 axis ibis. in 2016, olympus launch pen-f. as it has the built in profiles of a third company, sony could not gain access to it. 2019 sees funds going out as sony left olympus. many lens and development was hindered. olympus decided that carving out her camera department is the only way to protect her IP. olympus holds 5 percents of OMDS which is a new company.
Your content is okay, but your editing style is so distracting. Eyes looking in all sorts of directions, cuts too rapid, text off screen. All so unnecessary.
Thanks for watching, and I appreciate the feedback.
I agree - distracted from what point you were trying to make.
Dude is boring
this is probably the worst-quality video about cameras on TH-cam...who's your camera man...panning back and forth geez! Speak clearly bro!
He does a good job conveying info.
If you want high production values on TH-cam, go find a content provider who gets paid by a camera manufacturer...you know, that husband and wife team or that loud talking guy with big hair...
Allow me to be blunt; this man is the Bill Belichick of reviewers.
His understanding of the production/saturation of the market, continual shifts, initial cost of entry, user and price correlation, and demand from shareholders for the major 3 players to create new mounts…is surgical in it’s analysis and presentation.
He doesn’t deceive you by trying of suggest that that the MFT system can out punch the upper echelon…what he’s stating is that given your needs/objectives, budget and expectations…you should consider-and perhaps be even more satisfied with a MFT system.
Point is, he recognizes what many others don't: There is a trade-off involved in almost every decision. You can't have it all. In the case of MFT vs. Full-Frame, if you want to stay within, say, about 100mm then a Sony a7c is about the size/weight of a MFT body (non EM1X) and offers a good full-frame sensor. But if you want to go telephoto and have to carry the combo around then MFT offers a sizeable (!) advantage in size/weight.