M43, and why people are wrong about it

[Raymond Lin]

No, it isn't. If you are only using one format, then that is all that matters. Do you use equivalence for FF Vs MF?



You took it just now, stop lying

It doesn't matter what you were referring to it's nonsense. Saying people only defend things because they paid for it, it's a laughable view.

Proof, post dated April 2018.

Spoiler

As for people defending what they bought and what they own? That's nonsense? LOL, where have you been? That is the definition of fanboy pretty much, it's been happening since the beginning of time. Be it consoles (you want to see the keyboard fights between Xbox and PS4?), in cars, in everything. It's basic human behaviour, people like to think they made the right decision in their purchase so they have to defend it even with the evidence proves otherwise. Again, this is not just cameras, it's everything, I too am probably guilty of the same as well. It's what people do.

(and still, I've not specifically knocked m4/3 btw)

 

[woof woof]

But 'equivalence' is what it's all about. M4/3 wins on size and weight, but loses on every other aspect of performance. Equivalence explains why, and there's no denying it or ignoring it.

I think equivalence can also be used to get the best from mft and if doing so the difference between mft and aps-c or even ff can become pretty insignificant. For example shoot with mft at f1.4 to f4 and you may well get image quality that'll be lost amongst ff images shot at f2.8 to f8.

That sort of IQ in a small form camera and lens may be very atractive... and I think it is

 

[john.margetts]

These conversations are as old as photography. 35mm film had a hard time to begin with as it is a miniature format - now seen to be the big format. Ever since that chap lugged his 10x8 plate camera up Mont Blanc in the 19th century, there has been a tendency to make cameras smaller and lighter and this will not stop with M43. When Oskar Barnack designed the original Leica the image quality was appalling. The film technology of the early 1920s was not up to the job. People using 35 mm in large numbers drove the film technology. People using very small sensors (M43, as well as phones and compact cameras) will drive the technology to the point that someone insisting on Full Frame digital will be seen as much of a dinosaur as I am with my 120 film cameras.

So: I still use 6x9 film which produces a quality Full Frame digital struggles with. I also use M43 (Olympus Pen 5). I cannot afford 6x9 very often (£2.00 per shot, roughly!) and frequently do not want the size or weight of my 80D.

 

[HoppyUK]

No, it isn't. If you are only using one format, then that is all that matters. Do you use equivalence for FF Vs MF? <snip>

Of course. Equivalence explains why medium-format will not replace full-frame and will only attract a niche following. Basically, MF is bigger, but not much - crop factor 1.2x larger. But on the other hand, M4/3 is 2x smaller - big difference.

You're struggling Keith. Your argument reads like anyone who disagrees with you is either stupid or unqualified to comment. Neither is true, all views are valid, we just interpret the facts differently.

 

[Cagey75]

Of course. Equivalence explains why medium-format will not replace full-frame and will only attract a niche following. Basically, MF is bigger, but not much - crop factor 1.2x larger. But on the other hand, M4/3 is 2x smaller - big difference.

You're struggling Keith. Your argument reads like anyone who disagrees with you is either stupid or unqualified to comment. Neither is true, all views are valid, we just interpret the facts differently.

What arguments? I never called anyone stupid either so stop talking out of your cake hole. You seem to be jumping the gun on me 'arguing' all I said was Ray's point was nonsense, and it is in my mind. The rest was playful, I know he didn't just take that shot But knew he'd prove it. There's struggle if there is no fight, so try harder ...son

 

[Raymond Lin]

What arguments? I never called anyone stupid either so stop talking out of your cake hole. You seem to be jumping the gun on me 'arguing' all I said was Ray's point was nonsense, and it is in my mind. The rest was playful, I know he didn't just take that shot But knew he'd prove it

What point? that people defend what they bought?

Not accepting that IS nonsense because that happens everywhere.

 

[Cagey75]

These conversations are as old as photography. 35mm film had a hard time to begin with as it is a miniature format - now seen to be the big format. Ever since that chap lugged his 10x8 plate camera up Mont Blanc in the 19th century, there has been a tendency to make cameras smaller and lighter and this will not stop with M43. When Oskar Barnack designed the original Leica the image quality was appalling. The film technology of the early 1920s was not up to the job. People using 35 mm in large numbers drove the film technology. People using very small sensors (M43, as well as phones and compact cameras) will drive the technology to the point that someone insisting on Full Frame digital will be seen as much of a dinosaur as I am with my 120 film cameras.

So: I still use 6x9 film which produces a quality Full Frame digital struggles with. I also use M43 (Olympus Pen 5). I cannot afford 6x9 very often (£2.00 per shot, roughly!) and frequently do not want the size or weight of my 80D.

Not the point, people still to this day sneer at cheaper/lesser/smaller gear whether we like it or not. That is what the guy is saying in the video, and goes on to say why it is nonsense that people still do this because even the smallest sensor/gear whatever in the right hands can produce the goods. So why is there this elitism? why does gear envy or snobbery still exist?

Flipping it to say "You only like it because you bought it" is laughable. In that case I'll never believe a word anyone here says about any gear they bought as it'll just be plain bias.

 

[Cagey75]

What point? that people defend what they bought?

Not accepting that IS nonsense because that happens everywhere.

See above. That is a silly way to view things and I think you know it. Do you only ever praise gear that you bought just because? neither do I, and I like to think others don't do it for the sake of spends either. It's also not the point of the guy's video, i have no idea why you think we should shift it to your way of thinking

 

[Raymond Lin]

Turn it around, why did you buy it if you didn't like it? You got to like it in the first place to buy it so naturally if someone say something negative about it (which you automatically take it as snobbery), you get defensive, human nature.

I am going to say something about m4/3 now

M4/3 don't have the bokeh of my FF - FACT
M4/3 don't have the DR or Low light to my FF - FACT

It's not snobbery, it's like saying my car is red, and the grass in your garden is green. They are facts. I am not knocking M4/3 for having less low light performance, it's perfect usable, but the FACT is something else is better.

No doubt you will take that comment as snobbery.

 

[john.margetts]

So why is there this elitism? why does gear envy or snobbery still exist?

Because when someone has spent £2,000+ on a camera body and £10,000+ on a selection of lenses, they really do not want to face the idea that £500 on M43 kit would have produced the same images with a lot less inconvenience.

 

[HoppyUK]

These conversations are as old as photography. 35mm film had a hard time to begin with as it is a miniature format - now seen to be the big format. Ever since that chap lugged his 10x8 plate camera up Mont Blanc in the 19th century, there has been a tendency to make cameras smaller and lighter and this will not stop with M43. When Oskar Barnack designed the original Leica the image quality was appalling. The film technology of the early 1920s was not up to the job. People using 35 mm in large numbers drove the film technology. People using very small sensors (M43, as well as phones and compact cameras) will drive the technology to the point that someone insisting on Full Frame digital will be seen as much of a dinosaur as I am with my 120 film cameras.

So: I still use 6x9 film which produces a quality Full Frame digital struggles with. I also use M43 (Olympus Pen 5). I cannot afford 6x9 very often (£2.00 per shot, roughly!) and frequently do not want the size or weight of my 80D.

That may happen, and it could come sooner than we think, but not through 'conventional' cameras. It'll come through 'computational photography' where multiple images are captured simultaneously and merged and modified in software with extraordinary results. It's already happening in two-lens and three-lens smartphones.

IMHO, that will kill most 'real' cameras, starting with the smallest. FF will survive, but only as an enthusiasts' medium for folks like us who like to do things 'properly'. The future's bright, but a new dawn is breaking...

 

[Cagey75]

Turn it around, why did you buy it if you didn't like it? You got to like it in the first place to buy it so naturally if someone say something negative about it (which you automatically take it as snobbery), you get defensive, human nature.

I am going to say something about m4/3 now

M4/3 don't have the bokeh of my FF - FACT
M4/3 don't have the DR or Low light to my FF - FACT

It's not snobbery, it's like saying my car is red, and the grass in your garden is green. They are facts. I am not knocking M4/3 for having less low light performance, it's perfect usable, but the FACT is something else is better.

No doubt you will take that comment as snobbery.

I don't know I really like or dislike something until i have actually used it for a while, I don't have anywhere close to go handle or try out stuff before I buy, so I buy kind of blindly every time. I have to rely on reviews - if they're simply saying it's great because they happened to buy it, or because they are somehow stuck with it then they shouldn't be reviewing. Again, none of this is the point, the point is gear snobbery still exists, and it's sad.

You didn't even watch the video, as he points out those things. GG

 

[john.margetts]

It'll come through 'computational photography' where multiple images are captured simultaneously and merged and modified in software with extraordinary results. It's already happening in two-lens and three-lens smartphones.

It is already happening with single lens cameras. My main technique for avoiding noise in very dark situations is to average several exposures. My Olympus Pen does ISO bracketing - several Raw files at several ISO setting from one shutter actuation - which are also proving useful.

 

[Raymond Lin]

I don't know I really like or dislike something until i have actually used it for a while, I don't have anywhere close to go handle or try out stuff before I buy, so I buy kind of blindly every time. I have to rely on reviews - if they're simply saying it's great because they happened to buy it, or because they are somehow stuck with it then they shouldn't be reviewing. Again, none of this is the point, the point is gear snobbery still exists, and it's sad.

You didn't even watch the video, as he points out those things. GG

The guy in the video is a video guy, he isn’t a photographer, even stated it himself, his reasoning of why m4/3 is great, it’s strengths applies mainly for video, he even said he uses MF for his work and not it’s AF.

I want to say “yeah, what he is saying are right about m4/3” but when he doesn’t even use it for photos, I mean who here in this thread uses their m4/3 mostly for video like he does? I bet nobody.

His reasons on why people hate the m4/3 because what it offers and those are not found in FF, he is specifically only mention only video features…he even admits the AF in his camera is only OK, he keeps banging on about bitrate, 4k video…I don’t see him talk about photography.

Apple and oranges.

 

[Nostromo]

@Cagey75, for someone who didn't want to start a war

What do you think? Not looking to start a war, enough of them on here as it stands Just looking for honest opinions.

You seem to be anti anyone else's honest opinion.
I've not used ff or m43 so can't comment on either.

 

[Cagey75]

The guy in the video is a video guy, he isn’t a photographer, even stated it himself, his reasoning of why m4/3 is great, it’s strengths applies mainly for video, he even said he uses MF for his work and not it’s AF.

I want to say “yeah, what he is saying are right about m4/3” but when he doesn’t even use it for photos, I mean who here in this thread uses their m4/3 mostly for video like he does? I bet nobody.

His reasons on why people hate the m4/3 because what it offers and those are not found in FF, he is specifically only mention only video features…he even admits the AF in his camera is only OK, he keeps banging on about bitrate, 4k video…I don’t see him talk about photography.

Apple and oranges.

And those of us here who use M43 for mostly stills can vouch for the system in that regard right here, but then we'll only be doing so because we bought into it ...

 

[Cagey75]

@Cagey75, for someone who didn't want to start a war

You seem to be anti anyone else's honest opinion.
I've not used ff or m43 so can't comment on either.

The only person I've disagreed with here was Ray, so think again. People throw comments like yours about on here a little too often without backing them up. If you can't comment then why did you bother? Just came in to have that silly dig? This is actually the first time I have ever seen you post on here, so weird that you know me so well

 

[Nostromo]

Watch any M43 camera or lens review, find one without the word "equivalence" scattered throughout and I'd love to see it

No, it isn't. If you are only using one format, then that is all that matters. Do you use equivalence for FF Vs MF?

What disadvantage? Low light? we learn to work around it, the IBIS helps a hell of a lot. We don't all need to shoot at 6400, I rarely go above 1600 no matter the system. If ISO is your main, then you're not even looking at M43, so why are you even here?

 

[HoppyUK]

The only person I've disagreed with here was Ray, so think again. People throw comments like yours about on here a little too often without backing them up. If you can't comment then why did you bother? Just came in to have that silly dig? This is actually the first time I have ever seen you post on here, so weird that you know me so well

Do you ever read your own posts Keith, and wonder how they come across?

 

[Raymond Lin]

The only person I've disagreed with here was Ray, so think again. People throw comments like yours about on here a little too often without backing them up. If you can't comment then why did you bother? Just came in to have that silly dig? This is actually the first time I have ever seen you post on here, so weird that you know me so well

The only point here you have disagreed with has nothing to do with m4/3 itself !!! you merely disagree with the idea that people will defend what they bought because they don't want to be told what they bought is something inferior to something else that they could have bought, this applies to everything. BMW vs Audi, PS4 vs XB1, Intel vs AMD, people will defend what they buy, it happens everywhere. You makes it out like it's news or I made it up, honestly, where have you been?

Which is exactly what what John said too, more specifically.

Because when someone has spent £2,000+ on a camera body and £10,000+ on a selection of lenses, they really do not want to face the idea that £500 on M43 kit would have produced the same images with a lot less inconvenience.

You just want a fight with me and singled me out specifically.

 

[Cagey75]

The only point here you have disagreed with has nothing to do with m4/3 itself !!! you merely disagree with the idea that people will defend what they bought because they don't want to be told what they bought is something inferior to something else that they could have bought, this applies to everything. BMW vs Audi, PS4 vs XB1, Intel vs AMD, people will defend what they buy, it happens everywhere. You makes it out like it's news or I made it up, honestly, where have you been?

Which is exactly what what John said too, more specifically.



You just want a fight with me and singled me out specifically.

Singled out c'mon, you start more arguments on here than anyone Ray ... I said your comment was nonsense, and I still think so, where is the argument? Where is the singling out? If anyone else had said it I'd respond just the same

Do you ever read your own posts Keith, and wonder how they come across?

I do, I re-read them multiple times over because they are usually the best comments in the thread. What's your point? Nobody even said boo to you but you seem to be on some kind of mission, you're looking at the wrong guy if it's remorse you're after. I'll read this one a few times and chuckle to myself too

 

[Cagey75]

@Nostromo


Fantastic quotes, you must be a fan

 

[snerkler]

Watch any M43 camera or lens review, find one without the word "equivalence" scattered throughout and I'd love to see it

No, it isn't. If you are only using one format, then that is all that matters. Do you use equivalence for FF Vs MF?



You took it just now, stop lying

It doesn't matter what you were referring to it's nonsense. Saying people only defend things because they paid for it, it's a laughable view.

IMHO equivalence is important so that we have some 'standard' by which we can compare and evaluate things, and work out what we might be getting if we're buying a specific lens etc. Without using equivalence people might wonder why their images look different to someone else's despite using the same focal length for example. By using the term equivalence it's not saying that one is better than the other, it's just a standardisation

 

[Cagey75]

IMHO equivalence is important so that we have some 'standard' by which we can compare and evaluate things, and work out what we might be getting if we're buying a specific lens etc. Without using equivalence people might wonder why their images look different to someone else's despite using the same focal length for example. By using the term equivalence it's not saying that one is better than the other, it's just a standardisation

That's how it should be - but it gets used in a derogatory manner too often. Again, it's how it is, like it or not. I remember when thinking about the switch to M43, I didn't know a whole lot about the system, but people were asking me why I would want to 'downsize' to a 'tiny' sensor? I was like, meh, I want IBIS, and went for it There is short comings with M43, we all know this, but nobody should feel lesser or wrong for choosing it. They will have their reasons. And equivalence is just a waste of time if you're never going to use FF, or indeed never have, it's just numbers. Nobody ever says things like "Now, if I'd shot this on FF the DOF would be shallower" when speaking on the final image

 

[tijuana taxi]

My verdict on m4/3, it will do until something else comes along

 

[Nostromo]

War, what is it good for, absolutely nothing.
Good bye

 

[snerkler]

And equivalence is just a waste of time if you're never going to use FF, or indeed never have, it's just numbers.

It is in this example, and there are folk that use cameras that have no idea that cameras have different sensor sizes let alone know about equivalence. But, reviews etc should talk about equivalence imo. Also, if you look at specs of equipment often they give you the equivalent numbers as well

Nobody ever says things like "Now, if I'd shot this on FF the DOF would be shallower" when speaking on the final image

I do when looking at my own images

 

[Cagey75]

It is in this example, and there are folk that use cameras that have no idea that cameras have different sensor sizes let alone know about equivalence. But, reviews etc should talk about equivalence imo. Also, if you look at specs of equipment often they give you the equivalent numbers as well

I do when looking at my own images :laugh:

Well, you wouldn't explain this to someone else admiring one of your images

I never use equivilancy, if I'm using a 12mm on M43, then it is a 12mm, I don't waste time describing it as 24mm equivalent, because it is still 12mm lens. The image is cropped, not the lens.

 

[the black fox]

been a lovely sunny day up here in north Wales ,a few hours down the reserve with nothing to show for it ,then a couple of hours on the sea wall practicing my b.i.f technique on the passing gulls . when I process the limited amount of shots taken today will I say this is betterer than what I took with my canon f/f pro set up or my nikon gear previous to that .no of cause I bloody well won't . its just todays shots which by midnight will be yesterdays shots and apart from a odd couple of followers who will give a toss ,thats right no one .

get out on your own sea wall ,let the sun beat down on your head and enjoy the days you have left

 

[Brian G]

It doesn't matter how much M43 is developed, the sensors will never have as many pixels as a full-frame.

 

[Cagey75]

get out on your own sea wall ,let the sun beat down on your head and enjoy the days you have left

Ah if only, no sea anywhere close to me. But I do need to get out and shoot more, maybe when my camera returns from the doctors

 

[snerkler]

Well, you wouldn't explain this to someone else admiring one of your images

.

That’s because no-one ever “admires” my images

 

[Raymond Lin]

Singled out c'mon, you start more arguments on here than anyone Ray ... I said your comment was nonsense, and I still think so, where is the argument? Where is the singling out? If anyone else had said it I'd respond just the same

The only person I've disagreed with here was Ray, so think again. People throw comments like yours about on here a little too often without backing them up. If you can't comment then why did you bother? Just came in to have that silly dig? This is actually the first time I have ever seen you post on here, so weird that you know me so well

And what dig? What did I exactly have a go at? Human nature? People defend their purchases? You are upset over that? Upset me commenting about human nature? Really?

 

[ancient_mariner]

I do, I re-read them multiple times over because they are usually the best comments in the thread. What's your point?

The point is that until you value the comments of others above your own, you will never learn from anyone else and every thread you take part in will be a battle. I started reading this because the title suggested there would be a discussion, but all you seem to want is for everyone to acknowledge that you are right in whatever you say.

 

[Box Brownie]

When i posted the link to the pro using M4/3 having sold his Nikon gear it was to illustrate that any choice of kit is horses for courses!

I have previously given my reasons for switching to MFT for the majority of my subjects (wildlife, nature etc?) but will also be keeping my 5D3 & 24-105 lens for low light situations..........this will not stop me trying out/exploring just what i can get in lower light situations with my EM1.2 because I do like to shoot very low shutter speed handheld and IBIS will be a boon

I had a wander around the local lake yesterday (will post some examples in the main thread in due course ~ honest I will ) and took some subjects that with the best will in the world I either struggled with or wouldn't bother with my equivalency FF. NB this for more than just the sensor size !

So, my view is does it do the job, can I or will it give me the opportunity to print at least to 20x16......if so does it matter what kit I shot it with ~ it shouldn't, should it???

Now where did I put my

 

[wooster]

Any camera does the job perfectly well for just about anyone. Within that scenario, some do things a bit better than others. People value different things. I don't care. I use fuji a lot because it's light, easy and gives great images. If I peep at some pixels it doesn't look like a 5dsr but I'm not bothered by peeping at the pixels. No-one looks at a picture and my wall and says: "Hmm. Crop frame, eh?" No one. ? Not one person. Ever.

(Neither do I )

 

[Baloo]

Wow an entire thread based on a logical fallacy!

 

[Cagey75]

And what dig? What did I exactly have a go at? Human nature? People defend their purchases? You are upset over that? Upset me commenting about human nature? Really?

Far from upset dude, have had a great day while you seem a little fixated on this

The point is that until you value the comments of others above your own, you will never learn from anyone else and every thread you take part in will be a battle. I started reading this because the title suggested there would be a discussion, but all you seem to want is for everyone to acknowledge that you are right in whatever you say.

I only posted the thread, it's not my discussion, I'm only responding to people quoting me at this stage. Nobody need convince me of anything, seems like they are trying to convince themselves. They'll go back to telling others their gear is too crap for weddings once they get bored of this

 

[Cagey75]

Wow an entire thread based on a logical fallacy!

Another gem contribution, there's always a few and people nag at me?

 

[Baloo]

Another gem contribution, there's always a few and people nag at me?

So are you saying you and the video guy have not committed a logical fallacy?