Absolutely, it's just a personal choice...It may sound like I am pushing FF in recent posts. That is not my intention. I'm trying to push back a bit on the sometimes silly way this forum can be defensive about sensor size. My point is that FF and m4/3s both have their place. The important thing is not defending one against the other, but rather knowing what your photography needs and understanding what gear or format can get you there.
I fully agree with you...Absolutely, it's just a personal choice...
I wouldn't have much use for a 24x36, as I value compactness much more than the few benefits I could get from 24x36 (and I take much more pleasure with m43 gear).
However, that doesn't mean there is no benefit in 24x36 for anyone.
The differences are clearly stated above... wether they are pros or cons, important or not depends on the person taking pictures.
It's completely pointless to state that any system is better for everyone... it's as stupid for 24x36 or for m43, or smartphones...
However, most of the people are not fanboys... they're just photographers who have made a choice, making what they think is the best compromise *for them*.
(the only problem, is that fanboys are often the ones that talk the more - or write, as you see more on forums that in real life.)
Agreed. And there are many members here who run FF and m43.I'm not sure I ever saw any "Full Frame advocates" on this forum, though.
Most of 24x36 users are normal people, with whom you can have normal discussions...
In the end, we're just photographers... we don't need to fight system against system...
If any APS or 24x36 company was going down, I would be sad, just as I am for Olympus.
There seems to be only one person who is particularly obsessed with what non-m43 users are posting on other websites and needs to come here and endlessly post about it. I agree it is ridiculous.Do you see how ridiculous this discussion is? And the M43 community is expected to keep quiet and accept all the FF propaganda and dare not ask - if you that sure about yourself give me a % improvement or stop forever the propaganda...
Yes, most of these posts are filled with ridiculously stupid arguments. Agreed again!Again do you see how ridiculously stupid these arguments are?
Hi kettle, I seem to recall a recent post of yours referring to someone as a Canon Fanboy. And I agree it was small and unnecessary.One thing - I find it so rude when full-frame advocates lose an argument, they call people fanboys... How small and unnecessary...
We seem to be agreeing on everything. It would appear someone loves m43 but is also very insecure about his choice. Why else would he have a constant need to try keep comparing m43 to other systems on other web sites, here, and coming here to complain about it? You would think he could simply be happy and satisfied with his choice of system without requiring re-validation of that choice. I think the vast majority of us are very happy with our gear or we wouldn't be here discussing it. Likewise most of us really don't need someone to keep coming in here to rehash arguments they have had elsewhere and telling us how smart he is and how dumb everyone else. Percentage wise, this nonsense activity is about 96% of this person's posts, since you want percentages.M43 owners should not defend themselves on this forum or be called fanboys... Common folks this is the Mu-43 forum, be proud of your gear, share great techniques, awesome images and learn from each other...
Discussion of technical differences between FF and MFT are totally pointless for two reasonsThere are "advocates" on both sides, for every system, but they are just small part of the photography community, a vocal minority. Even most the gearheads probably are not so devoted to trashing other gear. As I said in the other thread, try not to focus too much on that stuff. I don't think the recent news pleases many of the non-Olympus fans either. Most full frame users do not want to see Micro Four Thirds go down or vice versa.
I agree entirely with your logic and have recently come to the same conclusion. After refusing for years to run two systems I’ve eventually realised that my frustrations with m43 files for certain landscape scenes are best resolved by using a high pixel FF camera! I’m not giving up on m43 though - for long lens work and macro it’s hard to beat. I’ve got a Z7 heading my way - not cheap, but I’m at that point in my life where I can afford it, so what the hell!Yup! I have FF, m43 and had APSC in the past. I suck at math so x1.5 crop factor calculations of APSC quickly got tiring and sold the APSC. Now I use FF and m43 interchangeably.
For telephoto, macro, zoo, birds I use my mft exclusively on account of the fact that a) I don’t have any of those specialty lenses on FF - too big, too expensive b) I believe m43 clearly has advantage in those areas over FF and APSC.
But when I am at a location with landscape which I am sure is truly amazing and rare then I use the FF, A7R II to be specific currently. Yosemite’s tunnel view or the small climb overlooking Yellowstone’s grand prismatic come to mind.
Does that mean mft cannot capture that scene? Absolutely it can. Will I use mft for that? Mostly not. IMO It’s better to have all those pixels and DR and not use it than when you need it and don’t have it. May be HR mode mitigates some of that but I never had luck with it. I also like the FF image aspect ratio. Often times I find myself cropping mft images to make it more “wide”.
I have no brand or format loyalty either. If by some miracle mft development beats physics and with help of AI and computational photography gives equally malleable files as FF, I’ll gladly sell FF and buy whatever that miraculous mft body is. Olympus em1.5 may be?
As for Sony: I’ll dump it in a heartbeat if others had small mlc body around $900 or less with all those megapickles. D810 is there but I’m not going DSLR route again and Z7 is still around $2000. So yeah I’m kinda stuck with Sony for now. I wish they had ergonomics and WR of Olympus.
Congratulations! I had Z6, which in my opinion is the best FF body of current generation as far as ergonomics are concerned (applies to Z7 of course). The EVF is absofreakinglutely amazing too. And Z lenses are stunning. A used Z7S is squarely in my sight for year 2023 lol. The XQD slot of current Z drove me away. I’m glad they are going back the SD/CFe or SD/XQD ways.I agree entirely with your logic and have recently come to the same conclusion. After refusing for years to run two systems I’ve eventually realised that my frustrations with m43 files for certain landscape scenes are best resolved by using a high pixel FF camera! I’m not giving up on m43 though - for long lens work and macro it’s hard to beat. I’ve got a Z7 heading my way - not cheap, but I’m at that point in my life where I can afford it, so what the hell!
First of all, photography is not an art form. Photography is a medium that can potentially be used for art, same as film, drawing, painting, and so on. But photography, like any other medium, can also be used for entirely non-artistic purposes.Discussion of technical differences between FF and MFT are totally pointless for two reasons
1) If you take them to the lab, latest FF sensors are better than 4 year old MFT sensors in every single way they can measure but this doesn't matter because
2) Photography is an art form and both sensors have already reached the limits of human vision to the point where their technical capabilities don't any more limit your ability to capture just the picture you want.
Well, of course neither FF nor MFT sensors work well in some cases like extremely low light or in MFT case even in relatively low light but in almost all situations your achievements in this art form are limited only by your personal talent and skills.
On a related note I'm personally certain that most ILC owners would get 10x better pictures if they bother to fully read the manual of their existing camera instead of switching to something even more expensive and complicated.
Of course photography is an art form. You are trying to split hairs with semantics. Yes sculpture, writing, painting, photography, etc. can all be used for less arty purposes but they still entail artistic thought and decisions, but more mundane doesn't make them art free. On your painted stairs and your photographed cover art, you made artistic decisions on colors, edges painted, framing the cover art, probably making sure there were no reflections, it was straight in the frame, etc. Why did you do that? All minor sure, but still artistic choices all the same. If you were a purely art-free robot then you wouldn't be listening to music at all, let alone trying to represent it with the cover art from the album and you certainly wouldn't be painting your stairs. But you did, didn't you and I bet you gave some consideration on how your stairs look when you picked up the paint and spent time carefully putting paint where you wanted it and not where you did not.First of all, photography is not an art form. Photography is a medium that can potentially be used for art, same as film, drawing, painting, and so on. But photography, like any other medium, can also be used for entirely non-artistic purposes.
If you are a forensic photographer or astrophysicist or curator at a museum, you will not use photography as an art form but to create a document which can be used as an evidence in a court or scientific community.First of all, photography is not an art form. Photography is a medium that can potentially be used for art, same as film, drawing, painting, and so on. But photography, like any other medium, can also be used for entirely non-artistic purposes.
I think Olympus' most amazing product was the original EM5. A close second, however, was the EM10 ii. It was a wonderful camera, except for WR, for a very good price. This really indicated to me that maybe this lower end market simply wasn't as big as it needed to be to make good of small profit margins.I agree that marketing has to be better, but really wonder how have you missed the greatness of E-M10 II. When I studied ILC market in 2016 and opted for that camera, it was very clear that it almost matched E-M5 II, basically just no weather-sealing, video output etc. Although I do study internet A LOT when investing in something more expensive.