Considering Purchasing m4/3

[MMaC465]

Hello,

I’ve been thinking about purchasing into m4/3 for nature and wildlife photography. The compact and lightweight bodies/lenses are very appealing as I am mostly hiking, backpacking or kayaking with my camera gear. The weather sealing, IBIS, crop factor and ability to take a knock or two are also added perks. But I have some concerns regarding the longevity of the platform. With the contracting camera market, Olympus seemingly mired in never ending financial troubles, and Panasonic releasing the new FF S cameras, I worry that continued innovation and product development in the m4/3 format will slow or stall. If the new CEO and investment group at Olympus decide to focus more R&D money on the medical imaging sector of their company (which appears profitable) and decrease or cut R&D in the imaging business (which has been and continues to project as operating at a loss) paired with Panasonic’s new commitment to the L mount alliance taking precedence over continued development of m4/3 technology, where will the incentive and money come from for innovation? I understand that Olympus has stated that the imaging business portion of their company is the testing/proving ground for their medical imaging business and that the company is extremely invested in it's roots as a camera company. Panasonic has also said they are NOT abandoning the m4/3 format, but none the less I can easily see a scenario where the m4/3 format becomes marginalized into a video first format while still photography becomes ever increasingly less important/profitable.

With Canon, Nikon and of course Sony aggressively pursuing the lighter and more compact high end mirrorless camera market it seems like Olympus is going to struggle to maintain it’s claim as a more compact/lightweight system. Nikons new 500mm f/5.6 PF (which weighs almost exactly the same as the Olympus 300mm f/4) and Sony and Canon appearing to be able to also reduce the weight of their longer range lenses (the 400mm f/2.8 is only 6.4 pounds and 6.2 pounds respectively) of course adds more fuel to the fire. Olympus in fact seems to be moving in the opposite direction with the EM1X and the 150-400mm lens which is significantly larger than the Pan/Leica 100-400mm.

Fundamentally I do not want to spend $7000-$8000 on a system that over the next three to five years falls so far behind other formats that the advantages the system had to begin with (lightweight, compact, weather resistance, crop factor etc.) are easily surpassed by the larger formats due to a lack of investment/innovation on one end and greater investment/innovation on the other. Looking at what Sony has accomplished in the limited amount of time they have been making MICL camera’s is astounding.

My main questions are; for those of you who have purchased m4/3 -or- FF gear with a primary focus on nature and wildlife photography, either years ago or more recently, how satisfied are you with your purchase? Are there other systems you explored prior to choosing your system? Are there other systems that you wish you had bought into instead, or systems that you would gladly switch to today (all GAS aside)? I know this is a fairly long post, so to those of you who read to end thank you.

 

[TNcasual]

If the camera you purchase today gives you the results you want, why worry about what the manufacturer will or will not make 3 years from now?

As for purchasing, Olympus (along with Pentax) has industry leading weather sealing. If that is a main factor in your camera purchase, than an Olympus camera and Olympus weather sealed lenses are the best you can get.

 

[ralf-11]

longevity is not likely to be a concern

real concerns are reliability (for Lumix), some holes in the lens lineup & AF tracking - neither of which is up to say Nikon D500 stds.

OTOH, the system is smaller as you say and few people want to pay for, rent, or carry the big big glass

 

[MMaC465]

Thanks ralf. I'm looking primarily at the OM-D E-M1 Mark II (the EM1X seems too large for my needs). I have seen comparisons with the D500 and A9 for AF vs the Olympus and Lumix and you are 100% correct. The D500 + 500mm PF f/5.6 seems to be a good combo for reach/weight and is a kit I'll look at next time I'm near a good camera store. The A9 100-400 combo could be interesting, but part of me is a bit worried about the 400mm (or 560mm with the 1.4 tc) reach being a touch short. I've heard Sony is planning on releasing a new APS-C camera but when is anybodies guess.

 

[MMaC465]

If the camera you purchase today gives you the results you want, why worry about what the manufacturer will or will not make 3 years from now?

As for purchasing, Olympus (along with Pentax) has industry leading weather sealing. If that is a main factor in your camera purchase, than an Olympus camera and Olympus weather sealed lenses are the best you can get.

Thanks TN. Very good points.

 

[Deleted member 20897]

I'll nut shell it for you from my perspective. Strictly speaking landscape and wildlife/birds in flight.

If you need weather sealing, AF performance and a small but highly "telescopic" system. An EM1.2 and 300/4 + MC14 are pretty hard to beat in any system. As mentioend previously, nothing I know of or have used personally touches the AF capabilities of the Nikon D5/D500.

I mention that because I would also recommend the Nikon D500 and a 300mm f/4E PF + TC14EIII. Between the APS-C field of view, and the TC you get a lot of reach for a small, yet arguably industry leading AF system. High ISO on the D500 is awesome as well, where I shoot routinely between ISO 6400 and 12,800 with no issues when needed. The D500 setup mentioned here was my light, all day do everything package for a week long trip to Yellowstone. I wanted for nothing (I also had the Tokin 11-16/2.8 and Nikon 18-140VR to round out the kit).

Those would be my top 2, with an honorable mention to the Nikon Z series mirrorless. If you need speed, get the Z6, if you need crop-ability, get the Z7. The AF system was much maligned by people that did not take the time to learn the system. Once you understand it, the Z6 of which I own, is just as capable as the Nikon D750 system. This includes using it with adapted f-mount lenses.

So, my 2 cents worth. The camera market has so many great choices, it really does come down to what little thing in one system or he other is the clincher. Could be IBIS, could be size/weight, AF.

 

[Phocal]

Don’t bother, it’s a dying system.

But if you insist I’ll gladly make you a good deal on my 300/4 and 150/2.

 

[TNcasual]

For clarification: What camera/system do you currently own? What photography experience to you currently have?

A full featured full frame system may not be the best solution for someone who has never held a modern digital ILC.

 

[jimr.pdx]

Panasonic/Fuji are still hard at work on global shutter and organic sensor tech - that R&D should be easier in a smaller sensor. Pana will likely prove it works here before shifting it to the L-mount format. I'm feeling confident in the future.

 

[ijm5012]

If you want to minimize your risk regarding the m43 system, buy used. Many m43 products on the market have stabilized in terms of depreciation, so you could buy it, use it, and sell it without losing much money. This is how I buy 95% of my photography gear.

I'm a bit biased, but the D500 is a great tool. World-class AF for wildlife, and a really good sensor for 20+MP landscapes (comparing the normal E-M1 II to D500, the D500 files were a bit better for landscapes. Now, the hi-res images are a bit different, but there are compromises to be made there as well).

D500's + 16-80 f/2.8-4 kits are plentiful and affordable on the used market. Pick up one of those along with a 300/4 PF + 1.4x TC III and you've got a really nice kit that's not much bigger than a m43 kit.

 

[kingduct]

I think you should compare the options out there and choose what's best for you now, whether it be Olympus, Nikon, or something else. Too hard to predict future developments... even Nikon and Canon are steering their R&D money to new mounts and focusing on full frame right now, so the future of APS-C DSLRs is not necessarily a vastly safer place to invest than Micro 4/3.

 

[number17]

I'd say for the $$, especially in the used market, m43 will be very hard to beat right now - even if the system dies in 3 or 4 years.

I mean, IF m43 really goes dead in 4 years, I'm trying to think what I'll do. Since it's a system I enjoy shooting and fills my needs, I'll probably keep shooting it until my bodies are all dead, then I may even try to find another used m43 body, and I'll probably keep doing that until there are no longer used m43 bodies in the market.

And how long will that be? I'd say at least 10-15 years from the time m43 is really discontinued. So, 15-20 years from now?

I wouldn't hesitate buying into a system that may be completely obsolete 15-20 years from now. Who knows where I'll be 15 years from now?

OTOH if you buy into a Sony FF system right now (apsc has the same risk as m43) you'll be paying thousands more than a similar m43 system. And it's heavier, and pictures are marginally better for landscape and wildlife.

My 2 cents....

 

[S-Osolin]

I hike and mountaineer a lot. Every gram counts when you're going uphill, so weight is an issue to me. I went to m43 system specifically for that few years ago. It's the only system that offers you truly quality telephoto lenses in the range of 600mm film equivalent that you can carry with you every day. I'm not using weather resisting body, just keep everything in plastic bags under cover in cases of rain and snow, and I must say everything went through freezing test already few times. Got my cam quite a bit wet, once dropped it into snow when changing lenses, and only thing that fell off my em10 was thumb grip that I've since replaced. No other problems whatsoever.

 

[ac12]

I migrated (partially) from DX/APS-C to m4/3. This was because I am a senior citizen with a bad bad, so weight has become a serious consideration for me.
For weight and bulk reduction, I could not be happier. I was shooting baseball the other week with a 75-300 on my EM1. The Olympus 75-300 lens is a a LOT smaller and lighter than the equivalent Sigma/Tamron 150-600 lens for a FX/FF camera. And my arms and legs appreciated the lighter kit.

However, as Andrew, Ian and others have said, fast action AF is not quite there yet in the m4/3 cameras (no info on the EM1X yet). I don't think it is there for the lower priced FF mirrorless either. For shooting fast sports (soccer and basketball), I still use my dSLR (Nikon D7200).

re FF mirrorless. The format size will mean that FF lenses will always be larger than m4/3 lenses, simply because the FF lens has to throw a larger image circle than a m4/3 lens. And the GOOD Nikon lenses have been the pro FX/FF lenses not consumer FX or DX/APS-C lenses, so bigger and heavier. I shoot a DX camera, and to get a GOOD lens, I had to get a pro FX lens.

For some marketing/design reason, Olympus decided to make their pro lenses heavy.
If you want lighter pro m4/3 lenses, look at the Panasonic lenses (12-35/2.8 and 35-100/2.8).

As for the Nikon 500/5.6 PF vs Olympus 300/4, not quite the same. The 12x magnification of the Olympus lens is equivalent to a 600mm f/4 lens on a FF camera, vs. 10x of the Nikon 500. So the Olympus lens beats the Nikon lens for both reach/magnification and speed. Although 12x vs 10x is too small to make a real difference, however f/4 vs f/5.6 does make a difference (if you are shooting in lower light).

 

[Lcrunyon]

With Sharp only now joining M4/3 for 8k video, I wouldn’t worry about m4/3’s future anymore now than any other time. It’s as good as anyone else in the camera industry, which is to say... it’s just so so.

I think we will see another firmware update to the E-M1 MkII, which will add some features of the EM1X. I personally don’t expect AI tracking or Handheld Hi Res, but the MyMenu and customizable target boxes will help. We may also get the new C-AF algorithms (who knows?), which would be very nice.

When you combine the reach plus the light gathering, the lens situation still favors m4/3 Pro telephotos, and I don’t think that will ever change. But the opposite is true with sensor performance, and I think it will come down to how much you are willing to carry vs your IQ requirements. If you plan to use a flash regardless, the balance tips more to m4/3.

As per features, nothing comes close to Olympus, IMO. The best IBIS, best weather sealing, Pro Capture, Hi Res, Live Composite... these are worth the price of admission all by themselves.

 

[MMaC465]

I'll nut shell it for you from my perspective. Strictly speaking landscape and wildlife/birds in flight.

If you need weather sealing, AF performance and a small but highly "telescopic" system. An EM1.2 and 300/4 + MC14 are pretty hard to beat in any system. As mentioend previously, nothing I know of or have used personally touches the AF capabilities of the Nikon D5/D500.

I mention that because I would also recommend the Nikon D500 and a 300mm f/4E PF + TC14EIII. Between the APS-C field of view, and the TC you get a lot of reach for a small, yet arguably industry leading AF system. High ISO on the D500 is awesome as well, where I shoot routinely between ISO 6400 and 12,800 with no issues when needed. The D500 setup mentioned here was my light, all day do everything package for a week long trip to Yellowstone. I wanted for nothing (I also had the Tokin 11-16/2.8 and Nikon 18-140VR to round out the kit).

Those would be my top 2, with an honorable mention to the Nikon Z series mirrorless. If you need speed, get the Z6, if you need crop-ability, get the Z7. The AF system was much maligned by people that did not take the time to learn the system. Once you understand it, the Z6 of which I own, is just as capable as the Nikon D750 system. This includes using it with adapted f-mount lenses.

So, my 2 cents worth. The camera market has so many great choices, it really does come down to what little thing in one system or he other is the clincher. Could be IBIS, could be size/weight, AF.

Thanks Gryph. I read your D500 OM-D EM-1 Mark II comparison for hockey. I don't shoot much sports, certainly not professionally, but the info was great none the less. The D500 + 300mm PF + TC or even the 500mm PF are potential combinations I have been looking at. I'll be near a great camera store at the end of month and I was planning on comparing the Nikon system (ergonomics etc.) with the Olympus set up.

 

[MMaC465]

I hike and mountaineer a lot. Every gram counts when you're going uphill, so weight is an issue to me. I went to m43 system specifically for that few years ago. It's the only system that offers you truly quality telephoto lenses in the range of 600mm film equivalent that you can carry with you every day. I'm not using weather resisting body, just keep everything in plastic bags under cover in cases of rain and snow, and I must say everything went through freezing test already few times. Got my cam quite a bit wet, once dropped it into snow when changing lenses, and only thing that fell off my em10 was thumb grip that I've since replaced. No other problems whatsoever.

Thanks S-Oso. A lot of the hiking/backpacking I do locally is in pretty rough terrain, and I couldn't agree more that every gram counts. The more my young son comes with on over nights etc. the more I realize how much extra weight I'm carrying with his sleeping bag, extra clothes for when he falls into a river, creek or into anything that looks remotely wet and disgusting. The added benefit of durability is also very important. I try to take good care of my gear, but that doesn't stop me from crashing into snow banks skiing with my camera around my neck (following my son). Thanks again for the reply.

 

[MMaC465]

If you want to minimize your risk regarding the m43 system, buy used. Many m43 products on the market have stabilized in terms of depreciation, so you could buy it, use it, and sell it without losing much money. This is how I buy 95% of my photography gear.

I'm a bit biased, but the D500 is a great tool. World-class AF for wildlife, and a really good sensor for 20+MP landscapes (comparing the normal E-M1 II to D500, the D500 files were a bit better for landscapes. Now, the hi-res images are a bit different, but there are compromises to be made there as well).

D500's + 16-80 f/2.8-4 kits are plentiful and affordable on the used market. Pick up one of those along with a 300/4 PF + 1.4x TC III and you've got a really nice kit that's not much bigger than a m43 kit.

Thanks ijm. I'll definitely be looking at good used gear. The D500 kit is something I'm definitely going to be looking at the end of month.

 

[MMaC465]

For clarification: What camera/system do you currently own? What photography experience to you currently have?

A full featured full frame system may not be the best solution for someone who has never held a modern digital ILC.

Right now I use Fuji. I have the XH-1 and a number of lenses. One of the issues I've had is I don't really like the 100-400 with or without the TC (most likely user error) I've used the 50-140 2.8 a lot. Having a decent range of focal lengths to work with can be helpful when a critter or a great scene presents itself. I've also used the 16-55 and 10-24. In terms of my experience I am an amateur at best, I spend a lot of time outdoors, taking photos and I enjoy learning systems and maximizing the system to the best of my all be it limited abilities.

 

[MMaC465]

With Sharp only now joining M4/3 for 8k video, I wouldn’t worry about m4/3’s future anymore now than any other time. It’s as good as anyone else in the camera industry, which is to say... it’s just so so.

I think we will see another firmware update to the E-M1 MkII, which will add some features of the EM1X. I personally don’t expect AI tracking or Handheld Hi Res, but the MyMenu and customizable target boxes will help. We may also get the new C-AF algorithms (who knows?), which would be very nice.

When you combine the reach plus the light gathering, the lens situation still favors m4/3 Pro telephotos, and I don’t think that will ever change. But the opposite is true with sensor performance, and I think it will come down to how much you are willing to carry vs your IQ requirements. If you plan to use a flash regardless, the balance tips more to m4/3.

As per features, nothing comes close to Olympus, IMO. The best IBIS, best weather sealing, Pro Capture, Hi Res, Live Composite... these are worth the price of admission all by themselves.

Very good points Lcru. I'd say most if not all of the deficiencies in my photos are my fault not the systems. I'm sure that the E-M1 Mark II would be able to far surpass my ability to utilize it, but I do enjoy learning new systems and this goes back to my concern about advancement in the m4/3 system (there have been a lot of great points made by others in this post that have made me far more confident in the system though). Carrying the extra weight will definitely be one thing, but how much space the kit takes up is also very important. Having to decide between carrying an extra day or twos worth of food and extending a trip or bringing an additional lens is never fun.