1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Forget APS-C - MFT is the new APS-C :)

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by Bhupinder2002, Feb 2, 2013.

  1. Bhupinder2002

    Bhupinder2002 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Hi Guys :smile:
    A friend of mine wanted a camera and he nearly spent one week in going round and round and round. He read numerous online reviews - handled so called top end DSLR-APS-C models and finally ordered an OMD and couldnt be more happier . He had short stint with Canon DSLR but OMD meant liberation for him . Thrilled by lightweight and its performance he asked me ..why people still buy DSLRs? I just smiled :smile: Now IMHO..
    MFT is selling well and making news as well .I am guessing APS-C DSLR sales willl decline heavily in favour of new breed of mirror less cameras lead by none other than MFT . MFT format seems to be heading in the right direction . It offers a much better , portable , high IQ and plenty of lenses according to you need and budget .I am wondering if we could call MFT - the new age APS-C . If offers you same IQ plus so many other benefits . I am not claiming that APS-C sized DLSRs will disappear from shelves over night .. Nikon, Canon and Pentax has enough brain washing power to convince even novice and seasoned photographers to make them believe that they still need those big black and plasticly creatures .But having said that I think balance will tilt heavily in favour mirrorless mainly MFT and FF . I wont be surprised if FF goes mirroless as well in next 5 years or so.Please share your views or opinion . Its just my humble opinon and I may be wrong but I can see the MFT wave coming ..:smile::smile: and I think MFT is the modern day APS-C system with many added benefits .
    Cheers
    Bhupinder
     
  2. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    Don't forget that New Year's resolution! :smile:
     
  3. Bhupinder2002

    Bhupinder2002 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Hi RTP..
    New year finished with 31st of January ..hahahhha:rofl::rofl::rofl: But seriously , new lenses , new bodies , new companies.. Its gonna be fun time for all of us .
    Cheers
    Bhupinder
     
  4. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    Last time I checked there were also some mirrrorless cameras that were APS-C. I think it's fair to say that mirrorless is definitely the hot camera these days I wouldn't declare the DSLR dead just yet.
     
  5. You're not really comparing the two formats here but instead mirrorless versus entry to mid-level DSLRs (all of which happen to be APS-C with the apparent demise of Four Thirds DSLRs). The difference there is more down to design philosophy and capabilities more so than a standoff based on sensor size, and noting of course that there are now four mirrorless systems utilising APS-C sensors.
     
  6. DynaSport

    DynaSport Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 5, 2013
    Dan
    The thing that brought me to M43 was the size. The thing that kept me from buying a mirrorless APS-C camera was the size of the lenses. I figured if the lenses were going to be as big as my DSLR lenses, I'd just carry around my DSLR. So, unless they really reduce the size of APS-C lenses, I'll be staying M43.

    Unlike many on this site, I still believe size matters, both positively and negatively. I hope all the formats survive. I think all have benefits and drawbacks.
     
  7. David A

    David A Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 30, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    Well, for a start M43 does not offer the same IQ as a larger sensor. The latest M43 cameras may offer you the IQ of a larger sensor camera from last year or the year before but all of the technological advances that have improved the latest generation of M43 sensors are also being applied to larger sensors. M43 gets better but so do the larger sensors and there are advantages that come with sensor size. IQ will never be equal.

    But then the IQ of 35mm film never caught up with the IQ of medium and large format film for the same reason. Advances that benefit the IQ of one are applied across the board and benefit the IQ of all.

    Still 35mm film eventually became the dominant film format despite the fact that it was trailing in IQ, simply because its strengths offered a lot of other advantages and its IQ eventually became "good enough", not "equal to" and definitely not "better than". 35mm film never became "the new medium format" or "the new large format". It simply became the dominant format.

    So why this obsession with M43 as "the new APS-C" or "the new full frame"? Could it be an inferiority complex?

    Well, we don't need that and we need make no excuses for choosing the cameras we choose, regardless of what size format those cameras are or whether they are film or digital, PROVIDED the do what we want them to do and give us the results we want. We don't have to satisfy anyone else, convince the majority to follow us, or anything like that. We just have to get the most out of the gear we choose and satisfy our own standards in the process, whether those standards be the standards of a hobbyist which most of us are, or a professional which some of us are.

    Big sensors will always be better, and deliver shallower depth of field, and higher resolution and a few other things. Small sensors will always be better and deliver greater depth of field at a given aperture which helps with low light shooting, be lighter and smaller easier to have with you, be more discreet in many situations, and a few other things.

    Time to stop thinking of M43 as "the new APS-C" or the new whatever, or "as good as" or "equal to" whatever. Time to start thinking of M43 as a pretty damn good format in its own right, with its own set of strengths, and start holding it up for what it can do rather than for what it definitely isn't doing which is catching up and surpassing other formats which are also continuing to improve for the same reasons that M43 is.

    When Henri Cartier-Bresson started using a 35mm Leica for news photography the one thing he did not do was try to show that 35mm could do the same thing that larger formats did, or do it better. He showed that it could do something else, something that people with larger cameras couldn't do and that something else captured the imagination of several generations of photographers and image viewers. He showed that 35mm could stand on its own feet and produce something unique and of value. That's what M43 needs to do if it is going to be taken seriously. It needs to be doing something the bigger formats can't do, something that it can do because of it's own strengths, rather than perpetually trying to win a contest it can't win by trying to beat the larger formats in the areas where they will always have an advantage. There are areas where M43 has the advantage and those are the areas where M43 will establish its value if it's ever going to become the, or even a, dominant format.

    So no, I don't think that M43 is the new APS-C and I hope it never is. I think it deserves a lot better than that.
     
    • Like Like x 17
  8. 67DGS

    67DGS Mu-43 Regular

    43
    Oct 5, 2012
    Vancouver, Canada
    Personally I still like my 4/3 DSLR. The zooms are great, the ergonomics are very pleasing and for certain times, like when using my 50-200mm lens it just feels right. I also prefer the larger body for tripod work. My DSLR camera is the E-620 which is considered very compact for a DSLR and has been criticized in the past for being too small. Hehe.

    All this said, it is mainly gathering dust and my m4/3 bodies are in my camera bag and going everywhere with me. I think that there will always be people that prefer the feel of DSLR's.

    Jack
     
  9. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    Well said...I think it's interesting to note that the mirrorless GH3 is very DSLR like in both design and size.
     
  10. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    I know what you mean I was looking at a Sony a57 and I was surprised at how small it was. It reminded me a lot of my E-520 in it's compactness. I had the E-520 paired up with a 14-54 zoom. Great fun.
     
  11. MAubrey

    MAubrey Photographer

    Jul 9, 2012
    Bellingham, WA
    Mike Aubrey
    I'd encourage you to compare equivalent focal lengths between μ43 and Canon APS-C at DxOmark (e.g. 35mm vs. 25mm, 50mm vs. 45mm, 85mm vs. 75mm, etc.). You'll see that μ43 is either on par with Canon in terms of IQ or superior. Micro Four Thirds doesn't offer the same IQ as FF, but the size difference between APS-C and μ43 isn't significant enough to make that larger sensor noticeably better--particularly since Canon sensor simply aren't as good as Sony ones...and Olympus' newest models are all using Sony sensors.

    Indeed, but the difference between medium and large formats compared to 35mm is much greater than the difference between APS-C and μ43. They're worth comparing. And μ43 holds its own. I've never understood why everyone wants to compare μ43 to FF that happens all the time on forums all over the internet. But comparing μ43 to APS-C makes sense.
     
  12. Mellow

    Mellow Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2010
    Florida or Idaho
    Tom
    I agree with this, which is why I'm hoping for more lenses optimized for size as well as IQ. With the exception of the 17mm f/1.8, seems like most new lenses in the past year have been relatively large: Panny 12-35mm, Panny 35-100mm, Oly 75mm, Oly 60mm, the new Tamron. The new Panny kit lens might be interesting if it has the IQ of the 14-45mm, but it's not really small either.

    There are three truly small lenses in the system--pancakes 14mm, 17mm, and 20mm. All are relatively old designs, and two have issues (17mm isn't very good, supposedly and the 20mm is slow and loud). I'd love to see updated versions of these, plus maybe a 12mm f/3.5 pancake or maybe even a 25mm pancake.

    I know I"m probably in the minority here--seems like this forum draws enthusiasts for whom IQ is much more important than size. But, as you say, size does matter to some of us--so let's hope Oly/Panny keep building small or even tiny lenses.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. MAubrey

    MAubrey Photographer

    Jul 9, 2012
    Bellingham, WA
    Mike Aubrey
    Personally, I prefer having the option between size and IQ. I have two Trinities depending on what my priorities are at a given moment (well, among other mostly MF lenses). One is a pancake trinity: Panasonic 14mm f/2.5, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, and Voigtlander 35mm f/2.5 Color-Skopar. The other is a IQ-centric trinity: Olympus 9-18mm f/4-5.6, PL25mm f/1.4, and Olympus 75mm f/1.8. And sometimes I mix and match. The nice thing about the pancakes is that at least one is nearly always in some pocket of my bag (or easily slipped in to jacket or pants pocket), so if I just go out with a single lens (e.g. the PL25), I can have a wide angle (14mm) if I need it without feeling like I'm going around with a big kit. Or on those occasions where I pull out the big Oly50-200mm, I don't need be weighed down with another lens to cover the wide and normal end. The 14mm and 20mm suffice for that delightfully unobtrusively.

    So for me, I don't think I'd ever say that μ43 is all about size. I'd say its all about flexibility, of which size and weight definitely play a part. It's all about the options.
     
  14. I find it slightly curious that so far only Panasonic and to a lesser extent Samsung (whose NX5/10/11/20 models have the look of a larger G3) have used the DSLR body shape. If you'd asked me what things I would have been happy to lose from a DSLR it would have been the weight and the OVF-priority design, both of which have opened up whole new ways of handling and operating a camera. As far as I was concerned, the ergonomics were the bit I was most happy to keep, and the G and GH models have generally done this.
     
  15. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    Correct.
    Case in point is the new entry level Nikon D3200 compared to the OM-D E-M5 - The D3200 boasts higher performance markings than the OM-D in all 3 measured categories:

    -> DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

    That being said, I have no self-esteem problems nor any issues with my E-PL5 :smile:
     
  16. I would change that statement to say, "Micro 4/3 does not offer, given equal levels of technology, the same measurable quantities of sensor output". DxOMark does not measure IQ, they measure factors that contribute to IQ.
     
  17. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    Fair enough - I was just trying to illustrate the point that our member "David A" made :smile:
     
  18. Oh no, I wasn't disagreeing with you. After all, you did say,

    "The D3200 boasts higher performance markings than the OM-D in all 3 measured categories:"

    and I don't question that one bit. What those numbers don't tell me is whether I will prefer the images from it to those from any other camera model (4/3, APS-C, FF, etc) that they might have scored lower.
     
  19. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    Yeah - That's why I concluded with a statement about me being comfortable with my E-PL5 :smile:
     
  20. brianvickers

    brianvickers Mu-43 Regular

    123
    Jul 1, 2011
    I agree that m43 stands as a new format in its own right and does not need to be justified by comparison with any other system. I believe the improvements are shared across all formats - but the key is that most cameras now exceed anyone's needs ... Yeah bigger sensors will always be better but unless you are going to reproduce your images larger than a double decker bus you will not see a difference.
    One ongoing shortfall (the only one Ive experienced) is failure to focus and track moving objects.....but my APS -C wasn't brilliant at this either. The only way I can get good images of fast moving objects is by pre focussing. Contrast detection focus is still not as good as phase detection focus. I will always recommend m43 except where I know the user wants to do sports etc