Tony Northrup's new bogus video "Micro Four-Thirds is DEAD"

Status
Not open for further replies.

tkbslc

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 6, 2015
Messages
7,611
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
When you look at "pro" vs "pro" lenses there is definitely a difference, especially in the weight. I think that's part of what Tony is trying to do though, he's trying to make everyone think MFT "pro" lenses are equal to FF kit lenses, based solely on aperture equivalency.
That's what usually irks me. It's especially true with the PRO prime complaints. "Look this $200 50mm f1.8 is 'faster' than their $1000 25mm f1.2 Pro and even smaller"

Nevermind that one is built like a tank, sharp as a tack at f1.2, has perfect bokeh and weather sealing and the other one's only redeeming quality is price.

It's like with cars how HP spec is all some people think about. Nevermind how it actually puts that power to the road (or how it steers, brakes and rides).
 

tkbslc

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 6, 2015
Messages
7,611
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
The Sony setup there is even lighter than the Olympus. That has got to be enticing for a lot of people. But then if/when they finally invest in good glass, they're stuck carrying around a brick
In this particular case, Sony has the 24-70mm f4 zeiss up their sleeve. Which is a high grade lens and gives DOF like f2 on m4/3. It's not sealed though, and it's not as sharp edge to edge like the Olympus.

Compact Camera Meter

Of course once you move into even mild telephoto it is game over.

Compact Camera Meter
 

bikerhiker

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 24, 2013
Messages
2,005
Location
Canada
Real Name
David
The Sony setup there is even lighter than the Olympus. That has got to be enticing for a lot of people. But then if/when they finally invest in good glass, they're stuck carrying around a brick
Yeap!
 

bikerhiker

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 24, 2013
Messages
2,005
Location
Canada
Real Name
David
Not to mention that the Sony kit lens will never take a photo at 12mm
True, but most of the time consumers are okay with a 28mm wide angle FOV. When you upgrade to better Pro glasses is when you get back the 24mm FOV, but at a significantly larger and heavier zoom lens. Sometimes, I noticed some Sony shooters would supplement the kit zoom with fast primes like the Sony 28mm f/2 with an ultrawide lens adapter making it I think 16mm f/2 to take astrophotography with it to keep the size and weight of their travel kit down. 28mm f/2 and UWA attachment is surprisingly affordable.

I did the same with my travels as well this year, supplementing my E-P5 + 25mm f/1.4 and fisheye body cap f/8 with my Panasonic ZS-100 1" compact. I get 25mm f/2.8 sharp lens from my ZS100 and exactly the same DR as my E-P5 @ ISO 80 plus I have a consumer zoom lens of up to 250mm with low light of my 25mm f/1.4 and my E-P5. I also have the ability to isolate subjects with the f/1.4 aperture and nice bokeh. I love the 50mm (35mm eqv FOV). Very small and discreet, very compact and redundant plus TSA friendly! I've included a GX-8 in this photo comparison, because that would be my upgrade from the E-P5 as I need a faster AF system.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

DanS

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Mar 8, 2016
Messages
1,763
It's like with cars how HP spec is all some people think about. Nevermind how it actually puts that power to the road (or how it steers, brakes and rides).
It's like a buddy of mine used to say, they aren't car people, they are compensating dumbas********
 

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
Tony wasn't the first that showed concern about the viability of m43. Thom Hogan did a written piece as well, though not on video that he showed concern current flagship m43 cameras like the G9 and the E-M1II had strayed away from their original ethos. That is to make m43 a pocketable camera and now they make them as large as a mirrorless FF camera.

Most consumers who are buying a camera want only 2 set of lenses. The 28-70mm (35mm eqv) and 55(70)-200mm (35mm eqv). These 2 sets are sold as kits with the T6i or T7i. They are slower lenses, but that's what most consumers simply want. So if you package them with a full frame mirrorless camera like a Sony A7 for instance, both the camera body and lens size aren't much bigger nor smaller than the E-M1II with a Olympus 12-40 f/2.8 and the Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8. While these lenses are 2 stops faster than a consumer version of the 28-70 and 55-200 for the FF mirrorless, full frame sensors are 2 stops better than the best m43. So in hindsight, it's equal. The consumer will always choose the best and it shows in sales and reality. Because the consumer can then opt to upgrade to a 2 stops or even 3 stops better professional lens(like the Canon 28-70 f/2 R). There is no 12-40 f/0.95 autofocus lens for m43. None, unless you Speedboost it with the Speedbooster. And if you speedboost it with a Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 (which happens to be Tony's favourite lens), then you wind up with the same size factor as a full frame setup with a fast or faster Pro grade 28-70mm zoom.

And this is what I paraphrased from Tony's video. To me, it seemed like people are shooting the messenger and not understanding his message.

As it has clearly shown with Canon's latest sales numbers. Their higher end sales are not in anyway affected, but their lower end to mid end products are. People are now wired to buy uber expensive cameras as long as they get the very best. This is the new market reality and which is why, I'm not surprised Olympus will introduce an uber expensive E-M1X to just maintain market share.

While m43 still maintain the size advantage, it's no longer the case if the consumer isn't using a 600mm full frame lens. Most consumers basically shoot with a medium range zoom anyhow, because what I'm seeing and hearing here is that, there is a lot of assumption put on consumers buying those 600mm lenses in droves. That is just not the case, but people always put a 300mm f/4 Olympus and pit it against the 600mm FF lens and say, that's how Olympus survive.
2 things that comes to mind.

1 - the average consumer rarely knows what raw means, let alone f stop.

2 - about that 300mm lens. Again, the average consumer, who walks into a store or searches amazon for a telephoto lens, who wants to shoot birds, checks out the Olympus 300mm f4, might look at the FF 600mm lens because he or she was also told to look at FF.

What do you think the end result is 99% of the time?

Who do you think buys the 600mm f4 lens?
 

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
True, but most of the time consumers are okay with a 28mm wide angle FOV. When you upgrade to better Pro glasses is when you get back the 24mm FOV, but at a significantly larger and heavier zoom lens. Sometimes, I noticed some Sony shooters would supplement the kit zoom with fast primes like the Sony 28mm f/2 with an ultrawide lens adapter making it I think 16mm f/2 to take astrophotography with it to keep the size and weight of their travel kit down. 28mm f/2 and UWA attachment is surprisingly affordable.

I did the same with my travels as well this year, supplementing my E-P5 + 25mm f/1.4 and fisheye body cap f/8 with my Panasonic ZS-100 1" compact. I get 25mm f/2.8 sharp lens from my ZS100 and exactly the same DR as my E-P5 @ ISO 80 plus I have a consumer zoom lens of up to 250mm with low light of my 25mm f/1.4 and my E-P5. I also have the ability to isolate subjects with the f/1.4 aperture and nice bokeh. I love the 50mm (35mm eqv FOV). Very small and discreet, very compact and redundant plus TSA friendly! I've included a GX-8 in this photo comparison, because that would be my upgrade from the E-P5 as I need a faster AF system.

View attachment 692009
But you were trying to make a point, which is fine, but let’s compare kit lenses with kit lenses.

Consumers, who are ok with the kit lens on a FF camera should be compared to consumers who are ok with the kit lens on an em1.
 

DanS

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Mar 8, 2016
Messages
1,763
But you were trying to make a point, which is fine, but let’s compare kit lenses with kit lenses.

Consumers, who are ok with the kit lens on a FF camera should be compared to consumers who are ok with the kit lens on an em1.
I agree, anything else gets into circular argument territory.
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,963
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
2 things that comes to mind.

1 - the average consumer rarely knows what raw means, let alone f stop.

2 - about that 300mm lens. Again, the average consumer, who walks into a store or searches amazon for a telephoto lens, who wants to shoot birds, checks out the Olympus 300mm f4, might look at the FF 600mm lens because he or she was also told to look at FF.

What do you think the end result is 99% of the time?

Who do you think buys the 600mm f4 lens?
Honestly, I doubt your average consumer spends $2,500 on a telephoto prime lens. The more likely scenario would be something like a Olympus 75-300 or Panasonic 100-300. Then go and compare those to a Tamron or Sigma 150-600.

Yeah, I think I know which one the consumer would be more likely to carry around all day...

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
The Sony setup there is even lighter than the Olympus. That has got to be enticing for a lot of people. But then if/when they finally invest in good glass, they're stuck carrying around a brick
That is an unfair comparison. Put a kit lens on the em1 and see how much lighter the FF setup is. Don’t fall for BS.
 

bikerhiker

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 24, 2013
Messages
2,005
Location
Canada
Real Name
David
2 things that comes to mind.

1 - the average consumer rarely knows what raw means, let alone f stop.

2 - about that 300mm lens. Again, the average consumer, who walks into a store or searches amazon for a telephoto lens, who wants to shoot birds, checks out the Olympus 300mm f4, might look at the FF 600mm lens because he or she was also told to look at FF.

What do you think the end result is 99% of the time?

Who do you think buys the 600mm f4 lens?
Actually thanks to Youtubes and the Tony Northrop type, they are way more educated that you might think. Though education wise is biased towards big is better sensors.

There are always 4 consumer types who step into the door of any camera shop. The first type is the soccer mom or those people who just started out in photography. The second type is the downsize crowd; mainly focusing on travelling. The third crowd is the upgrade and photographic specific crowd (birders, wildlife, astro) and the last crowd is the video centric consumers - vbloggers, movie producers etc.. Nevertheless, most people who step into the door, they already have a fairly good idea of what they want to buy (body and lens wise), again because of the internet and people like Tony Northrop, Thom Hogan and Ken Rockwell and also from people in the meetup groups they belong in. I belong in a few meetup groups run by, guess who? Professional photographers who shoot none other than full frame and Fuji medium format and while they are ambassadors to these brands, their influence reflect highly So they do have a fairly big influence on what people buy.

Now, when they do get into the store, usually it is up to store sales people to correct the incorrect perception of what they were fed. Some stores do it really well; but most stores don't really bother and most people don't shop in stores anymore. They shop online.

I really hope that there are more people like Lindsay Dobson who provide factual accurate and balanced views on photography products that ultimately people will be more happy with. Unfortunately, there are others who rely on internet revenues to measure their incomes based on how much controversy they can generate and how many clicks they get.
 

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
Honestly, I doubt your average consumer spends $2,500 on a telephoto prime lens. The more likely scenario would be something like a Olympus 75-300 or Panasonic 100-300. Then go and compare those to a Tamron or Sigma 150-600.

Yeah, I think I know which one the consumer would be more likely to carry around all day...

View attachment 692010
What I’m saying is, that no matter how it gets twisted, m4/3 still offers a tremendous size and weight benefit. Apple to Apple m4/3 wins. It’s a 1/4 size sensor. It should.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom