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

Status
Not open for further replies.

bikerhiker

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 24, 2013
Messages
2,005
Location
Canada
Real Name
David
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.
The point I was trying to make is that, the best FF always have about 2 stops better DR and noise compared to the best m43, but this is just a potential and not a realized benefit. In order to realize this benefit, the FF body must also have a 2 stops faster lens. If you want to shoot fast action indoors with a Sony A7III coupled with a 28-70mm kit zoom, then your ISO, shutter speed and DOF are very close to equivalent to an E-M1II shooting with a 12-40PRO. The only difference in this case is that, optics on the 12-40PRO is better than optics on the Sony FE 28-70. If you look at BHPHOTO, that's how Sony now sells their body and lens and Olympus with the E-M1II kit (body + 12-40). So why is it that Sony is the #1 leader in mirrorless sales? It is the perception that these people were being fed -- full frame is better. And why would I compare a E-M1II with a 14-42 kit lens and give Sony about another 2 stops more advantage? Photography is about ISO, shutter speed and aperture to capture an image and how you can maintain those dynamics. If you're shooting hockey, IBIS isn't going to freeze the players and hence you need the same shutter speed with your FF camera body as you do with your m/43 to freeze the hockey players. But when you use the same ISO to get the freeze action; undoubtedly the FF camera will give a cleaner and more detailed image than the best m43, because the professionals know that you need FAST glass to achieve that. But these requirements are for professionals and people making ads and or promotional materials. Most consumers do not need these requirements, but they bought FF just so that they may become professionals or they may encounter the needs to become one. Again, it's all just an illusion to get people to upsize.
 

SLOtographer

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
174
Location
California
Real Name
Stan
I was thinking about Panasonic as a manufacturer of FF and M43... Much of of the tech they develop applies to both formats. Given that most of the development cost is already in the past for M43, the resources they put in to m43 should be profitable. If profitable, that should mean they stay in the game for awhile.
 

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
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.
Do you think I live under a rock? Lol. You don’t think I have an idea about people? There are plenty of uneducated people (photographically speaking), purchasing those canon and Nikon kits at Costco and other places. In fact, I see way way more of those beginner kits around than higher tier systems. How many canon t series/Nikon d 3/4/5 series are being sold annually vs everything else?

Btw, the meetup type is not what I would call average. So I think we are talking about two different segment of the population. But than let’s seay that you are correct. How many of your meetup buddies switched to the Fuji MF so far? And how come you are using m4/3?

I am specifically talking about the average consumer, the masses, if you will. In my personal experience, they don’t know much about photography, but they know Canon and Nikon.
 

bikerhiker

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 24, 2013
Messages
2,005
Location
Canada
Real Name
David
Do you think I live under a rock? Lol. You don’t think I have an idea about people? There are plenty of uneducated people (photographically speaking), purchasing those canon and Nikon kits at Costco and other places. In fact, I see way way more of those beginner kits around than higher tier systems. How many canon t series/Nikon d 3/4/5 series are being sold annually vs everything else?

Btw, the meetup type is not what I would call average. So I think we are talking about two different segment of the population. But than let’s seay that you are correct. How many of your meetup buddies switched to the Fuji MF so far? And how come you are using m4/3?

I am specifically talking about the average consumer, the masses, if you will. In my personal experience, they don’t know much about photography, but they know Canon and Nikon.
It is simple actually why I am sticking with m43. After shooting for more than 30 years, I know pretty well myself, my photography style and my likes and my ISO range requirements for most of my shooting conditions. And that is, 95% of the time now I shoot from ISO 80 to ISO 1600. During my professional days, shooting indoors in dark stadiums, Olympics, FIFA and the rest; about 90% of the time I need at least ISO 10k (10,000) to ISO 12800 to maintain a certain shutter speed. My ISO operating range forced me to shoot with a D3, then D4 and lastly before I retired D4s because these are the bodies that could handle the ISO requirements and provide good DR and clean files. My buddy who is shooting for Reuters, AFP and AP right now have a D5 and his only main advantage against the EOS 1DX Mark II is that, above 10,000 ISO, the D5 files are cleaner and have better DR. He also owns the 600m f/4 and the newer 200-400 and easily makes six figures; a salary I so dearly missed. But that's another story. So m43 and even my newish 1" Panasonic are more than adequate to fulfill my ISO needs. The general public, however, are brain washed to think they need ISO 6400 or 12800 all the time as though they need to be prepared for the armageddon. Most of the time though, they would need those ISOs because they are using slower consumer lenses, whereas 'MOI" I use the faster Pro zooms and primes of the m43 to keep the ISO low. So why buy more when I could do with less?
 

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
That’s the default fall-back response from FF fanboys. They LOVE to talk about “total light”
Right. But those are the gear heads, they don’t represent the rest of the photography population. Those who have kit lenses and use AUTO to shoot. They don’t know what 2 stop difference means.


Ironically, I yet to see a gear head who is not a snapshot shooter. The louder they talk, the worst their pictures.
 

Orionwest

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Dec 3, 2015
Messages
50
Tony Northrop may have many subscribers but he is getting ahead of himself on this topic. The main reason I went to the Photo Show in NYC was to handle all the new mirrorless cameras. There was no FF equivalent to the Olympus 12-100 f/4 so that was the first compromise having to carry two FF lenses. Price for the two lenses of equal quality would be north of $4000 USD. Weight and size of the two lenses made the 12-100 feel very light and small. The features of the FF cameras paled in comparison to my Olympus M1 MK II. The only two advantages I could find were a better EVF and the claim of better low light performance. The whole reason for mirrorless is less weight and size or so I thought but Canon and Nikon proved me wrong on that score. One of the lenses attached to a Nikon Z7 could have doubled as a dumbbell! Summing it up I felt the both the Nikon and Canon cameras were under developed experiments. Sony though was the better of the three but the A7 III felt like a stripped down version so it could have a low price. Olympus has been an industry leader in mirrorless technology and the FF cameras have a bit of caching up to do if they are truly to be the end of M4/3. They can start by finding a way to make FF lenses smaller (physical impossibility?). No Tony M4/3 is not dead though either Nikon or Canon might be if they can't even compete with Sony!
 

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,963
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
Total light is complete BS.

It doesn't take into account photo site per unit area, or the differences between sensor tech or generations.
I’m aware, hence the [/s] at the end of my post. I always laugh when I see people talk about “total light”, but completely ignore “light per pixel per unit time”.
 

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
It is simple actually why I am sticking with m43. After shooting for more than 30 years, I know pretty well myself, my photography style and my likes and my ISO range requirements for most of my shooting conditions. And that is, 95% of the time now I shoot from ISO 80 to ISO 1600. During my professional days, shooting indoors in dark stadiums, Olympics, FIFA and the rest; about 90% of the time I need at least ISO 10k (10,000) to ISO 12800 to maintain a certain shutter speed. My ISO operating range forced me to shoot with a D3, then D4 and lastly before I retired D4s because these are the bodies that could handle the ISO requirements and provide good DR and clean files. My buddy who is shooting for Reuters, AFP and AP right now have a D5 and his only main advantage against the EOS 1DX Mark II is that, above 10,000 ISO, the D5 files are cleaner and have better DR. He also owns the 600m f/4 and the newer 200-400 and easily makes six figures; a salary I so dearly missed. But that's another story. So m43 and even my newish 1" Panasonic are more than adequate to fulfill my ISO needs. The general public, however, are brain washed to think they need ISO 6400 or 12800 all the time as though they need to be prepared for the armageddon. Most of the time though, they would need those ISOs because they are using slower consumer lenses, whereas 'MOI" I use the faster Pro zooms and primes of the m43 to keep the ISO low. So why buy more when I could do with less?
You are all over the place.

My prediction, with about 6 followers on YouTube is that Tony is incorrect. M4/3 is not going to die, not even in 5 years.

Please, look at what you wrote when you mentioned how you shoot now. That is most people. During the day, slow moving subjects etc...

DR and ISO advantages are lost on the general public. But we should be fair. Every interchangeable camera system is capable of producing award winners. That includes m4/3. Their system is more than good enough for most applications. AND LIGHTER.

Not to mention how feature packed these m4/3 cameras are. They beat everything else, in my opinion.

So there is a lot that is going for m4/3. Not just weight. These are more reasons why it’s a silly prediction Tony made. Btw, less than 90k views on this video. So I don’t think that he is starting a movement.

But what ever happens, it is not going to effect me much. And to be honest, I don’t really care whether m4/3 survives or not. I love the system and will continue to stay with m4/3. So why am I so vocal?

Because all the gear talk is a disservice to photography in my opinion.

You will see work of art with iPhones, while at the same time there is no shortage of snapshots taken with FF cameras. On the other side of the coin, I have seen photos from m4/3 that are terrible, while I can find amazing work from FF cameras. And everything in between.

Which brings me back to Tony, but I’m not going to single him out, so I will include all the other youtubers. You know, the ones who are invited to those events. They can all run their mouths, no doubt about that, but when you look at their photos, you realize why they talk on YouTube. They are not artists. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
 

DanS

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Mar 8, 2016
Messages
1,763
I always laugh when I see people talk about “total light”, but completely ignore “light per pixel per unit time”.
Yep, some people like to assume infinite resolution at the sensor.
 

bikerhiker

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 24, 2013
Messages
2,005
Location
Canada
Real Name
David
You are all over the place.

My prediction, with about 6 followers on YouTube is that Tony is incorrect. M4/3 is not going to die, not even in 5 years.

Please, look at what you wrote when you mentioned how you shoot now. That is most people. During the day, slow moving subjects etc...

DR and ISO advantages are lost on the general public. But we should be fair. Every interchangeable camera system is capable of producing award winners. That includes m4/3. Their system is more than good enough for most applications. AND LIGHTER.

Not to mention how feature packed these m4/3 cameras are. They beat everything else, in my opinion.

So there is a lot that is going for m4/3. Not just weight. These are more reasons why it’s a silly prediction Tony made. Btw, less than 90k views on this video. So I don’t think that he is starting a movement.

But what ever happens, it is not going to effect me much. And to be honest, I don’t really care whether m4/3 survives or not. I love the system and will continue to stay with m4/3. So why am I so vocal?

Because all the gear talk is a disservice to photography in my opinion.

You will see work of art with iPhones, while at the same time there is no shortage of snapshots taken with FF cameras. On the other side of the coin, I have seen photos from m4/3 that are terrible, while I can find amazing work from FF cameras. And everything in between.

Which brings me back to Tony, but I’m not going to single him out, so I will include all the other youtubers. You know, the ones who are invited to those events. They can all run their mouths, no doubt about that, but when you look at their photos, you realize why they talk on YouTube. They are not artists. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
The truth is that, 90% of the time getting better images start with the person standing behind the camera. Most of the cameras you buy today have more than enough DR including my E-P5 and my Panasonic, so improvements in post processing, shooting skills and experimentation can bring out better work. I agree that gear talk is what attracts people to speculate. Nevertheless, realize that most photographers who are stuck in gear talk are those who aren't yet sure of who they are as a photographer and what gifts they possess and can manifest fully. If you're sure of who you are as a photographer, then Tony is just noise. But if you're not sure of who you are in photography, then Tony and other Youtubers can move you in different directions. Having said that, amateur photographers also have the needs to improve. It's called showcasing their work @instagram, snapchat, flickr and facebook! I don't think I am going all over the place. I'm simply reflecting the fact that others, like myself, know what they want in photography and are buying equipment to fulfill their own needs. I think it is you who are shielded in your own reality and perception which I think has no basis in reality, because I think people have every right to choose what gear they use and how to use it. There is no written rule that photography has to be for art, this or that either.

30 years ago, I was like any other amateurs out there. I bought everything from small film frame all the way up to 6x7. People were moving me then. 30 years now, I don't get easily moved. :)
 
Last edited:

Mikehit

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2018
Messages
371
It is simple actually why I am sticking with m43. After shooting for more than 30 years, I know pretty well myself, my photography style and my likes and my ISO range requirements for most of my shooting conditions. And that is, 95% of the time now I shoot from ISO 80 to ISO 1600.
And that I think is the key problem. MFT seem to be appreciated more by experienced photographers who understand what compromises are involved in choosing camera gear - they have been there and done that and accept that although the MFT is not the last word in flexibility in processing or shallow DOF, they are willing to give those up for the benefits that MFT offers and for a system that they are far more likely to carry with them.
A vast majority of photographers (myself included at times) like the idea of having 'the best possible quality' (even if I only show the images on social media when it does not matter a damn) or having an image with maximum flexibility (cropping,shadow recovery, low light etc etc) even though most of the time it is not used. And this is the key barrier for MFT vs the rest - where people's ambition exceeds their ability. I do not mean to be condescending because, as I say, I include myself at times but this is human nature.
 

bikerhiker

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 24, 2013
Messages
2,005
Location
Canada
Real Name
David
And that I think is the key problem. MFT seem to be appreciated more by experienced photographers who understand what compromises are involved in choosing camera gear - they have been there and done that and accept that although the MFT is not the last word in flexibility in processing or shallow DOF, they are willing to give those up for the benefits that MFT offers and for a system that they are far more likely to carry with them.
A vast majority of photographers (myself included at times) like the idea of having 'the best possible quality' (even if I only show the images on social media when it does not matter a damn) or having an image with maximum flexibility (cropping,shadow recovery, low light etc etc) even though most of the time it is not used. And this is the key barrier for MFT vs the rest - where people's ambition exceeds their ability. I do not mean to be condescending because, as I say, I include myself at times but this is human nature.
m43 sort of reminds me of the FIRE movement as I'm part of it. If you're not familiar with FIRE; it stands for Financially Independent Retire Early. A lot of the FIRE individuals have one common trait. They know what they need and are not easily succumbed to wants that don't serve them. To be honest, I do miss full frame from time to time, but like the FIRE self in me; I know that I am not going to need full frame all the time then full frame would be a waste of resources on my financial part. I think most photographers who know the compromises that m43 bring appreciate the weight savings while not impacting their work much. Just like the FIRE movement people, that while we miss the 6 figures salary we enjoyed for years, living frugally with what we need the most in life actually brings more joy in life. That is how I feel with my m43 gear now. More joy in life, just like I can go swim in the morning, then lunch and then work short hours nursing my clients. I just find that it's pointless to treat LIFE so seriously. You have 1 life to live; so live joyfully!
 

50orsohours

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
2,420
Location
Portland Oregon
The truth is that, 90% of the time getting better images start with the person standing behind the camera. Most of the cameras you buy today have more than enough DR including my E-P5 and my Panasonic, so improvements in post processing, shooting skills and experimentation can bring out better work. I agree that gear talk is what attracts people to speculate. Nevertheless, realize that most photographers who are stuck in gear talk are those who aren't yet sure of who they are as a photographer and what gifts they possess and can manifest fully. If you're sure of who you are as a photographer, then Tony is just noise. But if you're not sure of who you are in photography, then Tony and other Youtubers can move you in different directions. Having said that, amateur photographers also have the needs to improve. It's called showcasing their work @instagram, snapchat, flickr and facebook! I don't think I am going all over the place. I'm simply reflecting the fact that others, like myself, know what they want in photography and are buying equipment to fulfill their own needs. I think it is you who are shielded in your own reality and perception which I think has no basis in reality, because I think people have every right to choose what gear they use and how to use it. There is no written rule that photography has to be for art, this or that either.

30 years ago, I was like any other amateurs out there. I bought everything from small film frame all the way up to 6x7. People were moving me then. 30 years now, I don't get easily moved. :)
Sorry, my reality is and always has been that other people use their own money and I could care less what they purchase. I’m not sure how you came to that conclusion.

And you were all over the place. Talking about pro shooting with D4s shooting hockey at iso 12800. No relevance to m4/3 dying or not. Or what the average person maybe shooting.

I also disagree with your idea of a gearheads. The forums are full of them, and they are not new to photography. The general public don’t want to be photographers, they just want to record a moment in time. Don’t believe me?

Cellphones
 

bikerhiker

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Dec 24, 2013
Messages
2,005
Location
Canada
Real Name
David
Sorry, my reality is and always has been that other people use their own money and I could care less what they purchase. I’m not sure how you came to that conclusion.

And you were all over the place. Talking about pro shooting with D4s shorting hockey at iso 12800./ No relevance to m4/3 dying or not. Or what the average person maybe shooting.

I also disagree with your idea of a gearheads. The forums are full of them, and they are not new to photography. The general public don’t want to be photographers, they just want to record a moment in time. Don’t believe me?

Cellphones
The reason I mentioned D4s and ISO 12800 should be pretty obvious to you. The best E-M1II can not match the quality of the FF at the same Hi-ISO. This implication is obvious because that's what people focus on -- Hi-ISO, because a Sony A7III priced at $2000 has better Hi-ISO performance (ISO to ISO match) than a G9 or the E-M1II. No relevance to m43 dying? If I am a consumer brain washed to think Hi-ISO must be my #1 priority in buying a camera body and E-M1II is priced the same as the A7III, then I would choose the A7III. And if I shoot @12800 ISO with the A7III which amateurs sometimes tend to do as they bring theirs inside stadiums to shoot their kids hockey play or soccer play; the A7III files will be less noisy. These people aren't educated enough to select the proper lenses, know which shutter speeds and aperture to use. Though if they go to school and get taught by Lindsay, then I would say most would probably go and buy a m/43. But sadly, it is not happening on a regular basis. Even where I bought my ZS100, the store where I bought it from tried to dissuade a buyer from ordering a Nikon Z6 and that his needs are better served with a E-M10III or II with Pro lenses. Even with me supporting my friend who was trying to sell the Olympus, finally the client opted for the Z6. Everything is about marketing and perception and perception sells.
 

dirtdevil

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Apr 9, 2017
Messages
937
Total light is complete BS.

It doesn't take into account photo site per unit area, or the differences between sensor tech or generations.
And I thought overweight people (with more area of skin compared to a skinny person) would increase his chances of getting a sunburn! Gathers more sunlight!

//s
 

Keeth101

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
410
Isn't it wonderful ... Tony Northrup has succeeded in getting everybody talking about something he said and his name is being said over and over (just like I just did) and his videos being watched.

Let's face it guys, he was only trying to get a little more exposure for himself and his blogs/videos and the best way of doing that is to be controversial in a well thought out way. I have no doubt that he has no belief at all that m43 will die any time soon .... but what a successful ploy.
 
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