There has been a lot comments on this video. Thank you all for taking a part to conversation. Sorry that I do not have time to answer to everybody. Most comments have been valid and to the point. I dont mean only the ones that agree with me, but also those do not. Unfortenately I had to delete a few comments because those comments were not nice towards Jared Polin or me. Please keep the bad language out of these comments. Then there is a misunderstanding. I do not get paid by Olympus. That is not how the Visionary program works. I do get access to Olympus gear when its available. Olympus does not tell me what videos I should do. I make only make videos that I think that might be interesting to my subscribers and viewers.

@kamurray82

5 жыл бұрын

I am a new subscriber to the channel, however I do enjoy your videos and your content. The fact that you are so open and transparent is to be commended.

@ForsgardPeter

5 жыл бұрын

I deleted a few a comments bad language. Of course any one can disagree with me. I wont deleted those kind of messages.

@rolandoruiz7659

5 жыл бұрын

Peter Forsgård You were just stating an opinion, same as Jared was stating his. Each camera no matter the size has a purpose. They have their pros & cons. And they have their limits. It all depends on what they want to use them for.

@LORDVADER357

5 жыл бұрын

Olympus should start to make phones as well. Smartphones. Possible tablets as well. That is very important piece of the market. Stainless steel hull of the phones/tablets. Sony is ahead in some ways of Olympus just because is making smartphones. If Olympus make stainless steel smartphones and tablets with micro four thirds sensor then will took all the market. Iphones will fall behind. Also Olympus can make photopaper, photo printers,powerbanks with solar charging back panel, flashlights,lanterns. The first phones and tablets with mic input and optical stabilization of the camera. Stainless steel is cheap and extremely durable. Also Olympus can make camcorders. I have proposals for Olympus to boldly go where no one has ever been before. Nikon and canon will die in few years. Simply you cant progress in modern world if do only certain type of cameras. Gopro cameras get rid off the fisheye effect in the latest models and sony action cam have optical stabilization plus mic input. So you can release two new models - TG Tracker Mark II and Tough 5 mark II. Keep the overal design the same but add following - stronger light on the tracker, bigger battery, optical stabilization. Tg 5 mark II - add flashlight. On both models mic inputs,optical stabilization and much brighter lens. F2.0 is not bright enough. F1 Speaking for mics you can do one thing which no other camera manufacturer has ever done - instead of putting mic inputs why not make wifi/wireless/bluetooth standalone mics. Fully compatible with all Olympus products.

@Tomservoca

5 жыл бұрын

TBT I gave up on Jared years ago. He's got a schtick and he makes money from it. Most of the photovloggers are just hot air. I put Jared in the same class as Rockwell. I did a volunteer shot for a local historical society a while ago and the fellow laying out the book was ecstatic with the sharpness and image quality. Some of the images where from my archives and shot with an E-300, an E-510, or an E-3. The recent ones where with an E-P2 and a Leica M-E. If a book production pro can't tell the difference between an OLY and a Leica does it really matter? Thanks for your clear thoughts and no, you're not controversial; in true northern European fashion you're calling it honestly without hype. Three other sensible, clear thinking photo vloggers are Thomas Heaton, Jamie Windsor and David Thorpe (all British oddly enough, wonder if that means anything)

Thank you Peter! Well done. I’ve been earning a living with the 4/3 sensor since 2005 and absolutely no one asks how big my sensor is, only thanking me for beautiful images. It is the photographer, not the camera, that is the artist. The camera is only a tool.

@chrisbryant8317

2 жыл бұрын

Sometimes the so called "photographer" is also a tool.

@cameronkrause4712

Жыл бұрын

good comment!

What bugs me is that whenever new features are introduced, these soon become "unmissable" and suddenly any camera that doesn't have them is, by many people, considered "non professional". "Oh wait, this camera has no second cardslot! That can't be used professionaly!" "What? It only shoots 5 frames a second? How unprofessional!" So what were professionals using 10 years ago then? Baby's toys??? Professionals are professionals because of the pictures they take. Not because of the gear they use.

@youknowwho9247

5 жыл бұрын

That's beside the point. The point is that a good photographer with current gear will produce better end results than the same good photographer with 10 year old gear. Similarly, a good photographer with a 45 mpix full frame camera will produce better results than the same good photographer with a 20 mpix MFT camera. Nobody in their right mind claims that it's impossible to make good images with suboptimal gear, or that gear is more important than skill. But gear matters in that, given a certain skill level, it enables the user to take better images more easily and reliably.

@teridzard1776

4 жыл бұрын

Landscope 360 Don’t agree with that. Gear is getting better almost every given day. But the pictures we see are not getting better, not at all. Even so on average everybody is using much better gear than he or she used to 10 years ago. Also the speed of developing new features seems to be faster than people can learn what to do with these features. I see more and more people lost deep down in the manuals of their camera, rather than thinking about a real good story to tell within a picture.

@rauliflemington7045

4 жыл бұрын

@@youknowwho9247 Your premise hangs precariously on what you identify as 'better'.

@laurencegr9978

3 жыл бұрын

These "influencers" are paid actors. Those who support them simply spreads doubt.

@Xer0.Visual5

Жыл бұрын

i use a Canon RP professional 😆 .. So am i not a pro now 🤣 also using the LX100 M43 is some shots hahah

Your only mistake was to listen to Jared in the first place ;)

@bernhardtsen74

4 жыл бұрын

Jared and the Northrups gets plenty of pennies from the sales of Sony I guess!getting my own Olympus 5mkii later this week!bought the 10mkii for my big brother in april and I cant wait to film with it!I got the Nikon D750 and I really really dont like the video settings!!!!

@rolandrick

3 жыл бұрын

Disagree: If not, we wouldn’t have this wonderful reply 😊😇

@letni9506

3 жыл бұрын

But fro knows photo 😀

Blah blah blah..... Just pick a system and shoot the hell out of it. We are so blessed to be in an age where ALL the gear is great! Just keep creating people!

@youknowwho9247

5 жыл бұрын

That's a pointless comment. All systems are great compared to cameras from 20 years ago, but the whole point of reviews is to highlight the differences and compare different options. By comparison, full frame simply yields better results than MFT. That doesn't mean you can never get good images with MFT. But it means that full frame is more reliable and consistent. You don't need to watch your ISO as much, you can get shallower dof if you want it, and you get higher resolution for moving subjects if you need that. The point isn't that MFT is always bad, it's that full frame is better in a myriad of circumstances that many, not all, professionals run into some of the time.

@mathewgardella

5 жыл бұрын

I don't think it's pointless at all... Sure I have full frame for my pro work... But I also have micro 4/3 and apsc cameras for my pro work.... All of them are great. The point of the pro is to know how to use them and in what situations... The point of these silly videos is to sell cameras, support your G.A.S. , and of course, help the reviewers make a little $$$ on the side if they can...

@youknowwho9247

5 жыл бұрын

@@mathewgardella On the contrary. The point of those videos is to save you money by enabling you to make the most informed decision possible. If someone goes out with no information at all and buys a camera he might end up getting a tool that's not ideal for the job he's trying to do. You said yourself that you choose your camera based on shooting situation. Well, most consumers will only be able to afford one system. If they shoot their kids indoor sports 90% of the time they have a lot to gain by watching a video that explains to them that MFT isn't the format they should be getting. The fault isn't usually with the reviewers, it's with the viewers who don't understand the point of their videos. Just because all today's cameras produce better results than film cameras people shouldn't just randomly buy whatever.

@mathewgardella

5 жыл бұрын

A better choice than watching a video, is to rent the gear you are looking to buy and put it through it's paces... I would never buy gear based on someone else's opinion... ,They are not me, and will never see or create the way I do. Just like I will never create or see the way that they do. And if I can't afford to rent it, I would at least head to a local store and talk with a sales rep, fire a few frames on my card, and bring the images home to look at them. For what it's worth, I still shoot film cameras too. ( that was all there was when I started, LOL)

@youknowwho9247

5 жыл бұрын

@@mathewgardella Those two can also been done in conjunction. Watching reviews doesn't prevent you from renting. But it can give you additional info. Where I'd have to strongly disagree is your advice to ask a local sales rep. From what I've witnessed, their advice is mostly terrible and certainly much more biased than good online reviews. Their info is also much less thorough. To my mind, the last thing a new camera buyer should do is go to a store for information. For a hands on test, yes. But never for advice.

Also forgot to add that I appreciate your giving just the facts, and not trash talking someone. You are a gentleman. Thanks.

Completely agree with you. I worked as a professional photographer during the 1970s and 1980s. I used mainly Hassels. and Mamiyas for studio, industrial and architectural work. Nearly all my wedding work was with 35mm (Leica M3. Minolta and Olympus) and won many awards (Kodak bride of the year etc). The only comments of a disparaging and critical nature re my 35mm gear were made by inexperienced, gear obsessed nerds who appeared to judge everything by its size. This has always been an American trait: If it's big it's better attitude to virtually everything. Sadly, many of You Tube photography sites seem to be dominated by these amateur Pro. styled gear gurus, spouting utter rubbish and misleading followers into thinking if it's got an enormous sensor, then any snapshot will be miraculously transformed into a proper photo. The guy you mentioned would be better as a pantomime dame or clown: he's got the looks and presentation style.

One of the problems I have with Polin's statement is the concept of "Professional" Unless there is an agreed upon standard definition of this, the argument can't even get started. I see the same thing with people arguing that you can't make large prints with MFT cameras (which is patently false). But the discussion devolves into a bunch of owl hooting over WHEN a print becomes large. Again...no standard, widely accepted definition. I'd suggest that if Jared Polin can't take a professional photo with the EM1x (or any MFT camera for that matter) then it's not the camera's fault, it's his.

@claudiareina2689

2 жыл бұрын

Also…. To be fair, how many photographers (pro or not) need to make large prints out of their photos. Most of your photos are going to be portrayed online, in web pages, apps, or in small printings. So unless you do have that special need bc of your field of work… there is no need for each one of your shots being 50MP

@gaoldias

2 жыл бұрын

@@claudiareina2689 Absolutely. And many of the current MFT flagship models offer a hi res shot mode that can provide up to 100MP files *if* you really need that extra resolution for printing.

He’s actually a very crude person. Never takes a reasoned approach to questions. I have canon 1D and Oly. Both are good.

@jesoby

2 жыл бұрын

Agreed, I use 5D4 and Oly Em-1 equally.

I was reacting as you on that video. The problem today is that "photographers" are more gearfreaks than actual photographers. Olympus is on the right track consider not only concentrate on sensor size. The innovation is superb.

@youknowwho9247

5 жыл бұрын

What innovation in MFT cameras exactly is it that compensates for the severe quality deficit the smaller sensor brings? I can focus on cars with a full frame DSLR just fine, but you can't get decently clean images on MFT beyond ISO 1600.

@santoshkiran_u

3 жыл бұрын

Well said

@laurencegr9978

3 жыл бұрын

@@youknowwho9247 you're everywhere. Spreading doubt is your business.

@maartenroest8842

2 жыл бұрын

I love the talks about any gear. But you are right. Started with Minolta, moved to the 6MP Dynax 7D and got excellent results. Nowadays, let's stop about the gear, all gear is good and a good photographer can get the best of any gear he uses. Personally, I use the olympus in the Dutch weather, it can be pouring and that's when you can get great shots of the wet streets in old cities. Use the gear what it's for, I use the A7R II for fine art and studio, and the A77 II for shooting sports and airshows. Just use what you have, and learn to use it properly; it brings better results for less money :) (and yeah, I want to buy the EM-1X, but as a secondhand, because - auch - that price )

@truthseeker3536

2 жыл бұрын

​@@youknowwho9247 MFT introduced mirrorless ILC to the world. MFT also have the best image stabilization systems. They also have the best performance to weight ratio, especially for long telephoto lenses. MFT were also the first to introduce excellent video recording ability in small ILC stills cameras.

"Professional" must be the work not the camera

@ForsgardPeter

4 жыл бұрын

Well said.

@spiderwaui

4 жыл бұрын

That is what I learned from my Basic Photography Class. well said sir.

@emanuel_soundtrack

4 жыл бұрын

Absolutely. I use whatever. I don’t waste my time competing with definitions, i just follow the ideal and compare it with the real. @emanuel_froes

@ThisOLmaan

3 жыл бұрын

@@ForsgardPeter : totally agree

"Sorry I couldn't take any images because it was raining" - Spat my coffee out laughing here.

Some guy in 1900: Hah! 6x4.5cm is way too small for professionals!

Excellent! Very well spoken, Peter. Thank you!

Nice commentary, I started shooting M43 almost threes ago when my research lead me to Olympus. I wanted a camera that was light and compact and could shoot great pictures. I did not want big and bulky, secondly, I didn't want to lug around giant pieces of glass. I also wanted something that was reasonably priced. I have never been happier and Olympus has exceeded what I was looking for in a camera. I can't see changing my format at this point in my life unless my needs happen to change. Thanks, Peter!

Jared Polin also thought that lossless compression meant data would be lost, so take what he says with a pinch of salt.

@percy9142

5 жыл бұрын

He said that Sony said to him that the lossless compression might loose some information and that´s why he is always shooting uncompressed raw.

@MKL_D

5 жыл бұрын

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

@jimlabos

5 жыл бұрын

No such thing as lossless when it’s compressed. The very nature of the compression means you must loose some data. What is meant by lossless is that it is almost indistinguishable to the human eye and it still has enough data to be able to edit with some latitude.

@TheMesomovie

5 жыл бұрын

@@jimlabosTake it from a programmer, that yes, there is lossless compression. It merely compresses by indicating that, say 11 bits of the same state are stored as one.

@mattiasburling

5 жыл бұрын

@@jimlabos This is incorrect. You are referring to lossy compression (which can be visually lossless), not lossless. Or are you saying that when we use winzip to compress a bunch of word files and then email them to someone, they will find them missing a bunch of paragraphs and letters? Of course not :) Lossless compression does NOT loose any information.

You are a 100% right. Good that I didn't whatch Polins video as I don't think I could have stayed as calm as you 😅

Thank you Peter, well done. Most of us professionals who have used and do use micro 4/3 for pro work understand how to use our equipment to get the best results required to do the job. Jared admitted in his video he has never tried an Olympus before, ever, nor has used micro four thirds -- proving he knows very little about what he's talking about. I took his video review with a major chunk of salt.

Do you agree with the wind tunnel test and sniff test on gears?

This was a lovely, even-handed and we'll researched middle finger. 😂 Thank you. I'm so glad that I've always been allergic to Mr Polin's personality. His photojournalistic work is excellent, and it's a shame that he seems to have decided that conveying his personality is more important than delivering knowledge these days.

In addition to your channel Peter (by the way thanks again for giving us your precious thoughs) I suggest that eveyone gets a look at Craig Roberts one, he his pretty good at showing week after week that micro 4/3 allows great creativity.

@markharris5771

5 жыл бұрын

thierry LE ROUX Have you seen any of the videos where Craig dips into his CV? I think it is safe to call him a professional photographer.

@titouyou1

5 жыл бұрын

@@markharris5771 Yes Mark, all of them, and that's what I ment, device matters for sure but work and skills do far more

@markharris5771

5 жыл бұрын

thierry LE ROUX I’m not disagreeing in the slightest as Craig proves many times over.

@nimbus5379

5 жыл бұрын

Totally agree - Craig has been a pro for many years and I'm always amazed at the images he creates out of seemingly nothing - e6 vlogs is his channel on you tube. Another great pro using Olympus is Joe Elderman a portrait photographer. He fairly recently changed and talked D of F with M4/3 and he manages without a problem. Both those pro's know what they are doing. I saw the JP review and just thought - really!!!

Joe Edelman uses an Olympus 4/3 as his work is amazing

@AlexRamosDrTaz

4 жыл бұрын

Oh gawd... I die a little every darn time I see Edelman's art.

@naufaltegarrahmani310

3 жыл бұрын

Fan of him..

Thanks Peter. I like to approach that the result should be the driver which camera you are using. I'm in this business since nearly 20 years and bored about the sensor size discussion.

Thank you for standing up for phototographers and photography, Peter. I have never understood gear-fanatics: photography is beautful a gratifying because it is so manifold. Let's just keep enjoying this variety and get excited with shooting fantastic subjects rather than create artificial debates. Use your camera to your advantage, that is all. Kudos!

@ForsgardPeter

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks!

@joaolopes1178

2 жыл бұрын

I shoot with Olympus since the E-P2 (Wich I still do) and I still love it. Own also the Panasonic GX8, and only have good things to say about it. Excellent image quality, practically, portability, durability, reliability and compact size make me go further than other large size models. In the end is a question of taste and use. The weather sealing is superb, just like my beloved and unforgettable E-1.

Great point on the High resolution images

LOL. Have I told you Peter, you're real cute when you're annoyed? That last few sentences were like water finally breaching a dam wall. :) I spoke to Stephan Bollinger some years back and he shoots a lot of studio shots - we spoke about this new age fascination with blurred background and bokeh. I think it comes from the era of small sensor phone cams and compact cams - this has become the norm for the masses now, that the next big thing for amateurs is to get a blurred background because it is impossible to do on a phone cam - so much so that Apple / Android use computational photography to force an image to have a blurred background. But back to Stephan - he said his studio shots needed to be pin sharp all over the body or all over the face to show fabric, hair, arms, legs - yes, for a specific shot you want to abstract part of the image and you sometimes use DOF but often you use light and other physical things. Jared thinks the Pro photogs for sports shots need a blur background to abstract the subject. He thinks that anyone who shoots sports needs exactly that kind of shot. You end up with a shot where it looks exciting but you have no clue to context or WHERE and what event the shot was made without writing it in text. It's great for a sports magazine front cover but other than that, you can't tell whether you made it at a Barcelona event or in China. Not every shot needs to be like that.

@scallen3841

5 жыл бұрын

A blurred background it is very easy to do . Yet it has it's time and place .

@TheMPTV

4 жыл бұрын

When do you see any sport photographer use a m43 lol, of course blurred background is not necessary for event or fashion photography, but for sports and portraits it helps isolate the subject without any distractions like busy trees, crowds, popping colors, and unwanted object

@adamvaz9097

4 жыл бұрын

State of 2020 which is a result of bad composition and no planing.

@JonathanAkosah

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheMPTV You honestly think none use that format? Wow

Just bought a m43 body and a 25mm lens. I plan to get the 400mm (ff=800mm) lens with a 1.4x or 2x multiplier in the future. A 600mm lens for full frame is already too large and heavy, I wonder what kind of truck you can fit it in.

thumbs up for this video, what about very vigorous light m4 / 3 or ff

Thanks Peter, well said. Just back from a trip to Bali. Why is my EM1 a "better camera" than my 6D or old 1DMkIIn? Well, firstly I slipped on a rock and fell into a stream (the embarrassment hurt the most) and the camera was submerged for a fair few seconds. Oly kept on working when the 6D would have died. Secondly - limited carry on allowance and I still could carry three lenses (7-14 pro, Pana-Leica 12-60 f2.8 - 4 and Panasonic 35-100 f2.8) and a laptop. With Canon I would have had either the 16-35 or the 24-70 only. And I had one photo printed a 1.2M x 80cm canvas with my 16MP. DSLR's grew larger than SLR's and it is a joy to be back to the size and weight of my old film camera with so many more features and capabilities.

If you are taking photos in a professional capacity, that is, as a professional, then whatever camera you are using is a professional camera Olympus has done a remarkable job with the E-M1X. They've ticked the boxes that both Nikon and Canon failed to do with their new mirrorless models. So, with nothing substantial to criticize, some folks simply fall back on the "small sensor" can't be professional argument. It really isn't much of an argument at all. Good video, by the way. It's reassuring to see some common sense.

@earl895

5 жыл бұрын

I just sold my full frame and chamge to omd em10 mark iii its very good camera..

Drafts Hi Peter Some six months ago , I upgraded from my Nikon to Olympus OMD 111, with standard lens. Since then I purchased a 14-150mm Mark 11 ( Olympus). As a general to take away on holiday I was thinking of purchasing F1.8 fisheye, what’s your recommendation, (amateur photographer ). Ron Ron

@ForsgardPeter

3 жыл бұрын

Fish-eye is a very special lens. It gives a very wide and distorted image. Take a look at some sample image if you can and see if that is something for you. My video about the lens: kzread.info/dash/bejne/lqpltMiTacnPqZM.html

@ronnapper2770

3 жыл бұрын

What do you think about 12/200mm 5.35-6.320 thanks Ron

Thank you for this video, Peter! It would be really nice to see another video about some common misconceptions about "good" photography, e.g. shallow depth of field, better/more expensive camera = better photos, and so on Take care! Kind regards

I'm just an amateur, and I don't really know JPs work -- maybe he is a good photographer. I saw his review video. To me, all that posing and shouting was simply boring.

@dsdave07

4 жыл бұрын

Agreed. His presentation skills need an overhaul.

@CynthiaS1951

4 жыл бұрын

I stopped watching his videos as well. He comes across as being egotistical with 3rd grade humor.

I use the olympus e-PL5 and the zuiko 45mm f 1.8 since 4 years. I shot concerts, weddings, travel fotos, long exposure ... When I have the camera at the event, nobody asks me what camera I have, but after I give them the pictures they ask : what camera did you use and want also to buy that for themselves. Of course this is a beginner question, because the correct question would be: what lense did you use? Last time I show the pictures to my friends they asked since when I have a new camera and I said it is still the old one. My guitar teacher said after he saw the pictures: maybe you should quit playing guitar and become a photographer ;-) and I don't consider myself a good photographer and I took only every 3-4 months some pictures. Imagine how much better photos a real photographer could shoot with e.g. Lumix g9 / OMD E-M1X and some pro glasses. It would certainly be much better than my pictures. I have a friend who is a concert and wedding photographer and uses Nikon Full Frame cameras, but her facebook profile picture for 3 years was the one I shot with my micro 4/3.

🧐 how sensors size is affecting depth of field?

You NEVER talk nonsense and I want to thank you for that. Also your photos are soooooo lovely. They make me want to jump on a plane to visit Finland! Keep up the great work...we need you.

I concur completely with your point of view and arguments.

Jared Polin never said you couldn't get shallow depth of field. And he never said a professional photo had to have a shallow depth of field. He did question whether professional photographers would buy this camera at this price point for professional photography. And THAT I wholeheartedly agree with. For professional photography I'm gonna spend that same money on a Sony A9 and get that full frame sensor. If you're gonna use someone's name for clickbait, you should quote them accurately.

@lukapretegiani3348

5 жыл бұрын

So, nothing except a9 is worth?

@tubularificationed

5 жыл бұрын

No Luka, again, same misunderstanding. The actual point is, if an ambitious or professional photographer can choose between two hugely different sensor sizes for the same price, then he/she hardly would choose the small one, because the big one has more leeway and power in SOME situations (not all of course). For some photography domains, the sensor size advantages play off frequently. For example wedding photographers. M4/3 users are a rarity there, even though a few do exist (I saw one who's personal style is to endulge in retro style noise). The same as in analogue times. If 35mm SLRs would have been as expensive as medium format equipment, then nobody would have bought them. The thing with 35 mm was that it was much much cheaper than medium format equipment. It had to be. Today, we have an intersting situation. Fuji and Olympus get more and more expensive, whereas "full frame" gets cheaper and cheaper (also with the help of 3rd party lens makers of course). This is the only reason why I suspect that there will be a back-swing from smaller sensor sizes to "full frame" again, in the long run.

@lukapretegiani3348

5 жыл бұрын

tubularificationed so what is the difference between fx and micro 4:3... If you ask me its only about iso performance... And that can be a deal breaker for a photogrpher using high iso often. But why than would anyone buy a medium size for 10x the price of fx witch has only good iso performance and lacking every other tech like fast focus, focusing technologies like eyeaf... And so on

@tubularificationed

5 жыл бұрын

The difference between FX and M4/3 would be - 2 stops noise advantage (as if two stops lower ISO) - 2 stops more bokeh - bigger sensor pixels exploit the limitations of optical lens sharpness and microcontrasts better; they don't suffer from lens sharpness / micro contrast bounds (as much). I suspect the last item is the reason for some photographers being on medium format. The alleged super-microcontrasty 3D look whe all heard about. But I also think that especially for digital medium format (which is not much bigger than "full frame"), the visual difference is probably not justifying the price difference ;)

@jacobgaysawyer337

5 жыл бұрын

Jamil, Don't confuse them with facts. this weird youtuber watched his video and felt an ache for some reason. Jared never said the things that guy said.. he implied them and thats completely different.

Thanks for your input, very informative

No i love your work and opinion about Micro 4/3s. I am interested in a Olympus camera cause of the good weather seal that they have. What would be a perfect camera for a beginner ???

@ForsgardPeter

3 жыл бұрын

E-M5 MKIII would a good start.

I fully agree with you Peter!!! Congrats! I am a professional photographer like you and i have been working with Olympus gear for the last 15 years. I never had complaints from my customers regarding bad image quality or something else. Sometimes i had to use medium format cameras for beeing able to deliver the requested results (XXXL prints), but most of the time m43 was more than enough. Full frame is no option for me. For me there exist only 2 formfactors....m43 and medium format! The E-M1X is an outstanding camera with a technology lead of minimum 5 years compared to other brands cameras!!! The Olymps R&D makes a great job. In my opinion Olympus is the technology leading company to date! With kind regards from your Olympus Visionary buddy from Vienna :-)

@ForsgardPeter

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks!

I appreciated your comments and love your videos...keep it up. BTW, your English is great. I thought it was odd for Olympus to give Jared Polin a sneak peak considering his frequent disdain for micro 4/3 and his focus on the shiniest and highest resolution cameras. That’s not really what Olympus is about. I think Olympus is about travel, portability, endurance, quality and customization. None of which would be important to Jared Polin

@odemata87

5 жыл бұрын

I think Jared was saying that the lack of DOF for a particular look, with the subject clearly isolated from the background, as one sees in a lot of sports photography, is why some wouldn't use this camera for professional work. He said other things but I think he had a valid point with that for if it's going to touted as a sports camera, then it's missing out one thing that's important to others which may include clients who want that particular look.

@arthurrmcphee4885

5 жыл бұрын

@@odemata87 Depth of field has nothing to do with sensor size, that's the domain of lenses and apertures. Sports photographers would have the benefit of stabilization as well as the new AI focus system incorporated into the camera. There are currently some sports photographers making videos about how well this new Olympus camera supports their profession. I take it (understand) that you're not a professional photographer in this field?

@odemata87

5 жыл бұрын

@@arthurrmcphee4885 I'm also not a surgeon, but I understand what Jared said. Did you watch his video and saw the example of the shot demonstrating how the subject isolation wasn't as good as say a full frame camera? I'm not talking about feature set but a look and that he explained fir which from what was show I would have to agree. Go see the video fir yourself

Hey Peter I have the. EM10 M3 do you know how I can take hi res images with it?

@ForsgardPeter

5 жыл бұрын

Unfortunately E-M10 MKIII does not have that feature. Its only in E-M5MKII, E-M1, E-M1 MKII and E-M1X.

@mystahgerri8178

5 жыл бұрын

Hey Peter I have a client in need of a headshot would the EM10 Mark3 shooting in raw allow the image to be blown up to 8x11 with good quality

@ForsgardPeter

5 жыл бұрын

Yes, most likely if you shoot it well.

Hi there, can I ask you something? As a photographer have you heard of the Justin clamp?

@ForsgardPeter

4 жыл бұрын

No I have not. edit: yes I have now that I googled it.

@RestorationAustralia

4 жыл бұрын

@@ForsgardPeter Hmmm this is interesting I thought this gadget is more popular, I've asked other photographers as well. Look I made a how to build the Justin clamp video please check it out if you haven't heard of this before. Please read the description as well for more info. Also this clamp is a giveaway object for my 250 sub you can enter if you wish. "250 Sub Giveaway / How to Make the Justin Clamp"

A lot of the argument about Olympus micro 4-3rd and the older 4-3rd system is very similar to when Olympus came out with the OM1with a lot of people say it was not a pro camera. Still, have my OM1and various lens and my OM2 and power winder was stolen, but now use E300, E1, E3 and E5 all second hand except the E300 and E3, I'm not a pro shooter but have fun. Just find Jared Polin is too far up himself sorry.

@ChrisCysterOne

4 жыл бұрын

I still have my OM1-n and power winder. Use my OM lenses on my EM-5. Still getting used to focusing using the OM lenses though

I haven't seen Jared's vid but it sounds like that's what he would say. I do agree with what you said, Peter, and while I'n not exactly a pro photographer I've been exclusively a m4/3rds user for about seven years and the few customers I've had have been quite happy. Also, this depth of field thing is getting old now. If that's all the down side that the Fro (and the Northrops actually :) can complain about then maybe these systems aren't for them.

They covered the gear or did they not take pictures?

HI Peter. Just became a sub to your channel. What many of these channels forget is that being a professional photographer we should be able to work with what we have. Even people learning can work with the equipment they have. . Many get hung up with the bells and whistles and when you really get down to it, many of the differences between the brands can be over come by technique or what we have learned over time. True some have nice features I wish I had in my Canons, but at the end of the day the client is not looking at what hardware we have, but the final results.

Well said Peter, I’ve been saying this for ages now, ever since the American couple thought m4/3 was dead ... I find that these types of comments are actually embarrassing, as you so clearly point out that there are different cameras for different jobs. I’ve worked professionally for 40 years and didn’t ditch my 35mm, my medium format, for a 10x8. Each has a unique characteristic and use. It seems like some of the click bait contributors have a strange binary mentality !! You have a very reasoned to the point approach , keep it up.

PERFECT Peter, thank you. So true.

You said about HiRes mode what I wrote on Jared's channel in a comment. He just hates systems with small sensors and is unable to appreciate the overall smaller system size and weight. But what about his complaints about viewfinder and screen quality? He sounded very genuinely disappointed about those.

Dude, did you lent your voice to the "Lighthouse Chief" character, on Rick and Morty, in the episode Look who's purging now???

Great video! I'm an Olympus fan and I found Jared's video a little upsetting. He didn't even mention all the cool things that it can do that other cameras can't. YES, I'm upset they are using an old sensor but outside of that I'd love to own one. I blame Olympus for sending him the camera to begin with, a LITTLE research would have shown it was a bad idea.

@GrenlandUnderVann

5 жыл бұрын

Every influencer got a X. The marketing is desperate for this unit.

very wise and realistic words! not just marketing bla bla bla. thanks for your channel!

Thanks for the video. I shoot with a camera the industry says is not a good stills camera. The GH5s. I didn't think I would use it for stills but my images consistently come out better than my classmate's a7riii shots. Megapixels and sensor size does note equal quality.

An excellent video Peter I agree with all that you say here I moved from Nikon full frame to m43 and found it to be a positive move

Hmmm this could stir volumes of comment. I wont go into the M1X which I think is ghastly; I am an Olympus user and I think Olympus has lost their way trying to ape CanNikon and will suffer as a result but , that is up to people who want to buy it. I really think the E-M1 MkII is everything that the M1X is not and am sad so see Olympus take this step. I will confine my comments to Pro gear in general. It is clear to me that Jared is a Pro but not a photographer; he clearly hasnt got a clue about photography in the real sense. Anybody can call themselves a Pro, all they have to do is charge for their pictures. It denotes no professional status in the sense of a Chartered Diploma say. When i encounter this obsession with shallow depth of field, I dont look on in awe, I just say to myself this person couldnt compose a real photograph to save his life; the background is as important as the foreground, ask any top artist from a decade ago. My father in the 50s, struggled with a 5x4 cut film press camera to get sufficient DoF to make the most of exotic locations for celebrity weddings; I see the same thing today with people like Leibovitz using her Hasselblad. and carefully modelling the background. People like Jared have no concept of this as for them shallow DoF short cuts the process and they get saleable results quickly without any thought whatsoever. My opinion of Pro gear is very low, I recently switched from Nikon to Leica because Nikon G glass is appalling (I have kept my lovely old D700 and D primes). My Olympus premier primes blows away Nikon G glass. If Jared thinks his awful Nikon G glass will give better results that some MFT glass then he is badly mistaken. But then I do have a diploma, my Chartered Physicist status gives me the authority to discuss lenses with some knowledge. I dont unbox stuff and then sniff it before seeing if i can blow it over; is he sane? But the fact remains, cameras are tools and what is required is the right tool for the job. I can see no job I would want to do that cant be done with my MFT equipment. If i want a larger format i pick up my Leicas. Pro is virtually a synonym for hard wearing but only optically adequate. None of my kit has the word Pro written on it (ooops sorry, I forgot my Fuji 6x9 but, as that is hardly high end it makes my point precisely). I choose my lenses with care; I take photographs, I put on art exhibitions, I am an artist and a photographer; I am not a Pro. My father took the weddings of minor royalty and celebrities and he never called himself a Pro either, he was always a Photographer ;-)

@ridealongwithrandy

3 жыл бұрын

I love my "X": www.rsdunphyphotography.com/mammals

Oly is very popular in JP. In the right hand, this M1X is a Beast. *Short Sword could be more deadly than a Long Sword, its depends who use it*

Great video!!! I'm a Fujifilm user, but I really the Olympus cameras and the features they have. You are a real photographer, and not a geartographer like so many on KZread. Keep up the great work!!

@ForsgardPeter

5 жыл бұрын

Love the word Geartographer.

right on the money! X-T2 and now T3 has been my main camera for over 2 years, and have not stopped from doing images for big campaigns for companies etc.

@ForsgardPeter

5 жыл бұрын

Seen your work all over and it looks great!

I really don't like Jared Polin and I think he can really be a bit full of himself, but he did make some good points in that video. The real problem is the price of the EM1X, what's the point of spending $3000 dollars on M43 when you can have exactly the same features in a full frame camera for around the same price? The full frame camera will undeniably have better low light performance when you need to take pictures in difficult conditions, and really nobody complains about 1d and d800 weather sealing. I'm a huge fan of the M43 system for making videos because of the amazing stabilisation and for the huge reach you can have with telephoto lenses in good light (useful for aviation, wildlife and outdoor sport photography) but I would not be able to justify such a massive amount of money on something that simply won't have good high ISO performance. They really should have priced the EM1X at a couple of hundred dollars more than the G9 to compete against that camera instead of trying to compete with the 1dx ii setups that most sport photographers use anyway.

@weizenobstmusli8232

5 жыл бұрын

But you have much larger lenses on ff. Going on a hike with 800mm ff lense and a big tripod is basically torture. I'm curios how handheld 400mm mft shots turn out with the new is. For me, the EM1x could be the perfect wildlife and adventure cam.

@cyberwarfare9118

5 жыл бұрын

@@weizenobstmusli8232 but as I said, why not buy a G9 and save yourself a tonne of money? Olympus really done goofed trying to compete with full frame when they should be offering complete micro four thirds packages to rival the G9.

@weizenobstmusli8232

5 жыл бұрын

@@cyberwarfare9118 , I think we have to wait until we see how many stops more the new IS brings with the new Olympus lenses. I mean, the X can create HiRes pics handheld. This alone is remarkable. And handholding someting above 600mm unstabilized is pretty difficult. What if you can really let your tripod at home? This whould be a big thing.

@eternalharvestfarm

5 жыл бұрын

He answered the question of why spend the same for a smaller m43 camera with the same features as a full-frame. A pro photographer delivers and is in the right spot at the right time and is able to hit the shutter. When you can have a camera with the same features and the same price, it can be vastly beneficial to have a camera with a 400mm lens that weighs less than just a 400mm lens of a full frame camera. A m43 shooter with a pancake lens will get shots that someone with a big full frame camera and fancy L lens can never ever get by simple A)having the camera on them more often and B) being less conspicuous. Remember, the best camera is the one that's with you.

@LexTNeville

5 жыл бұрын

I get your point, but can't think of any single similarly priced FF camera, as far as I know to have the same features (4k video, continuous af burst rate of 9fps (or whatever it is), IBIS, in-camera image stacking, hires mode). Most agencies I know use >£5k camera bodies for product photography, but it seems like this Oly would take at least equally detailed pictures, for a lower cost.

M4/3 is good. For video M4/3 is 70% larger than the old 16mm motion picture film frame of yesteryear. Many a films have been shot on 16mm film even today. People confuse personal preference with professionalism. What I don't like is that "professionals" telling others what they should or should not use based on a limited perspectives and criteria they made up in their own heads. Look at most any National Geographic photography and you see tons of deep depth of field shots that absolutely captivate the mind. Many of those photographers use small cameras, sometimes point and shoot cameras in some situations, and still capture so much beauty as to make a grown man cry.

@BlackWarriorLures

5 жыл бұрын

@Good Day Controversy does make for many clicks. The problem is that a real professional knows what he/she needs. They can tell you why each specification is important to their workflow, how it will fit in or won't fit. That has nothing to do with the camera itself, nor the size of the senro or anything. That's a thought process that only comes from years of understanding how producing images works. I'm not a photographer at all, I do all video, but as a fishing tackle designer, I understand that equipment has to perform a function in order to produce the goods. So I think most if not all these camera review channels are not helpful. The only camera channel tat help are ones like these where thew person has spent a lot of time with the camera, lived with it, and can tell you what he likes and doesn't like based on his long term experience and refined works flows.

@genx-tv

5 жыл бұрын

Not only have many films and TV series been shot on Super16 film format (with wonderful cinematography), even when you consider the use of Super 35 in movies (which is APS-C is close to in sensor size), many movies don't constantly use super shallow depth of field. Yet on KZread, the one thing that is constantly talked about is bigger sensor = shallow depth of field = professional. In the end, you just have to know the format you are using and use it to the desired effect.

@michaels8597

5 жыл бұрын

good points..

@youknowwho9247

5 жыл бұрын

I don't see why people keep comparing MFT to 20 year old technology and then justify the format based on that. The choice one has today isn't between MFT and a super 8 film camera, but between MFT and modern full frame mirrorless cameras. In that context MFT is becoming increasingly obsolete. Not because you can't get good results with MFT, but because FF yields even better results under a myriad of common conditions while at the same time being not much bigger or heavier anymore. I still haven't seen anyone make a single valid point why someone would get an MFT camera when a full frame or even aps-c alternative costs the same. Bigger sensors are simply better, that's undeniable.

@youknowwho9247

5 жыл бұрын

I don't see why people keep comparing MFT to 20 year old technology and then justify the format based on that. The choice one has today isn't between MFT and a super 8 film camera, but between MFT and modern full frame mirrorless cameras. In that context MFT is becoming increasingly obsolete. Not because you can't get good results with MFT, but because FF yields even better results under a myriad of common conditions while at the same time being not much bigger or heavier anymore. I still haven't seen anyone make a single valid point why someone would get an MFT camera when a full frame or even aps-c alternative costs the same. Bigger sensors are simply better, that's undeniable.

You hit the nail on the head with this one. Well done!

@ForsgardPeter

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks.

Hello Peter, I do agree with the earlier responder, The right tool for the job and this applys for everything not just for the cameras. I have several Olympus bodies for travel , work and hobby which I use about 70%. I love the size and the weight of the cameras and the high quality of the lenses. On the other hand I have EOS-R and 5Dm4 for the other stuff which is about 30% No need to bash Olympus or Canon ....

A professional, in any field, is the one who can produce great results with any tools. I'm just an amateur in photography, but I think that the camera is only a small part of the toolset you need to produce great images. There's timing, composition, lighting, post and delivery, just to mention a few.

@RimantasLiubertas

5 жыл бұрын

Actually professionals are very particular about their tools.

@mikaberglund

5 жыл бұрын

@@RimantasLiubertas Sure. Me too, in the field that I work with. But particular tools don't make me a professional, and _should_ be able to produce above average even if I don't have the tools that I prefer. Maybe not as fast as I would with the tools I would pick, maybe not as polished. A professional photographer should be able to produce good pictures even with a smart phone because of all the other things besides gear that go into being a professional photographer.

@KellyMercerhfx

5 жыл бұрын

It depends. You can't win a Formula1 race on a moped. But who ever enters a F1 race on a moped? Cheers!

@ForsgardPeter

5 жыл бұрын

Yes we are, but a pro chooses their tool for their needs. The end results is what counts, not the tool.

Enjoyed your video and I also enjoyed the intelligent common sense responses from the readers. :)

This was a very well done commentary, Peter -- and very objective. I have used Olympus digital cameras for professional work since Olympus came out with the E-20 -- and never had an unhappy client. Those clients have included wedding and portrait clients and corporate clients including Toyota, Acura, BASF, and Omni Hotels among others. When I hear someone like Jared Polin condensing professional photography down to shallow depth of field, I have to question that photographer's experience. Keep up the good work, Peter!

@ForsgardPeter

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you.

As always, a thoughtful presentation. Thank you One small point- a Mamiya 6x7 is an SLR

@ForsgardPeter

5 жыл бұрын

Yes, you are right.

I switched from Nikon several years ago. I sold my D2x and D90 even though they were still producing good images that appeared in local media and some bigger publications. I switched at a time when the standard format used by professionals was 12 mpx and no one complained about too few pixels then. I still have 20x30 prints on canvas from a 6 mpx D70 that I still get complements on. I switched to Olympus because I loved the smaller form factor. I got started on Olympus products with a ZX-2 which had an even smaller sensor that 4/3. Some of those shots are going into a local photography show this year. No one complained about depth of field, ever. I now shoot with an EM5 Mk2 and EM10 Mk2. I have both cameras with me on vacation. Both fit in a smallish camera bag with extra lenses, batteries, accessories and my tablet and keyboard. I just had one of my images selected for the cover of an upcoming art exhibition ppster. No complaints about depth of field or only 16 mpx. I am a writer and photographer for a local small town newspaper so I qualify as a professional. I would love an EM1X but to be honest it is probably more camera than I need and will likely pick up an EM1 Mk2. Fro may know Sony but he doesn't speak for all professionals. M4/3 is perfect for me. Plus he is one annoying guy. Can't stand his vids ;)

@seamuswarren

5 жыл бұрын

Gerry Beltgens, is ‘fro a Sony guy now? ‘fro used to be a Nikon guy and would show-off his significant lens collection often highlighting his three must-have lenses - ‘fro’s “Hebrew Trinity”.

@GerryBeltgens

5 жыл бұрын

@@seamuswarren I assumed he was Nikon because he was going talking about it. I luckily have not watched too many of his videos.

In my opinion, comparing m43 to full frame is like comparing a cat to a dog, for example. They are different animals and each of them has its own set of features. You can not say that one is better than the other, it just depends on what you like or what you need. If you are a professional, you consciously choose tools for your work. Sometimes it will be FF, sometimes m43, and sometimes camera obscura. For my work m43 is a very good solution (I'm GH5 user), a large selection of great lenses makes this system very versatile. Portrait? No problem. Pack shot? No problem. Video? No problem. Street photo? No problem. Run and gun? No problem. Yes, high ISO could be better and if you work in very low light, Sony A7III will be a better solution. But if you are a bird shooter - good morning m43 :) Whatever Jarred says, in my job m43 is the optimal choice :)

Loved the t-shirt f 1.2. It's like a slap in the face. Thanks for the great video!

Good stuff, Peter. I remember when digital was just coming out. The Jared type “pros” said only film is professional and digital is not true photography. Everything evolves as technology gets better. Just as your samples represent, there is no noticeable difference between full frame and MFT.

@ForsgardPeter

2 жыл бұрын

I also remember those days. Digital is ruining photography. What it did it changed photography. The change was something that some could not take. They lost their expertise because everyone was able to photograph.

Give a good pro any camera, and s(he) will produce great images. Modern cameras are so good, it really doesn't matter anymore. To a certain extent of course.

@youknowwho9247

5 жыл бұрын

That's true, but irrelevant for a camera review video. Of course a good photographer can, under ideal conditions, get good images with nearly any camera. But a good photographer with a good camera will take better pictures than a good photographer with a bad camera. Thus the need for comparative camera reviews.

@itsjantore

5 жыл бұрын

@@youknowwho9247 We aren't talking about comparative camera reviews here. We are talking about someone referring to m43 as a non-pro sensor size, which is just silly. If you have an eye for good motives, the sensor size won't dictate the image being good or not. I always come back to this. We are caught up in gear, so that we don't have to become better photographers - because that is actually hard. Buying gear and nitpicking on specs is easy.

@youknowwho9247

5 жыл бұрын

@@itsjantore All camera reviews are inherently comparative, because judging the quality of a camera only makes sense in the context of its alternatives. Calling MFT "not pro" doesn't make sense because "pro" isn't an objective metric of a camera system. That's why people mostly say they wouldn't choose MFT for pro photography instead. That statement does make sense, because full frame is a lot more reliable and versatile. Most pros shoot in dim conditions some of the time, which is a good reason not to go MFT. Again, I'm not saying that nobody can get good results with MFT ever. If you do product or macro photography or anything else where you control the lighting and have a perfectly still subject then I couldn't see why MFT would be any worse than full frame for you. My problem with it is that I can't really come up with real world scenarios in which I'd rather have an MFT body than a full frame. I can think of some situations where MFT wouldn't be worse, but none where it'd be better, and many where it would indeed be worse.

@itsjantore

5 жыл бұрын

Landscope 360 Good points. I would choose ff/crop over mft myself - but I would take just as good images with both, which is the point here.

@youknowwho9247

5 жыл бұрын

@@itsjantore Again, you would take equally good images with all systems under good conditions. But you (or anyone) couldn't get some shots that work on full frame with an MFT camera, shallow dof and low light photography being the most prominent examples. That's why I'm saying that larger sensors are objectively better. They won't let you down in non ideal conditions like MFT will.

Thank you for your excellent response to the”depth of field nonsense”.

Hi Peter, in the last few years I have tried lots of different camera systems, Pentax k50, Olympus OMD EM1, Canon 6D and 7 Dmll, Fuji xt2, I have settled on the Nikon D500 and the 500mm lens most of my shooting is birds so it works great. But I will have to say that none of these systems compared with the photos that came of the Olympus and the options it has I really liked the in camera time lapse it is so easy. But the colors and contrast can’t be beat. I know you can get most of that through photoshop but camera to camera the Olympus is very nice. Thanks

Thank you Peter for a level headed sensible discussion about photography. People like Jared in my humble opinion make such un-educated statements just to be noticed, he wants to be a pop star of the camera world! I have just found your channel and will work my way through your videos. Thank you. Stephen

Good video. The internet is flooding with conspiracy theories and other thoughts about Olympus as a company, the M4/3 system, the new camera EM1X and that Olympus killed the M4/3 format with their new camera. And that some people listen to all this crap, and make and post all this nonsense to You Tube etc is quite hilarious, but haters gonna hate. Myself has the OM-D E-M5 Mark II and I really like the system, lightweight and portable with endless possibilities. Only drawback is that I have to wait a year to Olympus release the 150-400mm PRO lens. It's going to be a long year......;-)

@dunsunyt

5 жыл бұрын

You are partly right. Shallow depth of field is really over rated these days. So for me this is not any problem that would kill m43 for me. Though what might kill m43 in the future is if Olympus stops listening to their major customer base. E-M1X is nice (even though they at least could utilize more higher end components in it) but it's an extremely niche type of camera. For few wildlife shooters and Olympus visionaries. Cheers

@GrenlandUnderVann

5 жыл бұрын

That lens might actually never see real production if Olympus goes down in 2019 after crappy sales of the "X" and the decling sales of photo gear.

@youknowwho9247

5 жыл бұрын

People usually only like MFT because they absolutely need the small size or have never tried anything else. The systems advantages are quickly disappearing. Nowadays you can get full frame that's barely any bigger or heavier, not much more expensive, but yields much better results. There used to be reasons for MFT, but by now it's pretty much pointless to go that way.

@LexTNeville

5 жыл бұрын

@@dunsunyt healthy camera eco-systems have niche cameras. And shallow DoF is as easily achieved with m43 as it is FF, especially since we have so many compact zooms to choose from. M43 just needs some more distance to get the same DoF.

@youknowwho9247

5 жыл бұрын

@@LexTNeville Increasing distance changes the framing. What if I want shallow dof at 50mm? The truth is that there's no way to get the same shot a 50mm f1.4 would produce with MFT.

Well said Peter, smack in the face of that weird haired so called Photographer...I love Micro 4/3 and yes it has versatility and class that can match any professional camera on this earth..God bless you

Every word you have said are gold, each one! I would like to said in more, a photographer should know what he is handeling, if we use a m 4/3 camera like a ff we will be disappoited for the result, the same will be if we use a ff like a medio format camera!

There's a mistake. 6x7 or any medium format doesn't offer more shallow depth of field than 35mm. It has always slower lenses, f/2.8 at best which is similar to f/1.4 in 35mm and those lenses have been around for a long time.

Peter, first of all thank you for all the time and effort you put into communicating useful information! Second, I think Jared Polin falls into a kind of trap that seems to affect many in the photo community -- and that is to obsess on a 'hot' aspect of image-making as a singularly important, objective measure of. A couple of years ago it was sharpness -- everything sharper was "objectively better". Today's hot topic is bokeh. And fine -- it's nice not to be limited by your gear, but did all the thousands of acres of Kodachrome reproduced in National Geographic suddenly become terrible because it doesn't have the dynamic range of a Nikon D5? Or indeed because some of it was taken on 35mm and not on 6x7 or 4x5"? No, the great photographs of history remain great photographs because they help us to see the world in a new way, not because they showcase the cutting edge capabilities of some technology. As for me? I've recently added m43 to my set of cameras because I like going on month-long hiking trips where heavy gear is not practical. For me, m43 represents a sweet spot that offers much more sophistication and quality than compact cameras, without the weight factor. (Previously I've found APS-C becomes awkward to carry, and full frame would be out of the question).

I shoot real estate professionally, i.e. I get paid to do it, which in my opinion is what differentiates a pro from an amateur, not the talent of the said photographer. getting to my point, for years I shot with a Canon T3i for my real estate with the EF-S 10-22mm and got great results. At that time, other 'professionals' criticized me for not using full frame, saying that professionals wouldn't use anything less than full frame. This didn't bother me because I saw their work and in my opinion, my work was better with a far inferior camera. As I got better paying gigs, I upgraded to the 80D, then later to the 6D mkII full frame. And I have to say I would not go back, I love the flexibility that full frame gives me, especially in those dimly lit basements. Bottom line, I want a camera that can do it all, and full frame, works for me, for that purpose, but a 1.6x or micro 4/3 sensor camera can get equally great results, it just takes a little more time and effort. what makes great photos is a great photographer, not the kit you use.

I like the depth of field that I get with micro 4/3s. And, the high rez mode is a wonderful addition to any camera system.

I love my EM1 mark II. I make the switch from canon 5D mark II and III I never use those anymore. They are way to big and heavy and since i injure my back. My oly is a lot lighter. I get a lot of people saying my camera is not a pro camera. Is funny a camera doesn't make you a better photographer. I saw Jared review and make me guessed for a second but I just love my olympus. I took a road trip across country and never guessed to bring my canon along the way.

Excellent video, Peter! Thank you.

Like I already stated after Mr. Northrups Clip about M4/3 is dead came up. In my opinion these guys are click-hunters. Every photographer knows, that it is not the machine - it is you taking the photos. I'm absolutely convinced, that lots of clients can't tell, which system made the job unless they see a direct comparison. The most important question for a pro is: what system will fit my needs (in general or for special jobs). I do a lot of people shoots and normally I take my Sony A7rII and some good glas with me. But sometimes I take my lighter MFT-Equipment even for portraits f.e. for test shootings or small jobs. As long as 42MPix are not needed and my ISO won't go higher than 800 you will hardly find differences in the RAWs. Last but not least: the "bokeh-trap" is a common mistake. It is not only the amount of the blurred background - much more it is the quality of the bokeh that matters. Take f.e. a 25mm Olympus @F1.2 and compare the shot to the FE 55mm F1.8 Zeiss Sonnar and you will see a slight softer background but (in backlight conditions) a more aggressive light rendering. Just one last word about the E-M1X: in my opinion Olympus tried to get a sports machine into the market. In fact MFTs advantage is a lightweight, reliable open DSLM standard for high picture quality. Now the cameras become more and more expensive (3000$ start price for E-M1X) and much heavier than ever before. I hope that Olympus did a good research before they decided to build such a machine. The limiting factor was and still is the MFT-Sensor-Size in terms of SN-ratio. As long as they don't overcome this limitation lot's of photographers will see MFT as a secondary system thats now getting very expensive as well. From my point of view: better don't forget your roots.

@MuertoInc

5 жыл бұрын

Unless I'm mistaken.... Olympus is still making small cameras. They just recently released the Olympus E-PL9. They also have Pen F rangefinder type, E-M5 lineup and of course one of their Flagships, the E-M1 lineup. If anything I appreciate Olympus expanding their camera options. No other company is as versatile as they are, no other company is misunderstood as they are, or unappreciated. But funny enough, Olympus innovates, and all the other brands take note.... and follow Olympus' trails.

@borderlands6606

5 жыл бұрын

The Northrup's "M43 is dead" claim was based exclusively on Panasonic announcing the S1 full frame camera. Panasonic have said this is a stills oriented camera, a market they began to explore with the G9. The companies that developed mirrorless cameras from the beginning are way ahead of Nikon and Canon, as those company's recent cameras have proved. The S1 wants a slice of that market. Nothing to do with the viability of M43, just click bait to throw to the expectant dogs.

Completely agree with you about the format, but I am quite underwhelmed by the E-M1x for my needs, it just seems too expensive for basically a beefed up E-M1mk2. I have a feeling many of us m43 shooters that will not be shooting in the most extreme conditions can get by with a G9 just as well, and have over 1.5k for lenses or travel left over.

First time to watch this...I love your passion, sir!

@ForsgardPeter

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks.

👍👍👍📷📷📷 Good points! 🇫🇮

You are spot on here. Micro 4/3rd cameras are amazing. Their software in camera, not overheating, the weight and size also make them great in use. Any camera is a pro camera in the hands of a good photographer. But thats the issue here. I have never seen any image of Polin that I liked. People defend him for having taught them everything they know about photography. Proof people need better teachers. He is a rude americanized Caricature of a man and that Fro by now has eaten his brain. Frak him.

I totally agree with your professional opinion on this subject. Best regards from me, a very satisfied Olympus user in Barcelona, Spain. I also left behind the "monster" of the huge and very heavy DSLR from Ninkon.

First time visitor to your channel. Nice. And a nice video here.

@ForsgardPeter

5 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

Don't feed the trolls Peter, these guys are struggling with the Sony disease. It's not necessary to prove, that you're professional, like a lot of Olympus shooters here including myself.

@ryukiT3

5 жыл бұрын

What's a Sony disease? Is that when you love Sony so much, that you shoot with a Nikon? (Jared shoots Nikon)

@mrheng562

5 жыл бұрын

Hahaha...it’s called the fanboy disease. But, Olympus users are less about that life. Hell, I got a Canon 5DM3, GH5, and EM5ii. Why? Because different tools for different jobs.

@midnightsnack1306

5 жыл бұрын

Fro is a Nikon fanboy. He shoots Nikon. What did Sony do to you? Shoot your dog?

@mrheng562

5 жыл бұрын

Poet Guide 😩, you missed the point. Fanboying any manufacturer is the problem. Best tool for the job is the best practice for pros.

@meme4one

5 жыл бұрын

Sony sell specs. Not good or nice to use cameras. They push them with photography influencers most of the time, but I've yet to see an actual pro who's not online using a Sony. They are nearly all using old canons and Nikons with fast glass. Bodies are sometimes 10 years old (D700).

Great video and very well said! Being a professional photographer never was and never is about being able to deliver out of focus backgrounds agreed, what rubbish these youtubers spew out for the uneducated masses to swallow. Rant on my friend, you are doing well!

As long as we all get good shots , does it matter what camera its taken on . great video Peter .

I dont have the money to get the newest Olympus cameras. I have the OM1n, and 2n. I also have the em5 and em1. They work so well for me, I dont feel the need to upgrade. When I deliver to a client, they are never disappointed. Thanks for this video.

I like my M 4/3. But I’m not a professional, so I guess I’m talking out of my a##... Anyhow, the weather seal seems to be on a completely different level compared to other cameras out there right now, but no one talks about that. All I hear is how bad, terrible and full of crap the new Em1x is. I wonder... 🤔 ... It’s almost like the reviewers are heavily invested in a different system...

f22 was good enough for Ansel Adams

@orion7741

3 жыл бұрын

actually it was F/64. he was one of the founding members of the F/64 club. and the members all formed their group around the desire for the best images possible using the smallest aperture possible (at the time) which was F/64.

Thumps up for this video. You nailed it. JP often talks nonsense. I am really impressed, how well Olympus is doing in producing tools for outdoor photographers.

I totally agree with you. For the type of photography I need a large depth of field, small camera and high res images (also a flippy screen). So micro four thirds are perfect for the job and getting a "professional" full frame camera would only be a waste of money and a hindrance!