For many years I worked with two systems: Full frame and mFT. Two months ago I completely left full frame and sold my Nikon Z- system. The reason is the OM-1: An amazing camera, which has been improved in every respect. I therefore can't see any reason to maintain full frame. Even low light is no longer a problem: The IS of the OM-1 is so good that you mostly can shoot at base ISO of 200 (for still subjects), and get enough depht of field at open or nearly open aperture. With Full frame you often have to stop down to get the same depth of field, and have to push the ISO's to get fast enough shutter speed. Also, there are now RAW- converters available delivering clean images at higher ISO's without the loss of detail, as DxO Pure RAW II or II, or Topaz DeNoise AI. Not to forget the high quality glass you get in the OM System, especially in the PRO- lineup. Kind regards from Switzerland

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Hi Markus, a brilliant comment and I agree with your points, and I would really love an OM-1 👍👍

@malikknows3510

4 ай бұрын

Same experience here! I’m a bit puzzled why they aren’t more popular. The advantages are many, the shortcomings, trivial, imho. All the best!

@iSirTaki

2 ай бұрын

Same here, agree in all points. OM-1 user here, fantastic camera. Shoot ISO 200 in lowlight with a 20mm f1.4. up to 1sec Handheld 😅

What it is easily forgotten is that the shallow depth of field of fullframe can be a great disadvantage in low light. While you can shoot f2.8 on m43 and may have enough DOF. This may not be the case with fullframe at f2.8. Needing f5.6 and 2 stops higher iso make the advantage disappear mostly. As mentioned by others DXO prime does an excellent job to get quite similar iso performance. I use both formats. Because I believe if not any major improvements are coming, I don't believe that there is any system that can replace all formats.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment. I have used Topaz to reduce noise but don't bother anymore because I'm happy enough with the noise I get from my M4T camera, and agree not one system has it all and if it does it would have a monopoly.

@jeffslade1892

10 ай бұрын

It is easy to disparage MFT and FF. They are different systems to be used differently. I see no reason not to have both. There is a 40Mp 4/3 sensor already in existence (Gigajot GJ04122) with noise level less than 1ev and huge well depth. That means no noise and huge ISO. Built for vehicle cameras, it will not be resized any bigger. It has already been built into a scientific camera but as yet lacks focus areas.

@eelco6587

10 ай бұрын

@@jeffslade1892 I agree with you about both systems. I tried to find sample photo's shot with the Gigajot. But could not find them. I think Sony does not have a real interest in improving Four Thirds sensors in a way that they might become more competitive to fullframe. A new player that has no attachement to a specific system could be a game changer. Hope they will not be acquired by Sony.

@jeffslade1892

10 ай бұрын

@@eelco6587 I believe the 4/3 sensors are designed by Panasonic and built by Sony. This is a fairly common business practise. Panasonic managed to have a fire in their sensor factory. It will use Sony tech. LMOS and CMOS are not quite the same thing, LMOS sweeps stray electrons off the sensor. Panasonic are like three to six times bigger financially than Sony. Sony likes money, Olympus got their fingers trapped in the till. Information on the Gigajot (based in California) has dried up since 2021 but has backing from the automotive industry. There's another mob at Cambridge Science Park and outfit another in Israel doing similar development.

@gregfeeler6910

10 ай бұрын

@@eelco6587Sony is building the dual-layer MFT sensor for the OM-1, and that is at the cutting edge of Sony's digital camera sensor technology.

I fell victim to the have to have full frame talk and sold all my Olympus gear and went Sony. I hated the sony. The IQ was great, but I just could not make friends with it. I ended up making a trade of a lifetime with a former Olympus visionary and switched back. I wish I had my original kit. But live and learn.

@MyPhotoJourney

11 ай бұрын

That's a great story and probably not unique. I really like my M4T cameras and I'm pleased you got back to them 👍

@AllanFrance

11 ай бұрын

Same here I shoot mainly Wildlife Birds I had Olympus e-m1 mk 2 with the 300f4 pro lens loved everything about it but kept watching Mark Smith shooting Ospreys with Sony full frame sold all my Olympus went Sony miss Olympus just the weight looking at going back Olympus soon

@hanumanguy

10 ай бұрын

Good to hear this. The Sony A7C interests me with the small primes but I am concerned I wouldn't like the user experience. Just got my first M43 coming from Pentax. Pentax has a great user experience but I wanted a smaller system + Pentax autofocus is not stellar

@colinspotswood9893

7 ай бұрын

Sorry to hear this…lesson learnt!

@jakesdewet3567

5 ай бұрын

I sold all my Nikon and Fuji gear to go Olympus/OM-1. Well my story is the opposite. First few months the feel and experience overshadows the compromises, the “ can deal with noise in post” the DR is as good as FF and all the other things that kept me using FF and even APS-C for ever. Then the first big trip starts, off to Kenya and Uganda, early morning when light is dim, fog in the air, beautiful light, active wildlife, with “confidence shooting at ISO 12800 with deep shadows, then it hit me, expose to the right for M43, went to +1 EV shutter speed drops, ISO go higher, focus on the OM-1 and 300f4 start to struggle and miss. Back at the lodge, processing time, what a disappointment. No color, noise screaming at me. We can solve this in Post. DxO, LrC, Topaz AI DeNoise, sharpening.. I watched to my left as my friend download his Nikon Z6ii images into Lr. ISO12800, tack sharp from his 500f5.6. I maintained hope.. next day bird photography in mid morning light ISO 800 came back files look good. Happy me. Next 3 days had amazing wildlife action early morning and late afternoon, cut long story short, for good light bird action I used the OM, rest of the time borrowed Canon R6 with 100-500. Back hom spend days trying to recover some decent images for printing. I ended up converting some to B&W.. sold the EM1x plus 12-40, 40-150 at stupid cheap prices as OM has no used value. Kept the OM-1 and 300 for birds. On my last 2 trips to Tanzania and Kenya, they stayed home. So reality. It is not the system that solves the ills of the photography world, it has its place..

Your story mirrors my entry in to photography . I began with Fujica ST 701 and added Nikons later . I also loved 5x4 and 6x6 bodies . My first digital body was a tiny Olympus with 1.3 mp. I produced some Fantastic images with that before it died . Next was a Pentax and gave that to my nephew a couple of years ago . I then bought the one of the last ME10 Mkii kits and I still using it .

@MyPhotoJourney

Ай бұрын

Fantastic to read that, thanks a lot for watching and for taking your time to comment 👍

As an old film photographer (NikonF 1963) I found even aps-c lenses too heavy to carry around. I am completely satisfied with m4/3 And have no trouble with working with its limitations. Compared to the limitations of Tri-X in available light in cafes and similar interiors where I worked m4/3 is joy to work with. But it is the great variety of compact inexpensive lenses that I can afford that makes using the m4/3 system so satisfying. The many pancake lenses available make it easy to set up a pocketable camera that is quite different from a phone camera.

@MyPhotoJourney

3 ай бұрын

Thank you very much for watching and for taking your time to write a nice comment. I agree completely and I too used aps-c and wanted a smaller lighter camera and that's exactly why I'm a m4/3 convert. 👍👍

Another positive with M43 is the 2X crop factor, which extends your focal length but using a compact lens. For example, a 40mm lens is 800mm FF equivalent. This is great for wildlife photography. You would need a small truck to carry around a 800mm FF lens, not to mention having to mortgage your house to afford it.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Yeah the crop factor means you can get a lot of reach with much smaller and lighter lenses which is what I like!

@8897johnson

7 ай бұрын

A 40mm lens is not 800mm

@robb8773

7 ай бұрын

@8897johnson typo, I meant to say 400mm is 800mm

I find the larger depth of field of micro-43 cameras an advantage, because the majority of pictures need it. It is only pics like portrait that need a smaller depth of field, but even there I prefer the larger depth of field, so that the whole face is sharp. So, this is no issue at all. Regarding low-light performance, it is more than enough.

@MyPhotoJourney

4 ай бұрын

Thank you for watching and for your excellent comment. I agree about the DOF, and being able to use F/4.0 to get a nice DOF is cool, and if I need it shallow I'd go for f/2.8 or f/1.8. Low Light is perfect for me too, cheers 👍👍

@SurfinScientist

4 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney Yes, I agree. When I need shallow depth of field, I use the Olympus 75mm F1.8 or the Panasonic 42.5mm F1.7, both of which are excellent and affordable portrait lenses. Also, there are some tricks to get a blurry background other than just a shallow depth of field. One example is choosing a lens that allows the subject to be close to the lens relative to the background. This requires some arranging sometimes, but that is what photography is all about. BTW, I once had a friend questioning me why the background of some of my M43 pictures was not sharp, and I explained the concept of depth of field to him. That was an eye opener for him, since he takes all his pictures with a smartphone, of which the much smaller sensor has a much larger depth of field.

In terms of low light, I went from the original EM-1 to the OM-1 + pro lenses (including 25/45 1.2 primes), and when i combine those with ai noise reduction software like dxo pureraw, the trifecta together is such a massive jump over my old em-1 its unbelievable. Truly. In capable hands, i believe this combination is just as good as full frame was in low light not too long ago in terms of noise and dynamic range (without the assistance of ai noise removal software) and they managed to get by just fine so. Of course if you add the ai noise removal to a full frame it will get you even further, but still.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and your great comment. I am really happy with the results I get from my Mark ii, and I can just imagine how great your set-up is!!

@gregfeeler6910

10 ай бұрын

Very good video, but I take exception to the statement that MFT sensors will never equal the low-light performance of ASP or FF. There is a *lot* of progress going on with new sensor designs which allow for much higher pixel counts per unit of surface, are more light sensitive, and with lower noise. We've all seen the amazing progression of tech in other areas and it all converges into ever smaller but higher performance devices. What I predict is that within five years there will be MFT sensors equaling or surpassing FF high-pixel count sensors today, and by that I mean both high ISO noise quality and equivalent pixel count (for enlargements). Yes, FF sensors can also benefit from these new generation sensors, but at a point, the differences in quality will be so insignificant as to no longer be a decision point. My advice is to move to MFT - or stay with it - and enjoy it's benefits now and it's every greater performance in the future.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your excellent response, and I bow to your extensive knowledge. The thought of improving technology did cross my mind and as you say there is no reason to think that Canon etc don't keep pace. I very much am staying with M4T and don't anticipate changing. Cheers!

@simonatterbury

10 ай бұрын

To be fair with my EM1 MKII using F1.8 to F.2.8 len's and using the IBIS, I can use slow shutter speeds, Im not really seeing any major issues with noise and whats there is fixable. Have three other Olympus cameras, the 2011 PM1 which can be flipping noisy plus M10 MKIII and PL10 which pretty much resolve the same quality images, If used properly results can be fantastic. Getting much better photos than from my old Canon APSC DSLR but that maybe because I have more fun with this system and so invest more time learning and using it.

@iSirTaki

2 ай бұрын

you can get further, yes, but at some point you have to decide, what is enough. m43 is enough for me

I've never shot with a M4:3 camera and I don't foresee doing so given my use case but your video helped me understand its advantages and I can definitely see where it would be perfectly suited for some based on their use case. Thanks!

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks very much for watching and your comment. The nice thing is that we have a system choice and we can have different photo tools for different people and situations 👏👏

Nice video. I have everything from 1 inch, M43, APSc, and FF. I like using M43, I have EM10Mii and EM10Miii, love using them along with GX85.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your comment and for watching the video. It's amazing you have so many cameras, and I would like an OM10 or a GX85. I think all systems are good and have their merits.

I'm a 'retired pro' who's finally settled on an mft system after much back and forth trading, and now carry a Lumix G80 plus an Olympus 14-150 lens and a Lumix 7-14 lens in a bag that would barely have accommodated a full frame body with a 50mm lens on it. Also, the IBIS on mft cameras blows the socks off the full frame equivalent 😊

@MyPhotoJourney

4 ай бұрын

Thank you very much for watching and for your great comment. If money was "no object" I would buy either an OM1 ii or a G9 ii, I'm not sure there is much between them, and for all the reasons I set out in my video. I posted a video using an old Nikon DSLR in Bath recently, and that reminded me how amazing my EM1 ii is, and that it is so easy to use, and I know you get familiar with your camera, but it got me thinking more. Thanks again for watching and your super comment. 👍

@keithspillett5298

4 ай бұрын

@MyPhotoJourney I owned an EM1 mk1, but prefer the menus on the Lumix range. I find the sharpness of the 16mp sensor fine for my needs, in fact, I've made 40"x30" prints which look great.

Great video, thanks for sharing your perspective.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thank you very much for watching and your nice comment 😊

Excellent reflections. I’ve had a micro4/3 kit for a few years and it never disappointed me. Always sharp optics and shooting even at 3200iso (At most I fix something with Lightroom) I print albums for events and they satisfy me. In addition I only have two kilos on me (two bodies and two optics mounted on my belt) instead of 4/5 of my old reflex kit. Another advantage is the phenomenal stabilisation Not to mention that I can shoot at full opening without danger of blurring the subjects. Then the blur is already enough on the micro (the distances also count) 👋🏽

@MyPhotoJourney

2 ай бұрын

Thank you very much for taking your time to leave such an excellent comment and for watching the video 👍👍

I like hearing your explanation. You speak well. It's a lot of information to absorb but well formulated ideas.

@MyPhotoJourney

6 ай бұрын

Thank you very much for watching the video and your very nice comment!!👍👍

If you want shallow dof in portraits just use the Olympus 45mm f1.8 at f1.8 and go in a little closer to the face/s.

@MyPhotoJourney

2 ай бұрын

Yeah and I'm pleased that I have one and it is amazing, super sharp, thanks a lot for watching and for your comment 👍👍

@angelorenna

2 ай бұрын

Very right. The 45 olympus is the optics to have in every micro4/3 kit!

Nice video, i have all formats but really enjoy taking out one of my 3 EM10Mii bodies.

@MyPhotoJourney

4 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching, and the formats have their merits but micro four thirds is my preference, and I can understand why you like the EM10 👍👍

Both depth-of-field and low-light performance depend on the physical aperture, which on a smaller sensor means a larger f-stop. For example an f1.8 lens on APSC is the equivalent of a f1.4 lens on m43. Luckily there are some fast lenses for m43, up to f0.95, which are less expensive than equivalent apertures on larger formats. Of course the downside of wider apertures is larger lens sizes, for any sensor.

@MyPhotoJourney

9 ай бұрын

Thanks a lot for watching and your great comment. I agree DOF is achievable with the right lens and I would love an f/0.95 👍👍

@tobykelsey4459

9 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney So would I. My Gear Acquisition Syndrome is incurable but I console myself by trying to be creative with my existing equipment.

I agree re the weight. I have a Canon 7d Mk11 and many lenses and accessories, I weighted my camera bag the other day and it was over 5 Kilo. I am interested in all forms of photography from Wildlife, birds in flight down to macro and insects. I have recently bought a Panasonic Lumix G7 and was amazed how much smaller and lighter it was compared to my Canon. When using the Canon for photographing say Dragon flies I found when bending over and rocking back and forward trying to get focus the Camera and lens becomes heavy . I have now used the G7 and found it so much easier when bent over at an odd angle trying to focus on a Dragon flies eyes. I will keep my canon gear for wildlife of the larger variety but the G7 for macro work. Thanks for your video.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks a lot for watching and for your great comment, exactly my point about the weight and also the M4T lenses do tend to be much smaller and easy to move and track wildlife.

Low light is not really a big issue anymore if you use DXO PhotoLab or DXO PureRaw best noise reduction it even restores loss of color due to high ISO.

@MyPhotoJourney

11 ай бұрын

I did use Topaz for a bit and don't bother now, and to be honest I'm happy with what the camera gives me. Thanks for watching and your comment 👍

@bigrobotnewstoday1436

11 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney I used Topaz also. I can tell you DXO blows Topaz out of the water. I just use Deep PRIME. The newer version Deep PRIME xD uses AI might have artifacts. Its mostly landscape photographers that are having a issue shooter late at night.

As a new-to-cameras person, I was stupid enough to buy my first GH5 camera, which is MFT. I am very worried and kind-of regret the purchase because of the worst crop sensor alone, but it was meant to shoot full body green screen spokesperson videos.

@MyPhotoJourney

29 күн бұрын

That's a shame, there are lots of other very good camera formats you could swap to that would better suit your needs, thanks for watching 👍

I love the M43 system. I have an EM1 Mark III with a bunch of Pro len's. I less my work online and through galleries. No one has ever looked at my work and said, "oh I'm not buying it because it wasn't shot with a FF camera"!!

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Great point and you have anasweosme set-up, thanks for your comment!

I thought that looked like South Common but assumed I was just seeing things until the cathedral was in shot! Spent many summers at that exact spot :)

@MyPhotoJourney

4 ай бұрын

That's cool. I've recorded a few videos at the South Common, nice and quiet and the horses add some interest. Thanks for watching 👍👍

I do a lot of close-up work (1/4 to 1/2 macro) where m43 increased depth of field is a boon. Also, the effective ff equivalent magnification is double, so even some standard (non-macro) m4/3 lenses (e.g. panny 42.5mm f1.7) can achieve x0.4 nearly half-macro ff equivalent in a tiny 130g package with a good 30cm working distance. I’ve considered moving to ff, but this kind of performance to price/weight ratio just can’t be matched. Top this off with its excellent image stabilisation and IMO micro four thirds is the best system for hand held semi-macro work.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your excellent comment and the DOF is a positive as well of course and the IBIS and hand holding capabilities are perfect, sadly I didn't want the video to go on forever and had to omit a few things. 👍

I love my Olympus epl5, got it cheap from market place ,80 quid with bad and 2 lenses , and flash, Truthfully I find it better than my Nikon 3300, and leave the Nikon at home ,for reasons mentioned on ur other video with the motorcycle,, and put my canon gx7 mk2 above the Nikon , when it comes to image quality , size and convenience,,, cheers Shane uk 🇬🇧

@MyPhotoJourney

25 күн бұрын

Hi Shane, it is amazing how good the Olympus cameras are and the E-PL5 is another really nice camera, and so easy to use. I personally don't use the older DSLRs i have access to and use them to demonstrate things. Cheers!

Yes full frame is better in low light, but medium format is, in turn, better than full frame. You never hear commentators mention that f2.8 on full frame is effectively less than f4 on medium format. And, of course, you could make even bigger sensors. The lenses would be massive but think of those stratospheric ISOs! Also the depth of field issue isn't always a disadvantage. I often shoot at wider apertures on MFT than I would need to use on FF to get enough of the scene in focus. In those cases I am usually on a lower ISO too (since the aperture is two stops wider), and therefore there is no low light disadvantage at all. By the way, you didn't mention the better stabilisation found in MFT cameras. Seven stops in some cases. Nor did you talk about the better shape of the format, which has the added benefit of using more of the image circle.

@MyPhotoJourney

5 ай бұрын

I forgot about the stabilisation of micro four thirds, though I am so impressed with it that I did create a separate video. Also I agreed with the advantage of DOF with MFT cameras and you get lots of light and a lot of depth if you get the settings right. Thanks again for your comments 👍

@AlexSegre

5 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney Thanks for your reply. I think you only mentioned depth of field on MFT as a negative. It would have been great if you had also explained how the greater DOF can be a positive as it can totally negate the supposed low light advantage of larger formats by virtue of the fact that when stopping down to get more in focus on full frame, the same DOF on MFT would be got at a much lower ISO (when shooting in low light). Very few full frame shooters have ever thought about this.

Nice video to watch. On the subject of depth of field and bokeh on Micro Four Thirds - it is becoming a bit more attainable. On my Sony Full Frame I would shoot most portraits at F2.8 and now with my E-M1 II I can achieve a similar result with any lens that delivers an F1.4 or less thanks to the introduction of some of the better Chinese prime lenses like the TTArtisan 50mm F0.95. I do shoot a lot of macro, so less depth of field also works really well for that. Definitely a matter of finding what works and building a kit to cater for your shooting style and subject selection. John Pouw NZ

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks very much for your escellent comment and watching the video, and yeah with the right lens you really can get amazing results. I've not long had the Oly 45mm f/1.8 and it is amazing for DOF.

Horses for courses! I have 5 different cameras, all used for various situations. MFT cameras are great for hikers like me, and as I always buy used you can’t go wrong! I also have a Canon APS C camera.

@MyPhotoJourney

Ай бұрын

Thanks a lot for watching and for leaving a comment. I totally agree, and you are doing well to have so many cameras - cheers 👍👍

As an aside, I had to pause the video a moment to stifle my sudden giggles after I saw the giant Tamron lens looming up behind you 😂

@MyPhotoJourney

9 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching, yeah I did a Tamron lens review too. 👏👏

Very pleased with my m43 cameras (3 of them). The light weight, and compactness means I am likely to take 2 of them out rather than leave a single large camera at home. Although no camera can defy physics the electronics can mask some of the issues. The image stabilisation for instance that has let me take shots handheld with a 1/2 second exposure time. Most of my photography is of landscapes and nature, however the few times I have used the cameras in crowds I am grateful of the camera being nearly invisible. People do tense up when they see a huge FF camera, going from one type to the other it is very noticeable. Controversially I think the FF camera manufacturers slipped behind with their electronics. Mirrorless was the way to go, as was stabilisation, we best not mention which format had decent HD video first either...

@MyPhotoJourney

11 ай бұрын

Fabulous comment, and I agree and didn't mention the stabilisation which is wonderful, thanks 👍

I can't believe his first camera was a Praktika LTL3. So was mine. It was the cheapest Reflex camera around at the time (late 70's) because it was made in East Germany and that was all I could afford at the time. I wish I had not misplaced it.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Ha Ha thnaks yeah, I actually bought mine in July 1981, and I couldn't afford the Pentax etc at the time, and the camera was great for me for a long time, and I think back to that f/1.8 lens very fondly.

@brianchandler1365

10 ай бұрын

Me too, I've still got mine together with a soviet built Zenit E. Both excellent at the time. Now OM -1, how things have progressed

Great video.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thank you very much indeed for watching and your nice comment, I've not long started the channel, or tried to develop it and it helps a lot getting your encouragement.

@pouchboy1

10 ай бұрын

I think you should stick with it. There is a lot of competition and clutter, so you have to stay in for a bit of time in order to have an impact. Do it. You are a good communicator. Just subscribed.@@MyPhotoJourney

a balanced review🎉

@MyPhotoJourney

9 ай бұрын

Thank you for taking the time to watch it, and for your comment 👍

I’ve been using M43 for 10 years now considering switching to A7CII. I’m using PenF+20f1.4 and it’s the same weight as A7C+40f2.5. The light weight advantage is not disappearing but diminishing. Plus, the A7CII has 7stop IBIS rated by CIPA which is the same as OM-5. The one thing full frame can’t have is the small and light telephoto lens. Weather dealing is Olympus strength but not a small sensor advantage. What I really want from Sony is the AI auto focus tracking system for kids photography. But I have never tried an OM-1 I don’t know the new autofocus from OM system is as good as Sony’s.

@MyPhotoJourney

9 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and your great comment. I know that the camera bodies are fairly comparable now, and the Lumix bodies seem to be getting bigger, and the lens sizes are good on M4T. I don't know enough about Sony though they are amazing cameras, and as I am considering doing a video about the features of my EM1 Mark ii, I continue for find new stunning things that it does that I took for granted, I'm sure Sony etc will catch-up though. Cheers.

I was put off by lack of extreme shallow depth too way back. However, compactness got me into MFT and I rarely need extreme shallow depth. I've used my full frame camera very rarely after that. I can always put a speedbooster with sigma 18-35/F1.8 when I want more shallow depth than my 12-35/2.8 can give. I tend to use sigma for filming a lot but for a holiday nothing beats small and light MFT with a generic zoom like 12-35/2.8 that gets me through most of what I need. (Telephotos are not for me usually anyway). Often the best camera is the one you take with you, not the technically most perfect heavy weight champion sitting at home.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Tanks for your great comment and for watching the video. I couldn't agree more and I knew about the possible lack of shallow DOF before I bought my M4T cameras and still went for it, and I'm super happy!

I have always worked with M4/3 but now I'd like to have as much detail as possible detail and sharpness in my pictures because I want to use the camera to create photo scans like photogrammetry and Gaussian Splatts. So I like the absence of depth of field but want noiseless details. Should I get a Panasonic G9 ii or a Sony A7 IV?

@MyPhotoJourney

7 ай бұрын

That's an interesting question, and if you get the G9 you would be continuing with M43, and the Sony would give you the detail you want, it's a difficult one. Thanks for watching and for your question 👍

I never meant to become a sensor snob. I love the advantages of full frame in dim lighting, but the images from the LUMIX G9 were so beautiful with the Leica 12-60.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Hi, thanks for watching and your comment. Being a sensor snob is so easy, especially for FF and M4T users because both have got something to brag about. I'd love to have your camera and lens set-up!!👍

This is what I can’t understand. The recent videos saying M43 has bad low light and blaming the sensor size. Yet my iPhone 12 Pro Max has see things in the dark that the human eye can’t. If an iPhone can do this then the sensor size isn’t the issue.

@MyPhotoJourney

2 ай бұрын

Micro four thirds low light is fine, and I posted a video comparing low light with a phone and a purpose camera and explain why or how you get such good light with an iPhone, its all about technology. Thanks for watching 👍👍

I own a Nikon D7500 (APS-C) and an Olympus OM-D E-M1 III. I did some comparisons on DOF with both cameras and to my surprise I did not find a visible significant difference in shallow DOF when I shot the same scenes with comparable lenses (i.e. Olympus 25mm 1.8 and Nikon 35mm 1.8, or Panasonic Leica 12-60 2.8-4 and Nikon 16-80 2.8-4. As a matter of fact: the bokeh area on the Leica lense looked nicer than that on the Nikon ...). Also what you said about the equivalence of aperture between full frame and MFT, that f2.8 on full frame equals f5.6 on MFT: I think it's the other way round: You get the same (or let's say: similar) DOF with 2.8 on a FF lense like with f1.4 on a MFT lense, isn't it? That's the reason you cannot get the look of a f1.4 FF lense on MFT - because it had to be a (non existing) f0.7 lense for MFT.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your comment, and for watching and your DOF comparison is interesting and I have enough cameras to try to do the same thing and that might be an idea for another video. You have also made my brain ache thinking about the aperture equivilant, and I don't think I was wrong but you are not wrong either, and just depends which way you look at it. Sorry for being confusing 😊

i love my om-1 it is a great camera

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

I bet you do, I want one too 🙂 Thanks for watching 👍

Cool, you were using an old East German Praktica 🤓

@MyPhotoJourney

3 ай бұрын

Yeah, I had it for about 5 years, most of my teenage years👍 Thanks a lot for watching.

I am not a pro but have been using micro four thirds and I wonder why it takes dark photos while I zoom n take photos

@MyPhotoJourney

7 ай бұрын

Yeah I know what you mean the images do tend to appear slightly darker than my APS-C cameras, maybe its is because of the smaller sensor? Thanks for watching and for your comment. 👍

Lumix g7 any good? Just bought a sigma 30mm f1.4 for it. Seems good shallow depth of field

@MyPhotoJourney

3 ай бұрын

Nice camera, I'd like one and with that lens a winning combo. Good luck and thanks for watching 👍👍

@Zombie101

3 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney thank you! Yes I bought it a long time ago and didn't use it, dug it out recently and it's a gem!

If IQ, dynamic range and depth of field are important to you bigger sensors are better and you can’t beat the physics on that. If light and compact matter more then M43 might have a place. But for me, when I need light and portable, an iPhone, Osmo Pocket 2, Ricoh GR III, and Insta Go 3 cover all of my needs completely and it all fits in a sling bag and pocket.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and your comment, yeah it's difficult to compete with iPhone and Ricoh GRIII for quality and portability.

I used Olympus for quite a while and enjoyed the size and features. In the end though, when I wanted to move to better lenses I found the Olympus top range rather expensive and ended up switching to fuji which I also love - especially those dials. More people migrating to FF from aps-c means used kit is very affordable. Thinking about getting a small Oly for travel again though.

@MyPhotoJourney

11 ай бұрын

I really like Fujifilm and if and when I do switch I probably would go with Fujifilm, and XT-5 looks amazing. Thanks for watching and your comment 👍

M43 is very good for shooting AE brackets handheld.

@MyPhotoJourney

7 ай бұрын

Yeah I agree, how good are these cameras for stabilization, and I did a test on this too. Thanks a lot for watching and for your comment 👍👍

The F value is same in every system once claimed. it represents the ratio between the focus lenght and the openning of the lens (aperture). It has to do with the angle the light comes in from outside. The difference here is decided by the bigger size of the full format lenses and the size of the sensor . There is a difference but not critical and it is a very subjective thing.

@MyPhotoJourney

5 ай бұрын

Great comment, thank you very much for watching 👍

MFT has a naturally deep DoF which should be used to its advantage. If you need shallow DoF and bokeh especially for portraits, you want FF or Medium Format. When shooting portrait, you want to use the same focal length (not equivalent) as you might use on FF, and zoom out with your feet. It's the "pinched features" of a wide lens, the foreshortening. To get the same look, the same focal length, you may even need a longer lens because you have to move back for the angle of view. I find it best to forget about "equivalence" and use what works.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your comment and watching, yeah I agree and TBH I'm more than happy with my set-up it does exactly what I need. 👍

Regarding low light performance, post processing can eliminate any noise in your image...

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Really good point, and I'm happy with the results I get.

I bought a lumix gx7 for travel many years ago and got hooked I upgraded to a gx9, even better because of IBIS. For the first time I used my g9 yesterday, which I bought recently used in great condition I'm still hooked. To be honest I don't like Olympus It's too brick like, in my opinion .

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

That's great and thanks for your comment. I was attracted to the Olympus and also found Lumix after and although I have't got any Lumix gear and I looking closely at the lenses and thinking of buying a used GH5 for these videos, and I'm sure I can get a good used deal. Thanks for watching the video!

Micro refers to the smaller bajonet in comparison to the 4/3 bajonet

@MyPhotoJourney

3 ай бұрын

Thanks very much for watching and for correcting my comment 👍👍

Moved to MFT quite some years ago and more than happy with the outcome. Glad to say that I have smallish hands and thus smaller cameras suit well. I don't have any other bodily limitations that require a large camera. If I want to carry a really small camera I use my Sony RX100. I doubt that any pro or pro-am user these days puts up an image that hasn't be post-processed and very few push the envelope when it comes to lighting.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and your comment, and that is a really good point that no serious photographer would publish an image without processing it first which really means the tiny diffences between the cameras a not worth considering!!

@Swaggerlot

10 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney Indeed. The point is that just like any user of tools, the selection of tools should match the use. Not as it seems so often that the tool selects the tools due to their own shortcomings.

Owning both a Nikon FX mount and MFT mount camera I’m still very torn. For professional work where I need to blow things up it’s always going to be my Nikon kit, that being said I increasingly use my MFT for video work or just personal photography. And I’ll have to disagree about Olympus lens. I think the Panasonic lenses that are made in collaboration with Leica are objectively the best glass the sensor type has to offer for… obvious reasons.

@MyPhotoJourney

6 ай бұрын

Thanks a lot for watching and your comment, in which you make a couple of really good points, and in truth the Nikon FX mount system is really good and I understand why you are torn, and equally I have overlooked the Leica lenses by Lumix, which are exceptional 👍👍

though lens mounts are compatible, functions are not identical. the stabilization is different between olympus and panasonic and hence not compatible. So you won't get the camera and body IS working together across mounts, as one example.

@RobertLeeAtYT

10 ай бұрын

No, stabilization works just fine, just not as well if cross-vendor. Have a Panasonic stabilized lens on an Oly body and it's fine. A Panasonic stabilized lens on an Panasonic IBIS body in some cases gives you another half stop.

@GoonieGooGoo910

10 ай бұрын

@@RobertLeeAtYT No, you are not responding to what I stated. You should take another read. it doesn't get dual IS or sync IS, as I stated. You get either lens OR body IS. You do not get both. The only way to get both is to have the same brand. That is a feature that is not cross compatible. There are other features that get a bit screwy too.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your comment and pointing this out, and I do understand that point because Lumix lenses are stabilised and Olympus are not. It's nice having the option though I think.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for replying, I didn't know that, which is great if true!

If you use M43 Pro len's with F1.2, which there are may, you can exceptional shallow DOF, rival FF!

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Wow I bet the DOF is amazing on that lens!

@robb8773

10 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney Yes, the DOF is amazing, great boken for these Pro len's. They are Prime len's, I have a 25mm and 17mm F1.2

@jkroemer2685

Ай бұрын

I can vouch for that, I had the Nocticron and man the background just disappeared!

My journey in digital photography started 15 years ago with the Pentax K100D super, over the years my Pentax collection covers the Kp,K10D, K5 MKII, K3, K3 MKII AND MKIII & K1 MKII , over the years l added cameras from Panasonic, Olympus and fujifilm. I love using the Pentax cameras and because I am not tied to one brand I added cameras that would compliment my Pentax collection and allow me to put together a kit that would cover all my photography needs. I carry a camera with me most every where and I have been photographing so many different subjects in different locations and environments that I wanted a system that would cover me on land water in my kayak, waist deep in a pool, steam or beach, and to cover events, sports, wildlife, land and seascapes along with travel, so no matter what the situation is I have a camera that will allow me to photograph in all the situations I find myself in that I want to photograph in. My micro 4/3 system gives me the ability to move fast and shoot in places where a large camera might not be practical.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks very much for watching and your amazing comment, and I truly am a Pentax fan and I feel sad giving it up and I'm impressed with your camera set-up and history.

Hi, nice and interesting channels. M4T rocks for non professionals, it's more than good enough also from the former 16mp sensor. Digital open up several possibilities, bu there is one that is not good, zooming to pixel peep that's not any longer photography, and possibly you do it on a picture when there is nothing interesting in it so ... who cares. Lightness, lens size, quality and choice, price in used market are making the right solution for most of non professional without niche needs insisting on m43 weeknes point, fast action in low light. Deepth of fields can be an issue if you need shallow depth of field but is a strength otherwise because you can keep the ISO lower choosing wider aperture. Again, shallow depth of field for most photography is a corner case not the rule. Ciao S

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment, exactly and where you lose DOF you gain with higher apertures, so pluses and minues.

today I got a lumix G95m and I tested it with a chinese cctv 50mm f1.4 lens, less than 30 dollars, at night I see no problems in low light.

@MyPhotoJourney

24 күн бұрын

Cool, a Chinese CCTV lens, great how it works so well. Thanks a lot for watching 👍

@manuelsuazo1125

24 күн бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney With the macro extenders, I have the best results, very little distortion. by enlarging about 10mm, the edges are out of the sensor, also when using f1.4 enough light enters and a good bukeh is achieved and I can use iso 200, so I have little noise. to use M4/3 at night the fullframe techniques are not useful, there are other pictures and techniques to use, it is another way to go.

@manuelsuazo1125

24 күн бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney PS, the composition is to some detail and the background buildings with lights that give coloured circles and some geometric shapes, so you don't want the background to disappear completely, but to contribute to the composition. in other words to use the field of view of M4/3 as an advantage.

My camera doesn't do well in low light environment and i use a zoom lens(40mm-150mm).Is the zoom lens the reason my camera doesn't perform well in low-light environments?

@MyPhotoJourney

4 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and for your comment. This might be controversial but Micro Four Thirds doesn't compare to fullframe when using standard equipment,and the low light is one area MFT lacks a bit. Using a zoom with a minimum aperture of F/4.0 in low light will always be a challenge and you would need to increase your ISO which might not be desirable. A tripod and longer exposures is what's needed. Good luck 👍👍

@nikfaris2536

2 ай бұрын

@@ronmurray7349 thanks for the recommendation!

Those Leica lenses tho 👍

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Nice aren't they!

@bradl2636

10 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney Honestly if Blackstone Group were smart they’d try to consolidate Leica and OM and buy Panasonic’s consumer camera division off them. Roll the whole thing up into an L, M, M43 alliance…

For me it’s the lens size of m43 easiest way to travel and carry for hours

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your comment, exactly my point really.

The weight issue, is no longer an issue. There are many FF mirrorless camera bodies that are the same size as a G9 or OM-1 don't even mention the 1X and the lenses are not that far off these days, apart from the larger tele lenses. I went from Nikon FF to an OM-1 and sold it on after 6 months I shoot landscape. I now have a Lumix S1r and tbh the weight compared to my DSLR gear is not an issue, it's the image quality that's important. Pro photographers that use MFT is still niche, compared to FF and APSC. It's a hobby system with an older demographic, the latest sales fig sits at 4.6 % in the overall market, but that's mainly Panasonic.

@stefanoreksten

10 ай бұрын

My Canon RP weights 468g, the Panasonic G9 600g, the Panasonic GX80 393g, so weight of the camera is actually comparable. However, Canon RP 24-70 is still 978g, Canon RP 70-200 is 1338g, Canon RP 100 macro is 764g, while Panasonic Leica 12-35 is 345g, Panasonic 35-100 is 415g, Olympus Zuiko 60mm macro is 228g (just weighted all of them). FF lenses *are* bulkier and heavier, as a matter of fact. (Let's put aside the fact that they cost 3 times the M43 equivalents). Sure you can carry all those lenses in a backpack, but at the end of the day you'll feel the weight. As for the hobby system, well, I follow many channels of pro photographers that use M43 and they seem quite happy with their gear. They're not better or worse, they're just a different tool with its pros and cons.

@RobertLeeAtYT

10 ай бұрын

No, the weight and bulk difference hasn't really changed, not if you use lenses longer than 35mm FF equivalent FoV. The pair of 28mm to 70mm f2.8 and 70mm to 200mm is not an all-day walkabout proposition on a FF kit. The equivalent for MFT is much lighter, literally one lens on the camera and the other in a coat pocket.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your comment and I agree the camera bodies are comparable between systems, and yeah the latest Lumix M4T cameras are quite big. Also I actually recorded the video twice and had a few issues first time around and in that video I did suggest that M4T is viewed as Niche and as I put it "Garden Shed", and as you point out the sales figures don't lie.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and replying to this comment, yeah and in many ways that is my point and like the DOF challenge you can't avoid phyics and the lenses have to be bigger and therefore heavy to service the wider sensor.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your response, and as I just mentioned the lenses must be bigget for both FF and APS-C due to physics and the size of the sensor.

I have both FF and M43 but I've noticed that AI imaging tools pretty much levels the playing field in terms of bokeh and low light performance so I find myself breaking out my old Olympus more and more often these days.

@MyPhotoJourney

Ай бұрын

Thanks a lot for watching and for taking the time to comment. I have found more and more recently how I can use lightroom to soften the background of images and as you say evens up the two system,. Cheers 👍👍

People move over to the OM1? Did I miss something? Dont get me wrong, I love mFT. Would be nice if they gain market share

@MyPhotoJourney

8 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and your comment. I think M4T has a place in photography as does other formats and at the time I'd created the video the stats suggested that people were moving to M4T because of the OM-1 👍👍

Shallow depth of field does not come from sensor size but the size of the optics. I guess I know what you mean just didn't tell it the right way.

@MyPhotoJourney

19 күн бұрын

Thanks for watching and for you comment. I know there is no physical difference and you need to consider focal length, aperture and distance from the subject, and I have considered making a video to explain but I'm sure there is enough on KZread. Cheers 👍

#1 - Every micro four thirds lens fits any MFT camera? Small? Sony a7c is smaller as the Olympus OM-D E-M10 but weighs 100+ grams more. Want great small, lightweight, fast, fast focusing and tack sharp then the Sony 24mm f/2.8 and the Sony 40mm f/2.5 both weigh less than 6 oz and are small. Perfect for street photography. Want a zoom then grab the Sony FE 28-60mm f/4-5.6 (167 grams). It is tack sharp and new was $500 so that tells you how good the lens is.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks a lot for watching and your comment. I think the Sony A7c is a wonderful camera and that lens combo is amazing, good luck 👏👏

It is a shame Panasonic has abandoned M4/3 for anything but video. The GX9 was fantastically small, light and capable (and a substantial upgrade over the GX85 it replaced), and an updated version with the autofocus of the GH6 would have been fantastic. I have recently sold my Panasonic M4/3 lenses (8 of them) and G9 - keeping only my GX9 with a 14-140 lens and moved over to Sony APS-C with a A6700 that will be delivered on Monday with 10-20mm, 16-70mm, 18-135mm and 70-350mm zoom lenses plus a 30mm macro and 50mm portrait lenses. Although it is only a little bigger than the GX9, the Sony is 3 generations more advanced than my GX9 and it was time for an upgrade.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and your comment, and I agree that it is a shame Panasonic are much more focused to video. APS-C is a great middle option and I think you have swapped to a really nice set-up.

@AlexSegre

5 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney APSC is in the middle of two things either side of it. But it's not in the middle of an iPhone and full frame.

@MyPhotoJourney

5 ай бұрын

@@AlexSegre Hi, thanks for your reply, and for watching. You are right it is in the middle, but not the middle of everything, and of course there is not one size for APSC so it is difficult to frame it. 👍

@AlexSegre

5 ай бұрын

​@@MyPhotoJourney Yes, my point really is to counter the flawed logic many people make when opting for APSC on the grounds that "it's in the middle". They base this on the notion that there are only three formats. Aside from the fact that even if it was in the middle what's so good about that?

The XTi/400D takes amazing pictures. Mine did too, until it fell.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and your comment, yeah I really like the camera and still use it 👍

While i see the benefits of mft/m43 sensor offers , the drawbacks at least for me is quite big The whole mft advantage hinges on its size and weight , but a good body ( like the gx8 ) is actually bigger and heavier than my a6400 and zve10 On the part of depth of field , i honestly prefer the flexibility of larger sensor , yes the mft can use f1.4 at iso 400 and the ff has to make do with an f2.8 at iso 1600 But you have the option for dof , while on mft/m43 you really cant. My work isnt a hobby and i need a usable af lenses that is not a manual f1.2 or f1.0 lens - the mft platform doesnt offer that in a cheap price The sigma 30 f1.4 i bought is 250$ and while available on mft , it'll just be a plain 60 f2.8 , atleast on apsc its a 45 f2 Not to mention that wide angle is easier on larger sensor , and when you work on an event that needs it - you just cant go mft

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your comment and for watching the video. I agree FF is awesome and the ability to get shallow depth f field cannot be beaten, you have a great set-up!!

Every professional photographer: « You do NOT need Full-Frame, it’s you, not the camera 📷.. get a Crop sensor, go and practice, take pictures, improve your skills, enjoy 😉 » Every professional photographer: Shoots in Full-Frame 😅

@MyPhotoJourney

11 ай бұрын

I think lots of professional people shoot with M4T and it seems to be increasing though too many are stuck with Full Frame and would never consider Micr Four Thirds, and you see this time and time again on KZread in particular. Thanks for watching and for your comment!

@GallicGarlic

11 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney Long time user of Canon Reflex... these days in FF still Canon, but trying M4/3 in parallel.. Both have advantages.. Who knows, with sensors and lenses progressing every year... who knows where we are in 10 years.. Maybe M4/3 gives us same low light, bokeh that FF can deliver today..

@stefanoreksten

10 ай бұрын

@@GallicGarlic low light, maybe; GH5S already has a dual native ISO at 400 and 2500 (if I remember correctly) and the GH6 has something similar. They already manage to handle low light somewhat decently (and then you can polish it up with DxO). But of course a FF is better for low light, being the photoreceptors bigger (I really wonder what will happen when the Canon R1, with its 100MP sensor comes out - the receptors will be as big as those of a M43). But as far as a shallow depth of field, with an equivalent lens, you should have a M43 f/0.6 to match a FF f/1.2 ... :| Somewhat impratical :P Fun experiment: you *can* have the same bokeh on a M43 than that of a FF camera: if you use, for example, a f2.8 lens on both, with the same aperture and focal length (and I mean the focal length must be the same on both cameras, e.g. 50mm, NOT using a M43 25 mm), you actually get the same depth of field and bokeh balls, ...but the M43 image is just 1/4 of the FF one :) If you want the same angle of view, you have to use a 25mm on the M43, and this will double the depth of field. So... FF will always have a shallower depth of field than M43, but this can be both an advantage (portraits) and a disadvantage (macro, landscape, architecture). They're tools, and as such, you should use the right tool for each situation.

@GallicGarlic

10 ай бұрын

@@stefanoreksten if you take a Canon RF 85mm f/1.2 or RF 135mm f/1.8 .. let me confirm the Bokeh is rather nice too In summary … I have both Canon FF and M4/3 and yes both have their use cases .. But one cannot replace the other

@GallicGarlic

10 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney Cameras 📷 are the same as cars 🚗 🚐 really You reasonably cannot ask the same thing to a small city car 🚗 or a large van 🚐 As a dual user of Canon FF and recently M4/3 .. well 😅 that’s the same 😊 (willl not detail why but the ones who tried FF know what I mean 😉)

With the right gear, and, obviously, good technical and artistic skills on the part of the photographer, full frame is better. Yes, fantastic results can be achieved with MFT, and yes, it can be used professionally, but only if you have the money and can buy the best MFT glass (which is very expensive!). Photography for social media and own use? MFT and a fast and cheap lens (eg Panasonic 20mm 1.7; Olymous 45mm 1.8; many Chinese brand manual focus lenses...) is all that is needed to get pleasure out of shooting. I think a lot of people still don't understand that the lens is much more important than the camera... MFT has its merits, many, in addition to being technologically ahead in many respects, like IBIS. Buy fast (yes, fast is the key), and cheap glass and enjoy MFT. Peace.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and taking the time to comment. It is hard to disagree about the quality a FF set-up can provide, and it should be about the joy of photography rather than the gear.

@AlexSegre

5 ай бұрын

MFT produces better quality images than full frame did when we had film. Yet full frame transparency was good enough for National Geographic photographers despite the low ISOs. The problem nowadays is too much pixel peeping on 4K displays which reveal imperfections that are completely invisible in the print. Full frame is an excessively large format for most uses, even professional.

People who are arguing about what is better are normally the ones with bad portfolios. I don’t get into discussion like this but when somebody treys to start one debate over sensors I just say: “show me your portfolio and we can debate about that”.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment, and I completely agree, it isn't a quality debate - it is a video about the size, weight and cost.

In a world were every photos you take ends up compressed on Instagram, I see no point on buying full frame if it's not for professional use.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your comment and watching the video. Really great comment and actually my most recent lens review video I question if all you do with your photos is share on social media do you even need a pro lens!!

My work around for shallow DOF is to use my 35-100 2.8 and shoot my subjects at 75 to 85mm. Yes I have to stand back twice the distance than with a full frame but it works. Your comment about Panasonic and Olympus lesbian interchangeable is true, but there are limitations, which I’m not sure if anybody else mentioned in the comments. Pro Capture with Olympus will not work with Lumix lenses for example.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and really good point, yeah I agree about the limitations and I know it's not perfect - cheers! 👍👍

@deanparkes4644

3 ай бұрын

I'm confused about the interchangeable lesbians. Is it to do with depth of field?

@azjoe_6310

3 ай бұрын

@@deanparkes4644 😆 OOOOOPS!!!!! Not sure what I was thinking that day. 🤣🤣🤣

@azjoe_6310

3 ай бұрын

Probably "lenses being"😂

M4/3 is NOT cheaper. When you compare the lens you have to compare correctly. F4 50mm Full Frame = F2 25mm M4/3 + more noise in M4/3. So to get the same dynamic range it will cost more money in M4/3.

@MyPhotoJourney

17 күн бұрын

Thanks a lot for your great comment and for watching, and I understand your point. Cheers 👍

I hope they stop the nonsense of making the bodies larger. I'd buy a refreshed PEN PL model tomorrow if they come out with one. Or whatever the next version of a Lumix GX85 is, as long as they stay small. Never again buying anything with the SLR hump. Not everyone wants to look like they're on a National Geo shoot.

@MyPhotoJourney

6 ай бұрын

Yeah I completely agree, we don't want larger bodies which seem to happening. There is a nice medium. Thanks a lot for watching 👍

Light is light a light meter does not ask you for the frame size to give you the reading. To my knowledge the doubled f stop on MFT is a myth.

@gregm6894

10 ай бұрын

You are correct, but the problem is that there is a 2 stop difference in DOF between m4/3's and FF at the same aperture. So people incorrectly state that f/4 on m4/3's is f/8 on ff -- which it is not, other than equivalent DOF. The fact is, your light meter doesn't care about DOF, nor does your flash -- they only care about exposure, which is exactly the same for any size capture medium. Oh, by the way, as a retired professional photographer of 35 yrs. (20 yrs. shooting 4/3's format), 99.9% of all clients also don't know, or care about DOF, nor sensor size.

@stefanoreksten

10 ай бұрын

The light entering a f/2.8 lens, be it a FF or a M43, is the same. So you can shoot with same ISO, aperture, and shutter speed, but due to the fact that you're using a crop sensor, if you use a 50mm on FF and a 25mm on M43 (that would be the equivalent of a 50mm on FF), you'll get a broader depth of field on the M43. You can use it as an advantage (macro, landscape, architecture) or it can be a disadvantage (portrait with blurred background). It's not the f/stop that is doubled, it's the depth of field. If you shoot on a 50mm on a FF and on a 50mm on a M43 you get the same bokeh, but your M43 image is heavily cropped (1/4 of the FF one) due to the fact that the surface of the M43 sensor is 1/4 of the FF one (that is why you use, like, a 12-35 on a M43 instead of a 24-70 - because being the lens shorter, it has the same angle of view).

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and your comment, yes you are right, F4 is the same light on any sensor which actually is a positive for M4T, I think.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and replying, and as I mentioned it's really a perceived negative and most people will not notice and I'm personally more than happy with my system and it's capabilities.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Awesome reply and thanks a lot for watching. I had another comment about this and I think I'm going to try a comparison video to just see exactly what the real difference is, though I only have M4T and APS-C to test with.

Well, I use a very light weight camera and I get full frame; its called a film camera

@MyPhotoJourney

7 ай бұрын

Fab, that is amazing, and I bet you get super shots. Thanks a lot for watching and for leaving a comment 👍

People make a lot out of the low light and DoF things with the 4/3 sensors, but really? - how much real-world impact does it actually have? I shoot all manner of things, including night shooting in industrial facilities and at music gigs, and while i do come up against a wall occasionally with low light sensitivity, it's a very small percentage of the shots i take. It's a similar story with DoF - i shoot the ZD SHQ lenses on MFT and they're all f/2 or, for the long teles, f/2.8, my point being that if you really want a lens that'll give great subject isolation, get something fast. That may mean non-native, or it may mean the ZD 150mm f/2, but it's one in a thousand shots that'll have you thinking FF would have made a meaningful difference. So it's a fact that 4/3 has these *comparative* drawbacks, but it's also likely that for 99% of people 99% of the time, it'll never be remotely apparent.

@MyPhotoJourney

2 ай бұрын

Thanks a lot for taking your time to write an excellent comment, I agree that 99% wouldn't notice a difference and those that would probably should be using a specialist camera anyway. Cheers 👍👍

@luzr6613

2 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney Cheers for your reply. There is now some fast glass available at the wide end, but the MFT tele end hasn't had the same degree of development - ie: 300 f/4. I think that MFT is caught in this trap of its own making where the physical size of lenses takes precedence over outright performance - the 'small is better' idea, central to their market positioning, stops them from making fast teles and they rely on the IBIS technology to make up for some of the difference. It came as a real break in the approach when they ditched the 4/3 lenses that were fast but bulky and heavy - both the 300 2.8 and the 90-250 2.8 weigh over 3.5kg. I'd love to have access to the transcripts of meetings within Oly when they realized that the 4/3 sensor wasn't going to have the long-run development potential of APSC and FF and they'd need to invent new arguments and the ensuing products in order to remain relevant - a difficult course to plot.

@MyPhotoJourney

2 ай бұрын

Yeah, I'm a bit concerned with OMD and their development of lenses and hopefully, they put in at least some of the effort that olympus did. 👍

Small camera, cheaper lens, good pictures and video ! Can you tell the difference ? The iPhone is the most sold camera in the world !

@MyPhotoJourney

7 ай бұрын

Thanks a lot for watching and for your comment. I'm not sure if its a question, though I am told how amazing an iPhone is but sadly I've not had the pleasure to use one, and don't have that experience with them. 👍👍

@lamasteve6905

7 ай бұрын

I'm at a tourist area ! Everyone is using the iPhone. I have a DSLR. We all get pictures ! People are happier with a small easy to use camera that you can see the image on the screen not in the eye hole ! The whole market has changed ! My brain works !

@MyPhotoJourney

7 ай бұрын

@@lamasteve6905 Ah yeah I understand, absolutely, and Smartphones offer something that professional cameras don't and that is portability and we all have one and use them. Great point 👍

@lamasteve6905

7 ай бұрын

Ease of use WISYWIG 4k screen ! Camera companies aren't aware ! The market left them 4 years ago ! My brain works !@@MyPhotoJourney

to me m43 is much more expensive... I'd rather go APSC, the lenses now are getting smaller

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

There is definitely merit in APS-C and as mentioned I enjoy mine and you can get them for a very good price. Thanks a lot for watching and your great comment. 👍👍

Top reason for me using full frame: All my cameras and lenses are full frame. The bigger the sensor area, the better it is.

@MyPhotoJourney

11 ай бұрын

Yeah, can't argue with that, thanks for watching and your comment 👍

@MyChevySonic

10 ай бұрын

If that's the case, why not just sell all of it and buy an X1D or GFX?

The "low light" is a bit of a lie that originated from "correcting" the result by dividing by the sensor area ratio to a FF sensor. The CIPA test says thou shalt not do that. Multiply by 3.98 to see the real result. The low light capability is related to the signal to noise ratio. Small sensors produce less noise to start with and easier to control noise on them. Pixel size is relevant but FF usually has greater resolution and pixels sizes are similar, and the larger sensor is noisier. MFT is almost ideal for nighttime photography. The trick is tripod, long shutter (they have a 1 minute timer), small aperture, low ISO. The small aperture is to improve sharpness and DoF at night and applies to any camera system, mft has an immediate advantage with the latter. Extra lighting is rarely needed indoors and can shoot by candle light (indeed one of the first systems that could), ISO 1600 is noise-free, ISO 6400 may need a little de-noising in post. To see what I mean, pop over to Photons To Photos and look up the Read Noise to ISO of your camera. Here I compare the respected Pentax K1 to wunderkind Sony A7C to the lowly and elderly Olympus E-PL7 (it is as good or better than the Sony). www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/RN_ADU.htm#Olympus%20PEN%20E-PL7_12,Pentax%20K-1_14,Sony%20ILCE-7C_14

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your amazing comment, and in truth I wasn't aware of the detailed technical stuff and really was only aware of the pixel size challenge, and your comment and that link does make sense and as per the DOF question I'm pleased with the quality of low light I get out of all my Olympus cameras. 👍👍

Its not about the gear, its the person holding it. I shoot m43 my mate has a z9. His camera has all the latest technology, full frame etc etc. His images still suck and he knows it. Why? Because he has all the gear and no idea. If you know how to nail exposure, how to use the light you have or is available then you dont need anything special. It annoys me how people look down from their FF pedestal like they are superior artists. A camera is a camera, a tool, an extension of the photographers eye capturing an image in the way they see it, how it is shot matters not if the end result is what the photographer wanted.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and your comment and I couldn't agree more and I have a mind to do a video with my own thoughts on just that point. It's not really about the gear and it is much more the person holding the gear!

Every system has advantages and disadvantages. It's not the hardware that makes the difference while taking pictures, it's the piece of meat with a brain attached behind the LCD screen.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and your comment, perfect point, it's not the gear really is it.

APS-C image quality is not that much better than mFT. It's hardly noticable most of the time. So I disagree with that comment. FF however is definitely better, but at a size, weight and cost disadvantage. If I had the funds I would own FF and mFT. I would skip APS-C.

@MyPhotoJourney

5 ай бұрын

Hi, thanks for watching and for your comment. I don't think the image quality of APS-C is better and I'm sorry if I implied that, maybe I have to check my video. Cheers 👍

Yet another KZread photographer giving misinformation about depth-of-field on Micro Four Thirds. There are three factors that affect DoF: focal length, distance from subject, and aperture. The primary function of the aperture is to control the amount of light passing through the lens, but it also affects the lens sharpness and what is in acceptable focus, i.e. DoF. In reality, only one point is actually in focus. The main factor affecting DoF, when it comes to different sensor/film sizes is the focal length, and M4/3 requires much shorter focal lengths than APS-C or 35mm sensors to get the same angle of view. The depth of field of a particular focal length lens is the same, regardless of sensor size or f/stop, what changes is the angle of view. Let's take a 25mm f/1.8 lens. On M4/3 that is a relatively compact, standard lens with the same angle of view as a 50mm on "full frame". A 25mm f/1.8 lens on a 35mm sensor would be a wide angle, and at f/1.8 a fairly large lens, but they would both have the same depth of field. To get the same framing with the 25mm on the 35mm sensor, you would have to stand a lot closer to the subject, which would reduce the depth of field. Closing down the aperture would increase the DoF, but equally on both sensors, but the relative distance from the subject and background would make only a marginal difference. The trouble is, one ill-informed KZread "expert" started spreading this nonsense about M4/3 and depth of field being to do with apertures and sensor size, and people have been repeating it without factoring the most important element; the lens. Now, on to image quality and sensors. I challenge anyone to be able to tell the difference between printed photos shot with M4/3, APS-C and 35mm sensors at their base ISO under good lighting. Maybe with extreme pixel peeping on a high quality, calibrated monitor, and who really looks at a photo like that? As you correctly pointed out, it's to do with the size of the photosites (pixels), which is why 20MP is really the limit for M4/3. But as manufacturers try to cram more pixels onto the larger sensors, the advantage drops. The more pixels you want, the larger the sensor has to be. If I really need more than 20MP, I would move to a Fuji GFX camera, especially given how reasonably priced they are. What we call high ISO is, in fact, what is known as gain, and to do with the electronic circuitry and processors. And let's face it, if you are shooting in light so low that it requires pushing the ISO to 256,000 then your probably not shooting in light that is going to make a great photo, and you either need to add some light, use a longer exposure/faster lens, or simply pack up and go home. I have noticed negligible difference between shots from my Canon 6D (FF) and my Olympus EM-1ii at ISO 3200 under similar lighting conditions, and that was without using noise reduction software. I've noticed there's a real macho "bigger is better" attitude amongst photographers, especially since switching back to Olympus. As often gets bandied about, "it's not the size but what you can do with it that matters". Apart from the obvious size and weight difference of M4/3 cameras, especially Olympus, one of the main reasons for me going back to Olympus was for the Zuiko optics, which are fantastic. They are what made with stick with Olympus since I got my first OM-1 in 1978. If it hadn't been for work demands, I would have never switched to using Canon for digital either. Now I can use whatever I like, and Olympus does everything I need, and so much more.

@MyPhotoJourney

5 ай бұрын

Thank you very much for taking the time to watch the video, and massive thanks for your detailed comment, which I say is the best comment I've received since starting this channel just over a year ago. I'm sorry that I did not respond immediately, and I really wanted enough time to read it and reply to you appropriately. I am also sorry if I have misled you or anyone else with video, and I do very much agree with your analysis and regret somewhat what I said, and I do understand the affect distance, focal length and aperture all play DOF. I believe despite it being technically possible to obtain the same shallow DOF with a MFT and FF camera, a MFT user would need lenses beyond the standard kit lens to compare. I wanted to make a balanced video and not try to say that MFT is better than other sensor types because as I tried to point out, each sensor has its merits. Your view of M.Zuiko optics is very much how I see them and I also really like the cameras too, and agree again the MFT photos are perfectly acceptable for 99% of photography, and if you need more you may actually be better buying a specialist camera for the task. Low light is another thing you mention and once again the sensor or capability of the photosites makes this more challenging and I agree with your comment, that if you really need super high ISOs your image may not be a good option for a photo. Once again thank you very much for your excellent comment and I'm genuinely sorry for providing incorrect information and I will treat it as a lesson to improve my research!

@chrispatmore8944

5 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney I possibly came off a lot more indignant than I meant to, especially as I tend to become quite defensive of M4/3. I'm quite aware of its limitations, and mostly work within them, but coming from decades of using film, I'm used to working with limitations. What your post did do is motivate me to write a blog post for my website on the subject of depth of field and sensor sizes, in the hope that it will get all the frustration out of my system, and it will all be written down so can avoid endlessly posting the same thing on KZread. Of course, I could better spend my time by not watching random KZread videos.

@kenwiberg6517

3 ай бұрын

and distance from subject to background.........

@MyPhotoJourney

3 ай бұрын

@@kenwiberg6517 Yeah Exactly!

“Hmmm M43 is dying, and I have all this M43 gear, better put up a pump and dump YT video” 😂

@Oxylomorph

10 ай бұрын

It is dying since at least five years according the rumors. Still new cameras and lenses arriving.

@MyPhotoJourney

10 ай бұрын

I'm sure it has a very long and healthy future - I hope so 😉

@bradl2636

10 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney Just like Nikon film cameras died and I’m still using them 😜 Yes I’m being a bit baity aren’t I… 😂

AI will negate the advantages of shallow depth of field and noise. No need to carry such large, heavy kit in the future.

@MyPhotoJourney

4 ай бұрын

Thanks for watching and for your great comment, and do you think AI will be the norm in photography and current digital will be the old system as analogue is today 👍👍

@malikknows3510

4 ай бұрын

@@MyPhotoJourney In post processing, we are already almost there. Built in processing features just need to migrate into the body, perhaps as we do with jpegs now. All the best!

Hmm. A lady photographer?

@MyPhotoJourney

4 ай бұрын

Thanks very much for watching and for your comment 👍👍