Is Micro Four Thirds Dead?

[Mike Farley]

Although I've just completed a big new piece .....

That looks as though it took some time to write. And more to come as well.

[Mike Farley]

According to this post, m43 equalled the image quality of medium format film around six years ago and these days exceeds it, falling somewhere between 6 x 7 and 5 x 4. Cue a post declaring that if m43 is that good, just think what full frame can do. True, but to refer to my earlier point, just how much image quality do most people need? Maybe some images will benefit from the use of longer focal length lenses on a larger sensor to reduce depth of field, but are there any other advantages apart from the ability to crop tightly for images from high resoluton sensors?

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.co ... nswer.html

For a lot of my work, a Panasonic FZ1000 with an even smaller 1" sensor would be more than sufficient, if I am honest. A few years ago, Michael Reichmann did a side by side shoot of a Canon G10 and Hasselblad H2 with P45+ back. That's a modest 1/1.7” sensor crammed with 14.7 megapixels up against 39 megapixels of medium format goodness. Both images were printed to 13" x 19" and there was no discernible difference between the two. The only way to tell which shot was which was to look at the reduced depth of field in the medium format shot. At the time, some people did not rate the Canon's sensor as they felt it was too many pixels for such a compact sensor, although Reichmann was impressed with it. That was back in 2009 and there have been a number of sensor developments since then. Unfortunately the article is now behind the Luminous Landscape paywall, but it is worth reading if you have access.

https://luminous-landscape.com/kidding/

[Mike Farley]

Oops, should also have mentioned the low light performance of the pixels in larger sensors .......

[davidc]

Lots of navel gazing going on over at the online photographer, as well as argument from authority.
Still working on my thoughts to it too, hopefully out for discussion today

[Mike Farley]

Lots of navel gazing going on over at the online photographer, as well as argument from authority.

Just a thought, have you ever produced any work with a m43 camera?

[davidc]

Yes I had a Fuji XT-1 I reviewed but for one reason or another didn't get it published. With the XT-2 out now it sort of feels pointless.

Also loaned an EM-5 from my cousin for a two week holiday but to be fair to him/the camera, he only had two lenses and both were long telephotos. I couldn't really find much of a use for them.

I like the XT-1 quite a lot. It's small, a little fliddly, but quite nice. It doesn't do anything my existing kit doesn't already offer me though, aside from form factor. If I had infinite cash I'd have got one of these Fujis for a dedicated travel camera but now the A7SII is out I'd get that instead.

The EM-10 I thought was horrible. Awful controls and it smacked of style over substance. I've never mentioned it before because I didn't want you to think I was having a pop at your EM-10 I did think it was pretty good during the day when I tried shooting birds though.

Image quality for both was fine for the day shots but I didn't bother with them at night. Overall, the biggest "pro" I felt from them was weight. The "cons" included size (too small, I have El Gigante hands), DOF limitations, AF performance (speed & accuracy)

I'm on about the 10th rewrite of my own blog piece about M43. It's hard to put opinion pieces over without it sounding ranty and I wonder if this particular "flavour of the week" discussion has passed now anyway. I wonder if the only person who would be bothered at this stage is you

[Mike Farley]

Yes I had a Fuji XT-1 I reviewed but for one reason or another didn't get it published. With the XT-2 out now it sort of feels pointless.

I like the XT-1 quite a lot. It's small, a little fliddly, but quite nice. It doesn't do anything my existing kit doesn't already offer me though, aside from form factor. If I had infinite cash I'd have got one of these Fujis for a dedicated travel camera but now the A7SII is out I'd get that instead.

Sorry, I am going to have to correct you. The X-T1 has an APS-C sensor and is still current*. It is the X-Pro1 which has recently been superseded by the X-Pro2, which has resolved a number of issues with its forebear. That does not include image quality, which is excellent and the X-Pro1's main redeeeming feature. I have shot the X-T1 a few times and concur with your comments, but for me it does not offer enough to justify a purchase. Your preference for the A7IIS suggests an interest in low light work and/or video? Given that you list higher resolution in your requirements, would 12 MP be sufficient?

Also loaned an EM-5 from my cousin for a two week holiday but to be fair to him/the camera, he only had two lenses and both were long telephotos. I couldn't really find much of a use for them.

The EM-10 I thought was horrible. Awful controls and it smacked of style over substance. I've never mentioned it before because I didn't want you to think I was having a pop at your EM-10 I did think it was pretty good during the day when I tried shooting birds though.

Image quality for both was fine for the day shots but I didn't bother with them at night. Overall, the biggest "pro" I felt from them was weight. The "cons" included size (too small, I have El Gigante hands), DOF limitations, AF performance (speed & accuracy)

I agree that the low light performance from the sensor in the E-M5 and E-M10 (I believe it is the same one) is not particularly good and I would not want to go above ISO 1600 unless really necessary. In terms of controls, both are similar and I find that the position of the dials works better for me than the E-M1, mainly due to my having the camera on a wrist strap. The position of the front dial made it too easy to move indavertently, but the placement on the E-M5/10 keeps it out of the way. When I bought it, the E-M10 fell midway between the two more expensive cameras. It was better than the E-M5 and had most of the features which were important to me from the E-M1, including the improved menu system. One downside is the smaller form factor and I found handling was much transformed when I added the well made grip, which is expensive given what it must cost to manufacture and adds no additional functionality to the camera.

The camera has worked well for me and apart from the camera being slightly too small I have not experienced the same issues as you. From what you have written both on this thread and previously, we have different approaches to our photography and the type of shots we take, so it is natural that we will be looking for different things in our cameras. There is nothing wrong with that and our opinions are equally valid. The world would be a remarkably boring place if everyone thought and did the same thing.

I'm on about the 10th rewrite of my own blog piece about M43. It's hard to put opinion pieces over without it sounding ranty and I wonder if this particular "flavour of the week" discussion has passed now anyway. I wonder if the only person who would be bothered at this stage is you

That's a pity, although I am sure that you would find others would be interested. From what you have said in this thread I suspect I can guess what the article would say.

* I would not be surprised if many of the enhancements from the X-Pro2 made their way into an X-T2 in time for Photokina and then an X-T20 sometime next year.

[Mike Farley]

I have just come back from the dentist and in the waiting room there was a copy of the February 2016 edition of Which? which had a summary at the back of the best DSLR and CSC cameras. The Panasonic GH4, which is m43, is so good that it tops both categories. And the second best "DSLR" according to Which?? Why, it is none other than the Olympus E-M5 II. Yes, in the topsy turvy alternative universe in which Which? apparently resides, m43 trumps anything DSLRs have to offer and the APS-C Sony A6000 is apparently a better DSLR than a Nikon D5300. For some reason, the E-M5 II only finishes fourth in the CSC table and the second placed camera is the Samsung NX1 which should not be on anyone's best buy list given its uncertain future.

Are we really supposed to take Which? seriously?

[davidc]

Not when it classes non-DSLRs as DSLRs

[Mike Farley]

Not when it classes non-DSLRs as DSLRs

So you are not going to accept Which?'s view that m43 is better than anything else on the market in support of my argument?