Micro 4/3 thoughts

[tom mann]

I said before that I was reluctant to buy into the 4/3 concept.  But I met up with my brother-in-law this past weekend and he has a GX8.  I was impressed with the small size of the 24-64mm (35mm equivalent lens) and the focusing speed.  We were in an art museum and the focusing was fast even in the dimly lit rooms.  So I get it now: it's about small size, performance, and good selection of lenses and bodies.

If you compare images on DPReview, 4/3s looks ok until ISO3200 or so, and at that point it exhibits a lot of noise. The Bokeh/DoF issue can be somewhat overcome with some F1.2 and F1.4 lenses.

So I'm looking at a Panasonic or Olympus with a 30mm macro for train photos. Anyone have a similar set up?

[BN1970]

I’ve been using an Olympus OM-D for a number of years, I quite like it as its smaller and lighter to carry verses a DSLR.  I have a friend who has a Nikon D300 and often he wants to keep it in the trunk at train shows and such, as he’s tired of carrying it.  Where as I can have a couple of lens and still be lighter than just his D300.

While I do have a couple of macro lens I normally use wide angle lenses for model railroad photography.  Something like 14mm which would be a 28 mm equivalent for full frame 35mm. —Brian

[Lenny53]

First question I need to ask is why 4/3 and not just a mirrorless system?   My beef with 4/3 is the small sensor size.   Also, were are talking about not just a camera body
but an ecosystem of compatible products.  What range of photographic subjects do you like to shoot and what optics will you require and are they readily available in 4/3.
What investment, if any, do you have currently in camera gear and can any of it be used in 4/3?

[tom mann]

I wouldn't consider 4/3 to be a primary system, but for traveling or for portability it's perfect. The lens selection is great - high quality and affordable.

The small sensor size means no shallow DoF and increased noise.  However, if you look at the DPReview comparisons, the sensors look pretty good up to 3200, putting them a stop behind APSC and up to two stops behind FullFrame.  But I rarely shoot above 1600.  In fact, Olympus has the best stabilization out there so one could just crank up the shutter time depending on the subject. To me, the bigger issue is the lack of a shallow DoF, but a good percentage of my photos (the railroad related ones) would actually benefit from this.

One other benefit to the small sensor size. So I can't take a photo of my kids at large apertures because they would never be in the same plane.  A 4/3 1.4 still has a T Stop of 1.4 but an F stop of 2.8 (FF equivalent), so I get the big aperture light gathering benefit while still at 1.4 (the resultant image just looks like 2..  Stopping a 1.4 FF lens to 2.8 and exposure time would double.

My Sony A stuff is in the Trading Post.  It's all good (especially the 50mm Macro), but as you know A might not have a future so I'm happy to switch.

[Denver Road Doug]

as you know A might not have a future

Really?  (that's an "am I understanding you right," not a "I don't believe you"  )   That is disappointing.   I'm not a "real photographer" but I take thousands of photos a year and from everything I had researched over the past couple of years I was thinking that the A6000 would be my next setup.   So what would be the best alternative....Olympus I guess?   I don't do Nikon.    Portability is key for me so the "best small" setup is what I'm looking for.  I've had a Canon 20D and it just isn't practical to travel with in my book.  (I bought it mostly for the crazy fast fps number it had at the time so I could catch complete Intermodal trains at speed.)   Primary use for the new setup is roster shots....both MRR and proto.   Anything else I typically am good with my phone.  And it will probably be another year before I pull the trigger...errr....shutter.   

I had an early Sony P&S and it took the absolute most crisp beautiful right-focused photos I've ever taken (especially taking into account the low resolution at that point being an issue) so I attributed that in large part to the Zeiss lens since the camera otherwise wasn't anything special.

Anyway, sorry to semi-hijack your thread but you just dashed my hopes and dreams so turnabout is fair play.   

[tom mann]

The A6000 uses the E mount, not the A mount.  Since the E mount mirrorless Sonys are fairly new, my guess is that the E mount is what they will be supporting.  It's been a few years since any new A mount lenses were released, and Sony has released quite a few E and FE (E mount for full frame) during that time.

Micro 4/3s gives you good quality in a small size for a cheaper price. In certain circumstances, you can't beat Full Frame (like for shallow DoF portraits).  A good comparison is here:

https://photofocus.com/2014/08/22/bokeh-showdown-full-frame-70-200mm-f2-8-vs-mft-35-100mm-f2-8/

I just purchased the Panasonic 30mm Macro on eBay yesterday. 

[Lenny53]

Really?  (that's an "am I understanding you right," not a "I don't believe you"  )   That is disappointing.   I'm not a "real photographer" but I take thousands of photos a year and from everything I had researched over the past couple of years I was thinking that the A6000 would be my next setup.   So what would be the best alternative....Olympus I guess?   I don't do Nikon.    Portability is key for me so the "best small" setup is what I'm looking for.  I've had a Canon 20D and it just isn't practical to travel with in my book.  (I bought it mostly for the crazy fast fps number it had at the time so I could catch complete Intermodal trains at speed.)   Primary use for the new setup is roster shots....both MRR and proto.   Anything else I typically am good with my phone.  And it will probably be another year before I pull the trigger...errr....shutter.   

New Sony A99II should be available right about now.

[Denver Road Doug]

The A6000 uses the E mount, not the A mount.

Ah, ok.   Then, in fact, I did misunderstand.   Fair enough.

[Big Train]

About four years ago I was looking into the Micro 4/3 system so I can recycle many of my Canon FD and Nikkor lenses. I seriously considered the Olympus EM5 but after actually handling it at the camera store, I found the ergonomics didn't suit me. Generally the camera controls were too small. Also, at that time, 4/3 was considered to be the "killer app" for digital photography with the intent of more manufacturers producing bodies using this format. It seemed there was little development then and when the increased critical mass of 4/3 bodies never materialized I really don't know if the format is viable now. 

Luckily for me, the the Nikon Df was introduced at the same time and that camera certainly got me into shooting digital in a big way.Haven't looked back.  It was designed to be exactly like the traditional 35 mm film cameras I've always used. And while there are people who say the Df is a heavy brick of a camera, well, I'm used to it. It's still lighter than my 4 X 5 Speed Graphic or Hasselblad I used for a lot of my railway photography.

For sure there are the 4/3 hardcore users. But like any niche technology, whether Beta vs VHS, Wankel Rotary engine vs piston engine, APS vs full frame 35 mm, unless there is a critical mass of early adopters, and the momentum of the marketplace to carry it forward, sometimes superior technology remains off on the siding.

[tom mann]

I bought a Panasonic 30mm macro lens on ebay Friday and it arrived yesterday.  I don't have a 4/3s body yet, but I got this lens for a price too good to pass up. It's nice metal construction with a very smooth focus ring. No stickers, just nice printing and made in Japan.

I'm hoping it gives me the same type of shots (60mm) as I was getting with the FF 35mm Rx1r after cropping (the guess was those were about 60mm). It should at least be wider than the 50mm APSC (75mm) macro I have.