Should a New User still buy a Micro Four Thirds Camera?


Pitachu

Senior Member
Sep 18, 2019
752
57
28
57
By now I am sure everyone has read that Olympus has sold its imaging division to JIP.
At the same time, it looks like that there is a commitment for a smooth transition
and plans for Olympus and JIP to keep it going at least for another 1 to 2 years for the new
products to be launched.

Being photographers, all of us have friends and relatives asking us for advice when they
want to get started in photography.

For me, I always ask them a series of questions to find out their needs first.

What is their top priority?
a) High Resolution & Dynamic Range
b) Videos
c) Enviromentally Sealed Body and Lenses
d) Portability
e) Kinds of Photography and required Focal Lengths
f) Other features eg. Articulated Screen
g) Budget

I always encouraged them to look thru the Model entire range of lenses to make
sure that it has the lenses they may be getting in the future.

I would also encourage them to go to a friendly camera shop to try out
the cameras first to see if they like the weight, balance and placement
of buttons etc. eg. My brother insists on having a camera where the
Aperture, Shutter Speed and Exp Comp. are shown clearly on physical
dials on the camera like the Fujifim XT2.

In the event if it end up to be Micro Four Third, of course now I will warn them
the risk of a M43 system being discontinued a few years later. But I do have a
couple of friends who travel a lot like me and like the idea of a very compact
but capable DSLR eg. EM5 Mk3 where I can use it for so many different purposes

eg. Some of them are surprised that I bring along a 120mm equivalent F2.8 Macro lenses
with me. If you are into Macro shots of flowers, insects etc, check it out.
It is a super tiny lenses but super sharp by Olympus.

And I also had a friend who started birding on a Canon System and keep wishing
he can get a 600mm F4 lenses like the Olympus 300mm F4 (reach is 600mm).
With his higher resolution he can crop but he said he prefer to be able to zoom in first.

But I also have friends who just want to get a capable Mirrorless with 1 kit lens
which I recommend the Sony 6600.
 

What universal truth are you trying to prove? You could have easily used an E-M5 Mk III which is just as valid a comparison depending on what tasks you're asking it to do.
Let's take a look at wildlife at 600mm FF equiv, since it's one area m43 might still have an advantange:


* hmmm... can't seem to embed the images so you might just need to click on the link.

Which would you rather use for shooting at 600mm?
The E-M1 III + 300mm f/4 is the fastest at 600mm f/8 equiv
The Sony + 100-400 is 600mm f/8.4 equiv
The E-M5 III + 100-300 is 600mm f/11 equiv
The Canon (substitute whatever R body you'd like) + 600mm f/11 is just that.

Suddenly the Sony's corner EVF for a more streamlined body doesn't look so attractive anymore. But the zoom makes it a more versatile combo of course and it has other benefits.
Again, you win some and you loose some.
 

OK, sure. Since you're cropping in from FF rather than using a cropped sensor, there're freedom to crop as much or as little as you like. So it doesn't have to be a 1.6X crop from 375mm, it can be 1.5X crop from 400mm or whatever yields the best results.
We don't know the aperture at the intermediate FL of a 100-500 L yet but taking your guess of f/6 @ 375mm, a 1.6X crops gets you to 600mm f/9.6 equiv.
The known values are 100mm f/4.7 and 500mm f/7.1 and one would think 500mm f/7.1 yields the largest physical aperture available on this zoom so that would likely have the best equivalent results.
At 500mm, it needs just a 1.2X crop to get to 600mm @ f/8.5 equiv and 31MP.
Similar to the Sony with 100-400 combo and guess what, similar in size too (similar lens size but larger body on the Canon).
You win some and you loose some.
 

The R5 crop mode is for EF-S lenses.
You cannot use it on a RF lenses.
Crop mode is usually for Full Frame camera to use APS-C lenses in case you do not know
or pretend not to know?

Canon EF-S lenses are pathetic, with only 250mm max range.
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS

Canon RF 100-500mm f/4-7.1L IS USM in R5 crop 1.6x mode.
in crop mode 375mm gives 600mm
Maybe at f6
Lose 30 to 40% MP.
45MP drop to 27MP
 

Canon finally realize the niche market which M43 has and try to copy.
Because of physics limitations, they are forced to come up with F7.1 and F11 lenses.
But the moment you try to use a 2x TC on them, you realize the problem.

As mentioned, I rather use a M43 system then to try all kinds of adapters
and end up with a F22 lenses as the only aperture to use. This is what happen
when you fix a 2x TC on the RF 600mm F11 lenses.

You just need to use the right tool for the right job.
Full Frame can not have all the advantages of M43
(and APS-C or even 1" sensors!)

For anyone who need 1200mm F8, I can comfortably recommend
an Olympus + 300mm F4 + 2xTC.

But to recommend
an Canon R5 + 600mm F11 x 2xTC
and end up with F22 only to use,
it just does not make any sense.

Canon RF 100-500mm f/4-7.1L IS USM in R5 crop 1.6x mode.
in crop mode 375mm gives 600mm
Maybe at f6
Lose 30 to 40% MP.
45MP drop to 27MP
 

Last edited:
The R5 crop mode is for EF-S lenses.
You cannot use it on a RF lenses.
Crop mode is usually for Full Frame camera to use APS-C lenses in case you do not know
or pretend not to know?

Canon EF-S lenses are pathetic, with only 250mm max range.
Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS

Oh, I did not know that.
Thanks for teaching me something new today.
Obviously you are the expert.

This article by another expert who wrote an article in snapshot.canon-asia.com has something to say.

canon-rf100-500mm-f-4-5-7-1-l-is-usm-coverage_2065-04.JPG
 

Pitachu: Cropping in post processing from the full FF image has the same effect as cropping in camera. So it doesn't matter what lens you put in front of it, as long as you can mount it (either natively or via an adapter).
In both cases you're just using a smaller part of the frame to represent the full image except cropping in post, you're not bound by what cropping modes the camera gives you nor do you have to crop from the centre.

This is when pixel density becomes an advantage.
If you had a FF sensor the same pixel density as a m43 sensor, there would be no difference to the final image whether you cropped it from the FF image or whether you shot it from m43 with regards to final resolution.
Eg. an 80MP FF sensor has roughly the same pixel density as a 20MP m43 sensor. If you cropped a 20MP portion of the FF image, it'll occupy the same sensor surface area as m43 and therefore have the same characteristics as if you shot it on a 20MP m43 sensor.
Similarly, if you had a 35.55MP 1.5X APS-C sensor or 31.25MP 1.6X APS-C sensor, cropping a 20MP portion will also be the same as using a native 20MP m43 sensor. Note Canon has a 32MP 1.6X APS-C sensor, and a pretty good one at that.

A consequence of having the high pixel density on larger sensors is you have a much larger total sensor resolution. This can be a good or bad thing depending on whether you want the large total resolution.

But m43 only maintains the pixel density advantage over other larger formats if there are future developments in m43 sensors. I've advocated for an increase to around 27MP (6000X45000) in m43 to give 6000 pixels on the long side for 16:9 6K video as well as a reasonable boost to pixel density (equal to 108MP FF or 48MP 1.5X APS-C).
 

Yes, in theory you can put any lens in front of any sensor, but that is provide the camera body manufacturer allow you to interface with it. In the case of R5, I think it just switch to Crop Mode when you attach a EF-S lenses to simulate itself as a APS-C camera
with a lower resolution.

I do know photographers who use high resolution Full Frame for birding and crop during post process as Full Frame 600mm F4 is out of reach for most photographers. And I have tried it, when my telephoto lens still does not have the reach. But the bird or insect is so small in the viewfinder that it is quite hard to see the details.



Pitachu: Cropping in post processing from the full FF image has the same effect as cropping in camera. So it doesn't matter what lens you put in front of it, as long as you can mount it (either natively or via an adapter).
In both cases you're just using a smaller part of the frame to represent the full image except cropping in post, you're not bound by what cropping modes the camera gives you nor do you have to crop from the centre.
 

Yes, in theory you can put any lens in front of any sensor, but that is provide the camera body manufacturer allow you to interface with it. In the case of R5, I think it just switch to Crop Mode when you attach a EF-S lenses to simulate itself as a APS-C camera
with a lower resolution.

Yes, so the camera does a forced crop when a cropped lens is mounted to avoid the significant vignetting that would otherwise occur. In some FF cameras there are options to revert to shooting with the full frame sensor even when cropped lenses are mounted and this is useful because some cropped lenses actually have image circles much larger than their stated crop. Years ago I used a 35mm f/1.8 DX lens on my D700 but not in cropped mode but in FF sensor mode because that APS-C lens had an unusually large image circle almost covering FF.

But you can still use FF lenses in cropped mode in-camera. I haven’t looked at this option on the R5 but this has been available on virtually every FF model from every manufacturer so I can’t see why EOS R cameras including the R5 wouldn’t allow this.

I do know photographers who use high resolution Full Frame for birding and crop during post process as Full Frame 600mm F4 is out of reach for most photographers. And I have tried it, when my telephoto lens still does not have the reach. But the bird or insect is so small in the viewfinder that it is quite hard to see the details.
This again is what I mean about pixel density.
Take for example the D850 and D500 that have the same pixel density. An APS-C crop from the 45MP D850 yields 20MP which is exactly the same as a native APS-C D500. A D850 in cropped mode is exactly like using a D500.
Except the OVF problem you speak of as the OVF in DSLRs do not magnify the APS-C portion (it just outlines it) when set to cropped mode so you end up looking at tiny subjects in the viewfinder on the FF DSLR.
But this won’t be an issue with mirrorless EVFs as it’ll display the magnified cropped portion in cropped mode.
 

I am not sure if the R5 crop mode works with Full Frame lenses, but even if you can,
you would not want to do it, as the resolution drops from 45megapixel to 17 megapixel.

I do not remember my EOS 5D and 80D have a magnify view,
Again, I am not sure about the R5.
but my Olympus have a nice magnify mode when I do Manual Focus.


Yes, so the camera does a forced crop when a cropped lens is mounted to avoid the significant vignetting that would otherwise occur. In some FF cameras there are options to revert to shooting with the full frame sensor even when cropped lenses are mounted and this is useful because some cropped lenses actually have image circles much larger than their stated crop. Years ago I used a 35mm f/1.8 DX lens on my D700 but not in cropped mode but in FF sensor mode because that APS-C lens had an unusually large image circle almost covering FF.

But you can still use FF lenses in cropped mode in-camera. I haven’t looked at this option on the R5 but this has been available on virtually every FF model from every manufacturer so I can’t see why EOS R cameras including the R5 wouldn’t allow this.


This again is what I mean about pixel density.
Take for example the D850 and D500 that have the same pixel density. An APS-C crop from the 45MP D850 yields 20MP which is exactly the same as a native APS-C D500. A D850 in cropped mode is exactly like using a D500.
Except the OVF problem you speak of as the OVF in DSLRs do not magnify the APS-C portion (it just outlines it) when set to cropped mode so you end up looking at tiny subjects in the viewfinder on the FF DSLR.
But this won’t be an issue with mirrorless EVFs as it’ll display the magnified cropped portion in cropped mode.
 

I think I'm not explaining it very well as it appears to be causing more confusion but I'll give it another go.

I am not sure if the R5 crop mode works with Full Frame lenses, but even if you can,
you would not want to do it, as the resolution drops from 45megapixel to 17 megapixel.
I'm saying the R5 can definitely support cropping when used with FF lenses.
This can be done either in-camera or in post-processing. I can't see any reasons why Canon wouldn't allow in-camera cropping using their FF lenses.

I'm not familiar with the exact method Canon cameras will implement their cropping mode but if it's anything like Nikons (and it likely will be), it just takes a read-out from a smaller portion of the sensor. A quick look at the R5 specs tells me they have various crop modes such as changing of aspect ratio (it's still cropping) as well as a 1.6x cropping mode in-camera.
And it is useful to allow this cropping in-camera, even with a drop to 17MP when you've reached the limits of your optical reach eg. at the 500mm end of the 100-500 L lens. But if the subject still doesn't fill your frame, it is useful to use the in-camera cropping mode because you're just chucking away the surrounding extra pixels that the subject doesn't occupy anyways and you end up with smaller files where your subject occupies more of the frame. In many instances, it also allows the camera to increase frame rate and/or have a larger buffer because you're offloading less data with the smaller files.

I do not remember my EOS 5D and 80D have a magnify view,
Again, I am not sure about the R5.
but my Olympus have a nice magnify mode when I do Manual Focus.
Both those cameras are DSLRs. Your 5D and 80D won't have a magnified view in the optical viewfinder (OVF) because as far as I know, no DSLR offer an OVF magnification change when shot in cropped mode. .
They just mask out the area that will be cropped or outline it with a smaller frame within the larger frame.
You may be able to get a magnified view on the rear LCD in cropped mode on a DSLR though.

On mirrorless cameras it is different. There are no OVFs, just EVFs. And one advantage of the EVF is the ability to display just the active area that will be shot. So if you're shooting in cropped mode, just the cropped portion of the scene will be shown occupying the entire EVF. When you're not in cropped mode, it'll display the framing from the uncropped field of view.

I have made some assumptions about Canon cameras eg. R5 because that's the way cropping normally works in-camera. But I will need to double check that is exactly how it is implemented on Canon cameras.
 

How about Canon M6 Mk2 with adapter + Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens ?
32MP.
1.6x will bring it to 640mm?
 

How about Canon M6 Mk2 with adapter + Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM Lens ?
32MP.
1.6x will bring it to 640mm?
Yes, greater reach and pixel density so you get 32MP at 640mm but f/9 equivalent so a bit slower.
Also no EVF or IBIS on the M6 II as well as less native lens choices in EOS-M although access to the largest lineup in EF lenses. But if you feel EOS R is the future, no adapters for EOS R lenses either.
 

Optional EVF available for M6 Mk2 . Must buy separately. Canon did that to bring down the cost of entry.
 

Honestly, if I am a Canon user already have a couple of EF or EFS lenses, I would just continue using my 80D to use
the Canon EF 100-400. The purpose of the M6 is for lightweight and portability. To pair it with a gigantic EF lenses
with an adapter that weighs another 150g defeats the purpose.

As a new user without any system, I would definitely choose a EM5 Mk3 with wide range of Olympus and Panasonic Leica lenses,
which are much lighter and affordable. I dont need to add EVF or force myself to use Full Frame lenses with adapters because the EF-M lenses are so limited at the moment.
 

The subject of this thread is Should a new user buy a Micro Four Thirds System?

The Sony 6xxx, A7, Canon R5 and M6 Mkii all have very capable, attractive and sexy bodies.
It did appeal to my friends especially those who are new photographers.

But for any user who took a look at how various photos are being taken, for example
Super Wide Angle Shots, Macros, Super Teles for Birding, Videos etc and they plan
their camera system as a complete system to be assembled and able to be carried
around for their planned trips, M43 is suddenly a very viable attractive proposal.

My planned kit at the time when I got my Olympus Em5 Mkiii are
1) Olympus 8-18 F2.8-4 (16-36mm)
2) PanaLeica 12-60 F2.8-4 (24-120mm equivalent)
3)Panasonic 45-200 F4.5-5.6 (90-400mm equivalent)
And together with the tiny flash that comes with the EM5, (for fill flash use) all this fit into my waist pouch!
for many of my family vacations and hiking trip, without being a hindrance.

Yes, you may get slightly better images with a Full Frame system, but
you will end up with a big backpack with a Full Frame body
1) a 16-35mm Lenses
2) a 24-120 Lenses
3) a 100-400 Lenses
4) a much larger flash than the LM3
Besides the weight, the bulk, it is also the total costs.

Full Frame systems are great because of a larger sensor, but all the corresponding lenses will be larger too.

But I also realized that even for a advanced user like me, it is difficult to push beyond the envelope limits
of a M43 system, especially my output are usually photobooks and social media. I don't print posters
as I have no space to display them.
 

I have no interests in the EOS-M system so all this is just an academic exercise to see what things different systems offer and how well they compare to one another.

It is helpful to assign a task when discussing camera equipment. As Pitachu mentions, you really wouldn’t choose an M6 II for wildlife and birding needs even if it has a suitable sensor because the lenses necessary usually dwarfs the camera body and in this role the larger grips are beneficial no matter the sensor size. A Canon 90D (which has the same sensor as the M6 II) is a much better option if you like DSLRs.

It’s actually pretty simple since wildlife photographers are a savvy bunch. You only need to look at what’s popular with them to see what are the most suitable gear, with equivalence already factored in. You never see the M6 II mentioned because not many will use it in that role.

An E-M1 mk II with the 300mm f/4 however is something many wildlife photographers use. As is the A7R4/A9 with the 200-600. As is the Nikon D850/Z7 with the 500mm FP or 200-500 f/5.6. I suspect the Canon R5 with 100-500L will be very popular with wildlife photographers.
They've done the homework already and these are the combo's that work in these roles. The Olympus combo might not let in the most light but the entire combo is also cheaper and smaller and does a very competent job.
If you want the smallest and cheapest way to get to 600mm f/11, frankly I don't know a combo that beats an E-M5 mk III + 100-300 II. It's not for the serious birder but it's smaller than anything else I've seen but happy to concede if there are better casual combos in other systems.
 

My off topic comment - one of my friends is looking for an adapter to fit Leica L mount lens (for SL2) onto a Canon R5 body (retaining AF capability) which he has paid for and awaiting delivery. So far Internet search has not found anything.
I think it might be practically impossible even if it theoretically fits.
Look at the table about mid way down:
Flange back distance for Leica L is 1mm less than RF so it has to sit inside the R mount by 1mm. Even though the R mount is bigger so theoretically the L lenses can sit inside the R mount, note the throat diameter (which takes into account the tabs for mounting the lens) of the R is 50.6mm, which is 0.4mm less than the diameter of the L mount lenses.
It would be easier to make adapters for Sony E and Nikon Z just because their flange back distance are less than the L mount. The Z mount is by far the most versatile mount for adapting lenses because of the combination of shortest flange back distance and largest mount diameter.
 

Why lump the whole mft with olympus? and Olympus is selling. Not the whole MFT group. I will still recommend Olympus and other MFT cameras to my friends. There is no mention that the whole consortium is going to be disbanded. AND if they are, that would mean that the rights will be open and free for the takings. There may end up with more tom, dick and harry companies manufacturing mft stuff.
 

I think it might be practically impossible even if it theoretically fits.
Look at the table about mid way down:

Thanks for the info. No wonder the China manufacturers have not advertised any such adapter.
If it was possible, they would have made one for sale by now.