Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4      
5
       end
  

Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear
  
 
telyt
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #1 · p.5 #1 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


ThanhHa wrote:
I went from Nikon FX to Sony FE for size and weight, but I soon realized that I didn't save much of those things after the switch...


The weight reduction can be quite substantial depending on the choice of lenses. Try to turn an a7(x) into a DSLR and you'll get DLSR weight & bulk. Take advantage of the E mount and EVF using legacy manual-focus lenses and the weight & bulk savings can be substantial.



Sep 16, 2017 at 09:44 AM
k-h.a.w
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #2 · p.5 #2 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


Matt Grum wrote:
Something which is completely irrelevant if the FF lens is still sharper wide open than the m43 lens. The fact that it gets even sharper when stopped down is hardly a disadvantage!

Case in point - on a recent shoot I discovered the Sony 55/1.8 and Batis 85/1.8 (not the most expensive lenses by any means) were both producing Moire patterns, wide open, on the A7RII.

That means they are outresolving a 42 megapixel sensor. Wide open.

What happens with most full frame lenses is that sharpen up until about f/5.6 (as aberrations are reduced) then diffraction kicks in and starts to
...Show more

According to Erwin Puts, the lens Doug (telyt) used, the APO-R 280/4 is already diffraction limited at f/4.

K-H.



Sep 16, 2017 at 01:05 PM
1texasaggie
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #3 · p.5 #3 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


Matt Grum wrote:
Something which is completely irrelevant if the FF lens is still sharper wide open than the m43 lens. The fact that it gets even sharper when stopped down is hardly a disadvantage!


Never said it was a disadvantage, but doesn't necessarily make it 'completely irrelevant'. You conveniently missed the part where I said, "Does that mean m4/3 is better? Nope, not even close." lol.

Matt Grum wrote:
There are many reasons to choose m43. The sharpness of lenses is not one of them.


Again, never said sharpness was a reason to choose, or even not to choose-- any lens. That's a matter of personal preference. Anyone who has looked at DxOMark's tests results can see that the FF lenses that I mentioned previously are several times sharper compared to the m43 lenses mentioned. Not saying I completely agree or disagree with this assessment either, but it is what it is.



Sep 17, 2017 at 01:10 PM
jankap
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #4 · p.5 #4 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


Matt Grum wrote:
What happens with most full frame lenses is that sharpen up until about f/5.6 (as aberrations are reduced) then diffraction kicks in and starts to reduce sharpness. Now diffraction as a percentage of image height depends on the entrance pupil diameter alone (well and the wavelength of light, but lets assume that's the same).

Since an m43 lens at f/2.8 has the same entrance pupil as a FF lens at f/5.6, what you're seeing with m43 is the tail off due to diffraction. In other words the fact they're at their sharpest wide open is because they're diffraction limited at
...Show more

Good point.
The wavelength of the light does not change, if one uses a smaller format.
But what about very small lenses, like the ones on smart phones?
Jan



Sep 17, 2017 at 02:43 PM
ytwong
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #5 · p.5 #5 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


M43 is not bad, I don't use it anymore only because of all its competitors.

I was among the first to jump into M43 system. And that was before Sony introduced the NEX-7 so I actually moved from M43 to Sony. I used to use M43 and a small prime as my 2nd body but it never replaced my Nikon. I later replace M43 with NEX-7 and that was when mirrorless can challenge my Nikon DSLR in IQ.

I don't like 4:3 format much so I often need to crop out those precious pixels.
16mp is not a lot once you have a 4K or higher monitor and Retina Mac. It's even less when you try to pan/zoom in 4K timelapse. 5K, 8K monitor are expensive now but if they follow the path of 4K monitors, they will become affordable in like 3 years.

Panasonic and Olympus are too protective to their higher priced stuffs that 20mp sensor are only for those "pro" expensive models, and those are bulky and for MY USE I don't see the point of using them.

If there is an inexpensive M43 with IBIS and 20mp, I might consider getting one, but I still prefer a A6500, or a Fuji X.

When RX100 (Mk1) introduced, its sensor was better than many M43 sensors. Although the lens wasn't better but RX100 is so compact and is an excellent serious P&S/backup/2nd body.

I rarely shoot long lens so the size advantage of using super-tele does not benefit me.

When I shoot astro landscape I'd appreciate lower noise of larger sensors.
I shoot a lot of Cityscape, and at evening/night I really want good DR (street lights, buildings, neon signs.. etc).
And I don't usually use my camera like a machine gun so more resolution doesn't hurt.

If I don't have any gear and someone gave me a M43, I'm certainly fine with using it. But at this moment M43 does not have products that I want at my desired price point. If GX85 is 20mp or more I might say something different (gotta say again, 16mp is a bit too few for someone with high-res monitor AND don't like 4:3 format)
Maybe I might get a small and cheap Yi M1 camera to play around (still have my old M43s and a few lens and adapters)... but I am unwilling to give up any system for M43.




Sep 17, 2017 at 04:35 PM
Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #6 · p.5 #6 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


1texasaggie wrote:
Never said it was a disadvantage, but doesn't necessarily make it 'completely irrelevant'. You conveniently missed the part where I said, "Does that mean m4/3 is better? Nope, not even close." lol.


Sorry I should have replied to this comment

johnvanr wrote:
most top-notch MFT lenses can be used wide open, while most FF lenses cannot (unless you spend a lot more money)


Which does erroneously suggest it's a disadvantage of full frame lenses that peak sharpness occurs when stopped down.

jankap wrote:
But what about very small lenses, like the ones on smart phones?


They're usually between f/1.8 and f/2.2 and probably diffraction limited, or close to. They also lack an iris so don't stop down. Bright light is handled by having a very fast electronic shutter.



Sep 17, 2017 at 06:05 PM
austinschutz
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #7 · p.5 #7 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


To me, the options are really m4/3 or full-frame. APS-C doesn't offer enough of a size advantage for the dip in performance to be worth it (to me) and m4/3 have caught up significantly starting with the GH4. For 90 percent of my photography, m4/3 does what I want. But, the other 10 percent is really important (mainly dealing with DR issues) and so fullframe is the best option for me. If I had the money I would have both systems, or even better, m4/3 and the fuji GFX.


Sep 18, 2017 at 02:52 AM
johnvanr
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #8 · p.5 #8 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


Matt Grum wrote:
Sorry I should have replied to this comment

Which does erroneously suggest it's a disadvantage of full frame lenses that peak sharpness occurs when stopped down.

They're usually between f/1.8 and f/2.2 and probably diffraction limited, or close to. They also lack an iris so don't stop down. Bright light is handled by having a very fast electronic shutter.


Youíre drawing the wrong conclusion from my quote. Iím saying that the good MFT lenses can be used wide open and that that is an advantage of them, since it allows for shallow depth of field while maintaining sharpness.



Sep 18, 2017 at 03:26 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



frezeiss
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #9 · p.5 #9 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


johnvanr wrote:
Youíre drawing the wrong conclusion from my quote. Iím saying that the good MFT lenses can be used wide open and that that is an advantage of them, since it allows for shallow depth of field while maintaining sharpness.


I dont have a problem at all using my FE 35 1.4, 50 1.4 and Milvus 85 wide open.. I guess wide open sharpness isnt m43's monopoly at all..

When you factor dof equivalance of 1.2 m43 results in near 2.5-2.8 at FFit becomes rather interesting. Considering those m43 1.2 lenses cost a lot. But the smaller formats has its charm when paired to lenses like 12-100 and 300. It would make a great compliment to a Sony FF system.




Sep 18, 2017 at 08:26 AM
jankap
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #10 · p.5 #10 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


"I guess wide open sharpness isnt m43's monopoly at all."

Matt means, that lenses made for m43 arenīt better than FF ones.
Because of the small front opening of the lens (half focal length) they can only have their maximum performance wide open. That has to do with the wavelength of the light entering the lens.
Jan



Sep 18, 2017 at 09:43 AM
johnvanr
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #11 · p.5 #11 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


If you read my original post, I talked about the better MFT lenses and also mentioned that the top - and expensive- FF lenses can also be used wide open. Iím not denying at all that FF is better when top gear is used.

What Iím saying is that people who complain that a f/1.4 MFT lens is really a f/2.8 lens forget that many FF f/2.8 lenses canít be used as such if you want the best image quality, while the MFT lens can actually be shot at that aperture.

If youíre moving up to GM, Milvus or Otus quality, that comparison doesnít work, but now youíre talking high expense and enormous lenses.



Sep 18, 2017 at 10:44 AM
Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #12 · p.5 #12 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


johnvanr wrote:
What Iím saying is that people who complain that a f/1.4 MFT lens is really a f/2.8 lens forget that many FF f/2.8 lenses canít be used as such if you want the best image quality, while the MFT lens can actually be shot at that aperture.

If youíre moving up to GM, Milvus or Otus quality, that comparison doesnít work, but now youíre talking high expense and enormous lenses.


Right, I see your point but you're assuming that only GM/Milvus/Otus lenses can be used wide open, which is frankly nonsense. I mentioned earlier that the Sony 55/1.8 and Zeiss 85/1.8 are outresolving my 42 megapixel A7RII wide open. These are mid-tier lenses and are also relatively small and light.

There are also the Sigma ART series which are all very good wide open and about half the price or less of the GM/Milvus series.

Finally there are some buget FF lenses which perform well enough one stop down from wide open to still give them a 1-stop advantage in light gathering and DOF control compared to m43 (which has a 2 stop deficit in terms of sensor area).



Sep 18, 2017 at 11:41 AM
johnvanr
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #13 · p.5 #13 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


Matt Grum wrote:
Right, I see your point but you're assuming that only GM/Milvus/Otus lenses can be used wide open, which is frankly nonsense. I mentioned earlier that the Sony 55/1.8 and Zeiss 85/1.8 are outresolving my 42 megapixel A7RII wide open. These are mid-tier lenses and are also relatively small and light.

There are also the Sigma ART series which are all very good wide open and about half the price or less of the GM/Milvus series.

Finally there are some buget FF lenses which perform well enough one stop down from wide open to still give them a 1-stop advantage in light
...Show more

Iíd include Sigma ART in lenses that are exceedingly large and heavy, though indeed reasonably priced.

Iím speaking in general terms defending the IQ of top MFT lenses. I just donít agree at all with those acting as if MFT IQ sucks and FF is the holy grail. I think MFT scores above its weight class.

Other than saying I donít like Sonyís interface, I fully Ďgetí the appeal of FF. I have two FF Canon cameras for a reason and Iím lusting after the D850.

If Sony could design a camera like Nikon, Canon, Olympus or Fuji can with a FF sensor, Iíd buy it in a heartbeat.



Sep 18, 2017 at 12:01 PM
Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #14 · p.5 #14 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


johnvanr wrote:
Iím speaking in general terms defending the IQ of top MFT lenses. I just donít agree at all with those acting as if MFT IQ sucks and FF is the holy grail.


I'm not saying MFT IQ sucks, but specific claims made about the need to close FF lenses down two whole stops simply don't stand up.

johnvanr wrote:
I think MFT scores above its weight class.


It's very hard to quantify image quality as a whole, but in terms of sharpness, contrast, noise, aberrations I don't think it does (except maybe when you get into telephoto lenses). The A7R is only 465g including battery, and there are plenty of small light FF lenses such as the 120g 35/2.8, which outresolves the 36MP sensor wide open (since my original post I found an f/2.8 image from the 35/2.8 which exhibits moire patterns).

Is there a 17.5mm f/1.4 for M43 that will resolve more than 36MP wide open and weigh in under 585g including the camera body?

My personal view is Panasonic/Olympus have on the whole underdelivered on lenses considering the small image circle they were designing for (aberrations increase exponentially as you move away from the image centre), there should be a lot more f/1.4 glass and it should all be the price of f/2.8 primes for 35mm cameras (generally at the lower end of the price range).

That's not to say there aren't plus points for the system, if IQ isn't you're #1 priority. If you want to talk about bokeh, usability, ergonomics etc. then that's a different conversation, all of those things are subjective so you wont get any sort of consensus.



Sep 18, 2017 at 01:18 PM
GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #15 · p.5 #15 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


Agree with Matt here given the smaller sensor the lens designers can really take advantage of 1.4 lenses with less aberrations as it's much easier to design than full frame sensors. Problem is there design goals are small lenses. You have a much harder design restriction for speed and lens aberrations if you have to make it small. In 35mm full frame we have both fast glass and some smaller ones as well. We get more options on lens choices in full frame because some folks want 1.4 regardless of size and some will want smaller. Basically the market is bigger to do both. Smaller formats are more about size.


Sep 18, 2017 at 01:57 PM
1       2       3       4      
5
       end






FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4      
5
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password