you (probably) don't need a full frame camera...

timestamps:

00:00 let's get stuck in...
00:45 no... #1
02:15 YES #1
04:34 however...
05:25 m43 dynamic range
06:03 storyblocks
07:01 the problem with small FF lenses...
08:11 YES - a look at shallow depth of field
09:28 what would my talking head look like in m43?
10:35 NO... it isn't even a compromise
12:11 who is this best for?
13:10 what are the benefits of full frame?
13:53 astrophotography?
15:11 landscape?
15:37 so basically...

#microfourthirds #photographytips
▾ ▿ ▾ ▿ ▾ ▿ ▾

(Some links in the description are affiliate links. If you choose to buy using them, I get a small commission at no cost to you.)

▾ ▿ ▾ ▿ ▾ ▿ ▾

[swphotographiekiel]

In a nutshell: Learn to use your equipment properly instead of constantly looking for other cameras. I completely agree with you!

[albertjurina]

Unpopular opinion? Shallow Depth of Field is overrated. I just sold all of my full-frame Canon gear and switched to M43. I've shot weddings using Full-Frame, APS-C, and M43 weddings, as well as landscapes, portraits, etc. It's all down to opinion. What's the "Best" format? The one you like to work with that gives you the results you like. It's that simple. What's not simple is how the internet has been given enough sway as a hive-mind for some people to shake or influence their opinions of themselves and others, rather than just enjoying the art of photography. Great video, great thoughts. Thank you for sharing!

[SuperReview]

10:40 Big agree. Both systems have advantages and disadvantages. You don't need to "settle" for M43, you're just selecting a different set of priorities. That it's cheaper is a happy bonus.

[oakbrookconsultants]

Emily remains a refreshing commonsense voice in the photography community. I love her videos particularly as I shoot Pentax Qs, Micro 4/3, APS-C and Full Frame as it suits me! Every point made is spot on and delivered without dogma. Long may she continue!

[NorthWolfPhotography]

After being someone who has in the past been fully behind the "APS-C / Micro 43rds" camp and at some point in my hobby had a disdain for "Full Frame shooters being Snobs" I've come to realize after years of reflecting that ultimately it really comes down to using the right tool for the effect you want. When Full Frame became more accessible as used DSLRs flooded the market for cheap I took a moment to re-evaluate this line of thinking and now will shoot both.

If there is any one thing that I've learned from collecting cameras as a sub-hobby to photography in general its that not being pigeonholed into one camera body, one format, and 1-3 lenses has huge advantages. I know a lot of "Pro" photographers will often think this is the case; but from an artistic point of view having more options with different sensor sizes, different lenses (from modern to adapted vintage lenses) and even different Manufacturers (since they all have different ways in which the camera will output contrast and colors yes even in RAW) really opens up a lot of tools as an Artist to be able to capture the world with a much wider brush.

So yes, I now own pocket cameras, M43 Cameras, APS-C Bodies AND Full Frame. And even just having one of each or even just one other sensor size camera then your "main camera" really opens up a lot of options artistically.

[teepee]

M43 and FF have different merits with a large Venn overlap. A case can be made for either so its really up to you as an individual to decide which system suits and then simply tune out the noise.

[huwalban]

One of the most honest and unbiased assessments of both formats that I've ever seen. Thank you for putting it out there. Oh, and btw as a landscaper I use both - not quite for the reasons you described - and play to the strengths each time I use it. Seasons greetings to you.

[rkhayden]

Whenever I've been tempted to 'upgrade' from M43 to a full-frame camera, I've looked at what secondhand M43 lenses I could buy for the same money as the full-frame camera body. I probably have too many lenses now.😀

[dopravnivideacz]

Before buying GH7 I was thinking about moving to FF world and found out that about 90 % of my work (mostly video, a few photos here and there) would be worse with a FF camera. I'm not a shallow DOF fanatic, I'm only rarely shooting at night / in very bad light. On the other side I do a lot of shooting outside, so the portability is important for me. Also, 5.7K60 H265 is my most used video mode on my GH6 / GH7 (cropping ability + smooth framerate for faster movement without RAW hassle) and there's only one single FF camera that does do that - Z6 III which has many other downsides.
Not to mention using longer focal lengths with FF vs MFT - Lumix 100-300 is 520 g, FF 600 mm lenses start at 2 kg. So a single tele FF lens alone weights about the same as MFT body + 35-100 F2.8 + 100-300 + 12-35 F2.8 + 9 F1.7. Yikes...
I would buy / rent FF only as an addition to that 10 % where I would benefit from its low-light capabilities, if it's cheap enough.

Going FF would only be viable for me after there's FF version of GH7 or a camera that has similar video features in crop mode + lenses with similar weight as MFT. I'm not expecting that anytime soon, but maybe S1H II will surprise me. 🙂

[anta]

I still shoot with 35mm film for fun, so having a full frame camera is a practical move:
very same lenses, on a more modern body.

That said, I think APSC and FF cameras are oversaturated markets. Why don't take the extreme path for fun:
- M43 for daily use (very compact system)
- And medium format for ultimate image quality

:D

[Djsten]

This is why it's important to actually go out and shoot instead of only ever obsessing over gear. If you only ever trusted online opinions about these cameras then you'd be led to believe that anything less than full frame is totally unusable in low light. I've made my living off M43 cameras for years in a variety of environments and I've never had complaints about the quality, ESPECIALLY since Lightroom introduced their Denoise AI, which have cleaned up my shots considerably. If I see someone saying that full frame is the only way to shoot something professionally then I can assume they've never actually done client work or are being paid by the brand.

The only thing that I wish I could get on M43 is a proper 35mm f/1.8 look, not completely blowing out the background but softening it more than my 10-25 1.7 does, but it's not a big enough deal to me to consider switching over.

[jimmay]

Speedboosters also offer a way to "claw back" some of full frame's advantages on m43. I bought a Metabones 0.64x speedbooster to use my existing Canon glass on a Panasonic G7 and now a G9, which effectively expands the sensor to APS-H dimensions (1.28x crop) and light gathering capacity.

I'm not a professional so I might fail to notice the potential image quality loss with speedboosters (likely, more flares and a bit of contrast loss at least), but I love that I can leverage less expensive (if bulkier) EF glass to get wider than FF 24mm.

[andystiller]

I have been using MFT cameras for years. I decided to get a Full Frame camera for a few reasons. The reasons were autofocus tracking (the OM 1 had just been released and I was buying used), low light performance and dynamic range. The Sony camera I got did the job but I noticed a few things.

In low light there was almost no difference as I needed to use a narrow aperture. The single auto was slower and less reliable. The dynamic range made more difference than I expected. I'm glad I got the camera and kept my MFT gear. I've learned so much more using them both.

[DTUFINOPhotography]

100% correct. I'm looking to pick up a m43 olympus camera and a standard 20mm lens to compliment it.

[keithspillett]

As a retired photographer with a seriously knackered back after a career spanning nearly five decades, I have owned/used several M43 cameras and smaller APS-C ie Sony 6000 range due to size/weight considerations. I'm currently using a Sony A6500 with Sigma and Sony glass. I think my favourite cameras have been Olympus EM10 mk3s and Lumix G80, but I shoot a lot of transport videos, so the Sony A6500 wins for its AF capabilities, which is how I appear to have (perhaps finally) settled on the A6XXX range. The A6500 has very good IBIS, though not quite as good as the M43s, which is good enough. Keep making the great videos 😊

[juliette-mansour]

Emily, I love this so much! It reminds me a lot of the digital versus film debate. For many years, I was deeply involved in that debate until I realized and made the point that these are all different genres of art being practiced. It’s about whatwhat tool when? It’s not what is better. As always, great video!

[kevinl]

I shoot events on M4/3 and FF. The problem with M4/3 is that I am often shooting at my self imposed limit of ISO 6400 when using f/2.8 zooms. A drop in light levels makes your setup no longer viable. So, you use fast primes on M4/3 or switch to FF. But for sufficient DOF, FF often needs f/5.6. FF can handle higher ISO, but you close to the limit. Time to break out the flash.

[turtledovechen]

switch to M43 for birding for a while now, been loving the experience, its light weight and small so i can run around looking for birds not standing in one place with my giant camera on a tripod, and i still have amazing reach, and with the weight and space i save i can have more gear like a spotting scope and a big bright 40+mm bino
and my arms and back will still be in one piece at the end of a long day birding

[mauricio.montoya]

I bought my first and only full frame camera a few years ago. It’s a LUMIX S1, I love it and I can assure you that is way more camera than I need for my photography style and I’ll be rocking my trusty S1 for many years more! Love your channel Emily, happy holidays! 😊

[michaelwausr]

Seems, You are the Micro Four Third Queen! ))) One hour ago streamed an such a number comments....congratulations. Regards from Germany