Let's Compare! Micro Four Thirds VS Full Frame ~ The results might surprise you!

In This video I go over comparing MFT camera vs a Full Frame camera, having used both of these camera options! So what is your choice? Let me know in the comment!

[nithinchandran]

MFT still has an advantage when it comes for telephoto. I use an Lumix G85 with 40-150mm f4.5-5.6.
I use this setup to shoot wildlife and my daughters school events. The small compact nature makes it unnoticeable, easy to carry and portable.
Also, Olympus did release a latest version of compact 5 series camera, OM5. It doesn't have the latest 20mp Backlit, stacked sensor though, and has single memory card slot.

[Democratiser]

Well done! Great overview.

I shoot with a G9 + 10 lenses and 5DIII + 6 lenses. Both systems are great. My next wish is for a small FF mirrorless camera like the LUMIX S9.

[gfvt]

An interesting comparison, thank you for your thoughts.

[comeraczy]

Thanks a lot for this comparison. Considering that these are digital cameras (as opposed to film), I am surprised by the decision to compare at same f-number. Wouldn't it make more sense to compare what's needed to get the same resulting image?

[karlgrabherr]

It would be much more serious if you could compare cameras of a similar age and latest improvements. To compare a camera with a sensor which came out 2016 for the first time is a bit odd, not so say nonsense.

[BobN]

Why is the 12-100/4 such a small lens? Because it collects the same amount of light as an f/8 lens would on a FF sensor. So the Nikon lens, about the same size, collects more light throughout the range. In fact, the sensor size itself is not so important. What' is how much light is being projected on the sensor, however that is achieved, with a big sensor and smaller f-numbers or a small sensor and higher f-numbers. Personally, I use both mFT and FF, because they are good for different things. BTW, Olympus weren't the first with IBIS. Minolta and Pentax had it before.