Top Reasons to use Micro Four Thirds Cameras

Let's dive into the pros and cons of this versatile camera system, starting with the drawbacks. While Micro Four Thirds cameras deliver fantastic image quality, especially during well-lit conditions, it's essential to acknowledge that they may not perform as well in low-light situations. Night photography or indoor shots without proper lighting might be a bit challenging, and you might notice some noise creeping in at higher ISO levels. Nevertheless, with the right techniques and settings, you can still capture stunning shots! 🌃

Another aspect to consider is the shallow depth of field, where some photographers may find the system lacking compared to larger sensor counterparts. Achieving those ultra-blurred backgrounds for portrait shots might not be as pronounced as with full-frame cameras. But fear not! Micro Four Thirds allows you to explore other creative aspects like capturing a broader depth of field, ideal for landscape or architectural photography. 🏞️

Now, let's move on to the bright side! One of the most significant advantages of the Micro Four Thirds system is its compact size and lightweight design. Carrying around heavy camera gear is a thing of the past, thanks to these cameras' portability. 🎒 You can pack multiple lenses without feeling weighed down, making it the perfect companion for travel, street photography, and outdoor adventures. 🌅

Another huge plus for embracing Micro Four Thirds is the cost factor. Both Olympus and Lumix offer an impressive range of affordable lenses and camera bodies, making it an excellent option for photographers on a budget. Moreover, buying used gear within this system is more accessible and pocket-friendly compared to larger sensor systems. 💰

In summary, despite some limitations in low-light performance and shallow depth of field, the Micro Four Thirds camera system from Olympus and Lumix shines bright with its compact size, lightness, and budget-friendly approach. Whether you're a hobbyist or a professional photographer, this system offers remarkable versatility and outstanding image quality that will undoubtedly elevate your photography game. 📸💫

If you're already using Micro Four Thirds or considering making the switch, share your thoughts in the comments below! Don't forget to like this video, subscribe to my channel for more photography tips and gear reviews, and hit that notification bell to stay updated with my latest uploads. Happy shooting, everyone! 📹😊

--------- Social --------

[markusbolliger]

For many years I worked with two systems: Full frame and mFT. Two months ago I completely left full frame and sold my Nikon Z- system. The reason is the OM-1: An amazing camera, which has been improved in every respect. I therefore can't see any reason to maintain full frame.
Even low light is no longer a problem: The IS of the OM-1 is so good that you mostly can shoot at base ISO of 200 (for still subjects), and get enough depht of field at open or nearly open aperture. With Full frame you often have to stop down to get the same depth of field, and have to push the ISO's to get fast enough shutter speed. Also, there are now RAW- converters available delivering clean images at higher ISO's without the loss of detail, as DxO Pure RAW II or II, or Topaz DeNoise AI. Not to forget the high quality glass you get in the OM System, especially in the PRO- lineup.
Kind regards from Switzerland

[eelco]

What it is easily forgotten is that the shallow depth of field of fullframe can be a great disadvantage in low light. While you can shoot f2.8 on m43 and may have enough DOF. This may not be the case with fullframe at f2.8. Needing f5.6 and 2 stops higher iso make the advantage disappear mostly. As mentioned by others DXO prime does an excellent job to get quite similar iso performance. I use both formats. Because I believe if not any major improvements are coming, I don't believe that there is any system that can replace all formats.

[lgude]

As an old film photographer (NikonF 1963) I found even aps-c lenses too heavy to carry around. I am completely satisfied with m4/3 And have no trouble with working with its limitations. Compared to the limitations of Tri-X in available light in cafes and similar interiors where I worked m4/3 is joy to work with. But it is the great variety of compact inexpensive lenses that I can afford that makes using the m4/3 system so satisfying. The many pancake lenses available make it easy to set up a pocketable camera that is quite different from a phone camera.

[HuzzahTheFirst]

Nice video. I have everything from 1 inch, M43, APSc, and FF. I like using M43, I have EM10Mii and EM10Miii, love using them along with GX85.

[Jgatti]

I fell victim to the have to have full frame talk and sold all my Olympus gear and went Sony. I hated the sony. The IQ was great, but I just could not make friends with it. I ended up making a trade of a lifetime with a former Olympus visionary and switched back. I wish I had my original kit. But live and learn.

[DessieTots]

If you want shallow dof in portraits just use the Olympus 45mm f1.8 at f1.8 and go in a little closer to the face/s.

[bfqywqd]

I've never shot with a M4:3 camera and I don't foresee doing so given my use case but your video helped me understand its advantages and I can definitely see where it would be perfectly suited for some based on their use case. Thanks!

[akeluify]

In terms of low light, I went from the original EM-1 to the OM-1 + pro lenses (including 25/45 1.2 primes), and when i combine those with ai noise reduction software like dxo pureraw, the trifecta together is such a massive jump over my old em-1 its unbelievable. Truly. In capable hands, i believe this combination is just as good as full frame was in low light not too long ago in terms of noise and dynamic range (without the assistance of ai noise removal software) and they managed to get by just fine so. Of course if you add the ai noise removal to a full frame it will get you even further, but still.

[SurfinScientist]

I find the larger depth of field of micro-43 cameras an advantage, because the majority of pictures need it. It is only pics like portrait that need a smaller depth of field, but even there I prefer the larger depth of field, so that the whole face is sharp. So, this is no issue at all. Regarding low-light performance, it is more than enough.

[carmenfissenden]

Your story mirrors my entry in to photography . I began with Fujica ST 701 and added Nikons later . I also loved 5x4 and 6x6 bodies . My first digital body was a tiny Olympus with 1.3 mp. I produced some Fantastic images with that before it died . Next was a Pentax and gave that to my nephew a couple of years ago . I then bought the one of the last ME10 Mkii kits and I still using it .

[robb]

Another positive with M43 is the 2X crop factor, which extends your focal length but using a compact lens. For example, a 400mm lens is 800mm FF equivalent. This is great for wildlife photography. You would need a small truck to carry around a 800mm FF lens, not to mention having to mortgage your house to afford it.

[HuzzahTheFirst]

Nice video, i have all formats but really enjoy taking out one of my 3 EM10Mii bodies.

[angelorenna]

Excellent reflections. I’ve had a micro4/3 kit for a few years and it never disappointed me. Always sharp optics and shooting even at 3200iso (At most I fix something with Lightroom) I print albums for events and they satisfy me. In addition I only have two kilos on me (two bodies and two optics mounted on my belt) instead of 4/5 of my old reflex kit. Another advantage is the phenomenal stabilisation Not to mention that I can shoot at full opening without danger of blurring the subjects. Then the blur is already enough on the micro (the distances also count) 👋🏽

[manilamartin]

I like hearing your explanation. You speak well. It's a lot of information to absorb but well formulated ideas.

[keithspillett]

I'm a 'retired pro' who's finally settled on an mft system after much back and forth trading, and now carry a Lumix G80 plus an Olympus 14-150 lens and a Lumix 7-14 lens in a bag that would barely have accommodated a full frame body with a 50mm lens on it. Also, the IBIS on mft cameras blows the socks off the full frame equivalent 😊

[mistermcluvin]

Great video, thanks for sharing your perspective.

[kennuff]

I agree re the weight. I have a Canon 7d Mk11 and many lenses and accessories, I weighted my camera bag the other day and it was over 5 Kilo. I am interested in all forms of photography from Wildlife, birds in flight down to macro and insects. I have recently bought a Panasonic Lumix G7 and was amazed how much smaller and lighter it was compared to my Canon. When using the Canon for photographing say Dragon flies I found when bending over and rocking back and forward trying to get focus the Camera and lens becomes heavy . I have now used the G7 and found it so much easier when bent over at an odd angle trying to focus on a Dragon flies eyes. I will keep my canon gear for wildlife of the larger variety but the G7 for macro work. Thanks for your video.

[keirwatson]

I do a lot of close-up work (1/4 to 1/2 macro) where m43 increased depth of field is a boon. Also, the effective ff equivalent magnification is double, so even some standard (non-macro) m4/3 lenses (e.g. panny 42.5mm f1.7) can achieve x0.4 nearly half-macro ff equivalent in a tiny 130g package with a good 30cm working distance. I’ve considered moving to ff, but this kind of performance to price/weight ratio just can’t be matched. Top this off with its excellent image stabilisation and IMO micro four thirds is the best system for hand held semi-macro work.

[K.]

i had many aps-c sensor cameras (Pentax and Canon) Now i switched to MFT cameras and i am a happy guy! just Love MFT System! ❤

[johnpouw]

Nice video to watch. On the subject of depth of field and bokeh on Micro Four Thirds - it is becoming a bit more attainable. On my Sony Full Frame I would shoot most portraits at F2.8 and now with my E-M1 II I can achieve a similar result with any lens that delivers an F1.4 or less thanks to the introduction of some of the better Chinese prime lenses like the TTArtisan 50mm F0.95. I do shoot a lot of macro, so less depth of field also works really well for that. Definitely a matter of finding what works and building a kit to cater for your shooting style and subject selection. John Pouw NZ