The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

How goos do you find m43 IQ today?

Paratom

Well-known member
I have been a user of m43 for a long time, but often came back to cameras with larger sensors since I had the feeling that the IQ of larger sensors to be somewht smoother (color transitions, mid tones, transition to background).
Recently though I have aquired a EM1II + 12-200 for a vacation with boat trips on the sea and have to say I enjoy using this combo a lot for its speed, handling and flexibility.
The images are certainly very sharp and colors are nice (and punchy), sometimes I feel everything looks slightly oversharp nd contrasty, which certainly can be influenced in processing the files. (I use LR)

So I wondered others opinions how close is m43 to dx or even full frame in your opinion and experience.
Certainly FF allows more flexibility in regards of shallow DOF, on the other side sometimes a little more DOF can be an advantage as well.
I am also not talking super high ISO, I brely go over 1600 ISO anyways.
For my part I hve the feeling to use m43 more often again.

So how you guys get along with m43 in a long term and where do yo see the main differences? I am not interested to say one is better thn the other, I am sure there are reasons for different sensor size.
Tom
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
...
So how you guys get along with m43 in a long term and where do yo see the main differences? I am not interested to say one is better thn the other, I am sure there are reasons for different sensor size.
I have been reluctant to completely let go of my FourThirds gear because the E-1 and E-M1, and the Olympus pro-grade lenses, are such excellent performers.

The Olympus camera are on opposite poles when it comes to image processing when compared to each other.
  • The E-1 is a 5 MPixel camera with a heavy antialiasing filter. To get the most out of it requires careful framing so as not to waste pixel resolution and a modest boost to the default raw sharpening in LR to make the photos sing. (Today's modern LR raw conversion algorithms gives the old dear a new life ... I can now shoot color with it all the way up to ISO 1600 without objectionable noise, and B&W can handle ISO 3200. Amazing to see a fifteen year old digital camera produce such quality!)
  • The E-M1 sensor has much more resolution, 16 Mpixel, with light to no antialiasing filter. Lightroom's default sharpening on these raw files is too heavy IMO: my defaults back it off to half of what is normally applied (very similar to what I discovered with the E-5 DSLR too). Once I do that, the photos lose that 'over sharpened' look and gain the fluid feel of the E-1.

Comparing either of these cameras's output to my Leica SL, M-D, and now CL files, the differences become that it is easier to achieve that look with the Leicas partly because the sensors gives you a little bit more leeway and partly because the Leica lens tuning goes further than the Olympus lenses do. I've pushed down the default sharpening on both the SL and M-D files a little bit (still learning the CL, haven't made decisions there yet) and otherwise use an even gentler hand in PP to achieve the look that I want.

Nowadays, the big reasons to choose one or the other of these cameras, for me, comes down to what lenses I have and how much depth of field control I want, combined with how much or how little I feel like carrying. I get results I like out of all of them. :)

G
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
What Godfrey said.

It's good enough for 95% or more of what I do, and I can live without those 5% unless somebody pays me to pull them out of the hat. I use 2 x GX8 and 2 x GM5 now, and in reality, the GM5 bodies are the ones that get the most fresh air.
 

Knorp

Well-known member
There's definitely a difference between µ43 (EM1-II, G9) and FF (A7r2) files. The latter being smoother and having more latitude for processing and less prone to noise in my experience.
But if you shoot with ETTR in mind, µ43 results can be excellent even at higher ISO values than 1600.

But as always YMMV ... :rolleyes:

Best regards.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Currently I shoot only m43 (EM1.2 with Olympus PRO lenses) and I am very happy WRT IQ, handling, ease of carrying.

Other formats I used before were FF (Nikon D810) and APSC (several bodies up to the X-T2), but I in the end got rid of all of them. The Nikon FF DSLR system was simply too heavy and bulky for me and the colours I got out of it needed too much fine-tuning IMHO in LR as well as in C1Pro. The Fuji system with the X-T2 was almost perfect WRT IQ and especially I loved the Fuji colour science even more than the Olympus colours, but overall that system had some flaws compared to the Olympus system I currently use. These flaws have almost gone away with the introduction of the latest X-H1 camera with IBIS, except the still very poor battery life.

So overall m43 has for me the best balance of IQ, size, weight and thus I ended up with m43 as my current "only" system :cool:
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I have to say that the EM1-II has some "minor" changes from the EM1-I and other m43 cams I had used before which make it very enjoyable for me. The body, and grip now seems to have just the rights size, and I do like the more silent shutter (compared to the first version).
I think I need to check out what Godfrey said and start to reduce sharpening and contrast a bit.

If I see my SL+ 24-90 + Telezoom + fast prime (50/1.4) vs the EM1II+12-100+17/1.8 ...wow, what a difference in bulk and weight.
I am not yet ready to give up the "big boys", but I pplan to use m43 more often again and see how I like IQ in a longer term.
The 12-100 is so flexible, I love it allready after 2 weeks of use.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I have to say that the EM1-II has some "minor" changes from the EM1-I and other m43 cams I had used before which make it very enjoyable for me. The body, and grip now seems to have just the rights size, and I do like the more silent shutter (compared to the first version).
I think I need to check out what Godfrey said and start to reduce sharpening and contrast a bit.

If I see my SL+ 24-90 + Telezoom + fast prime (50/1.4) vs the EM1II+12-100+17/1.8 ...wow, what a difference in bulk and weight.
I am not yet ready to give up the "big boys", but I pplan to use m43 more often again and see how I like IQ in a longer term.
The 12-100 is so flexible, I love it allready after 2 weeks of use.
Great to hear you like the 12-100, this lens is on my wish list anyway!

I would not dare comparing it to a Leica setup WRT IQ, but definitely the Olympus combo is much lighter and easier to carry around. Having said that IQ from the Oly is not bad and with the right lenses can become very good and satisfying.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
I want an E-M1.3 soon with improved shooting performance.
IQ is already sufficient with the excellent lenses I have.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Great to hear you like the 12-100, this lens is on my wish list anyway!

I would not dare comparing it to a Leica setup WRT IQ, but definitely the Olympus combo is much lighter and easier to carry around. Having said that IQ from the Oly is not bad and with the right lenses can become very good and satisfying.
I was torn between the much more compact 12-60 but finally decided for the 12-100. For kids and vacation the added range has been very usefull to me.

For my taste the Em1II and this lens fir very well together in regards of size. I read that the Pana G9 should be the better camera in many peoples opinion, but I allready knew the Oly interface and did not want to learn another new interface. Also I prefer the slightly smaller size of the Oly.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
I think it is expected beginning of 2019?
What do you miss in regards of shooting performace?
Way too slow electronic sensor/shutter readout times of about 1/50 or 1/60 s.
Gives rise to pronounced rolling shutter distortions when shooting Hummingbirds in Flight. In this case thrown back to the noisy mechanical shutter with slower frame rate. E-M1.3 should have blackout free EVF, like the Sony A9. A global electronic shutter should be achievable. Also would like AF tracking that actually works.
 

SrMphoto

Well-known member
IMO, the image quality of m43 made a leap forward with Em1-II and G9. I have no qualms about using them together with a medium format camera (yes, there is a difference in image quality).

On the rumor front, what I am reading is that Olympus is working on something completely new, not a successor to E-M1 or E-M5, but better. Will it be m43?
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
IMO, the image quality of m43 made a leap forward with Em1-II and G9. I have no qualms about using them together with a medium format camera (yes, there is a difference in image quality).

On the rumor front, what I am reading is that Olympus is working on something completely new, not a successor to E-M1 or E-M5, but better. Will it be m43?
For me the essential image quality leap came with the E-M5.
That improvement made all the difference.

Olympus needs to continue to deliver better m43 cameras to keep me interested.
For them to start another format , like Fuji did, is a separate issue.
For me Sony with the A9 camerawise has established the benchmark to beat.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Much smaller difference between modern M4/3 and APS-C but there’s a noticeable IQ difference (IMO) between the best Micro 4/3 and the best FF camera’s. For the aforementioned, I think the bigger question is do you prefer 4:3 or 3:2 aspect ratio? Both have great lenses but I’d stick to OEM native ones for AF and Voigtlander primes for fun. IMO M4/3 is the best size and system compromise and the IQ is nearly always “good enough.”

I personally always preferred the color from the Panasonic cameras but some prefer Olympus. It’s a subjective thing but something to consider.
 

Frankly

New member
I'm a former m4/3 user.

I think it is harder to make a good photo with the smaller sensor cameras, you have to be more careful to get the exposure within range. Focusing is easier on static subjects but moving subjects are harder too.

Carry a little more camera and have more latitude and freedom IMHO.
 

Knorp

Well-known member
I guess for most happy-snappers (like me :eek:) µ43 is more than enough most of the time with lesser bulk to boot.
But true, there's no denying the benefits of larger sensors.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Thanks Bart. A global electronic shutter (or close to it) would convince me to add another m43 camera to my collection - be it from Olympus or Panasonic. Panasonic seems to have a global shutter in their sights. Hopefully Olympus does as well. When? Whenever...
 

Knorp

Well-known member
Thanks Bart. A global electronic shutter (or close to it) would convince me to add another m43 camera to my collection - be it from Olympus or Panasonic. Panasonic seems to have a global shutter in their sights. Hopefully Olympus does as well. When? Whenever...
This supposedly new high-end uber-camera should be a major step-up to the EM1-II.
I wonder what feature or features would justify the higher ranking.

BTW - Global electronic shutter has its drawback, no ?
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
This supposedly new high-end uber-camera should be a major step-up to the EM1-II.
I wonder what feature or features would justify the higher ranking.

BTW - Global electronic shutter has its drawback, no ?

Well Bart thanks, please enlighten me, what are the drawbacks?
 
Top