Micro Four-Thirds is DEAD (Picture This! Podcast)

[@TonyAndChelsea]

One thing I should add: The M43 system was not designed for phase detect autofocus (PDAF). On-sensor PDAF wasn't around at the inception. As a result of this fundamental missing feature, there are zero M43 cameras that can keep up with Canon, Sony, and Fuji for sports, wildlife, action, and video tracking (and yes, we tested that camera you're thinking of). They can give future M43 cameras PDAF, but none of the existing M43 lenses have the focusing motors they need to take advantage of it, so no matter what, you'd basically be starting over.

[@aspzx]

I don't know... if they announced PDAF and a new set of a lenses, I can believe that would attract a new set of users to M43 who rely on PDAF, plus it might convince existing M43 users to upgrade their current set of lenses. As you say in the podcast, small sensor cameras are getting better with more advanced software. Why shouldn't small sensors, lightweight lenses with the best technology (PDAF) be the future of professional photography?

[@dieterr.799]

The Olympus OM-D E-M1 MKII does have Hybrid AF with 121-point On-chip Phase Detection AF (PDAF) and Contrast AF.

[@zurih]

Lenses with Focusing motors to take advantage of PDAF? Can you explain further? I never heard this before.

[@ronjopp7169]

@@mr.l6982 Tony is not interested in real results .... . He's just interested in clicks. His clickbait works ....

[@mr.l6982]

Yep, that thought crossed my mind LOL

[@eljayr4669]

I bought a four thirds camera yesterday. I am a pensioner and lugging around my Canon 100-400mm lens is sending me to an early grave. I am not a professional so picture quality isn’t an issue with me. I can’t tell the difference from my new Lumix camera to my Canon lenses anyway so it is win win.

[@la8920]

I come from the future, it hasn't died yet

[@thomasuriarte3182]

I am from the further future. Still not dead yet.

[@clem_chret]

@@thomasuriarte3182 I'm living in the future of the further future and it's still alive !

[@JuanAMatos-zx4ub]

Believe it or not, I'm from the even distant future. It's still alive!

[@jeffhampton7405]

@@JuanAMatos-zx4ubIt is, but barely. Sigma is dropping M43 from their lens lineup, the G9 ii is the only big m43 Panasonic release in the last couple years, and OM System is basically just firmware updates with a different logo. It’s still a great system and will be usable for a long time, but the R&D budget is almost $0 across the board.

[@brunodrakenas9575]

I AM THE FUTURE!! It’s still alive!

[@jeroen2082]

After this video Olympus launched the E-M1X, 12-200mm and is developing the 150-400 along with 5+ other lenses. Panasonic launched the G90 and 14-140mm II and is developing the 10-25mm. Sharp joined MFT consortium and will come with 8k camera.

[@gabl8a89]

in long run, I believe M43 will lose most of its market share due to FF hype. In a ever shrinking market, FF is gonna capture more stake due to peer pressure, unless Olympus find the other way to market their camera, M43 will not last long. However, that doesnt mean M43 followers will vanish,will For example, I was benefited from FF hype and almost all of m43 gears are from fleeing M43 users. By reselling unwanted gear, I was able to slowly upgrade my inventory to include 12 lenses and 6 M43 bodies. So far I'm happy with M43 system and has no intention to ditch the system.

[@jamesoren7238]

They also killed off the PEN F stating that people won't pay that much (which we knew) and that's kind of a problem. They really don't want to jump from their established platform... so it might be time to try something new. They've really carved out a market making brilliant mid level lenses. This channel loves to point out that whatever pro oly or panasonic lens they have to hand is about the same size as an equivalent entry level FF lens with the crop factor applied to it's numbers, because of physics, but often skip over the fact that oly have put a LOT more effort into theirs. IT's the real advantage of M43 right now - if you want smaller, ultraportable lenses ... they're by far and away the best at it because their pro leses and pany's leica lenses are what they use to sell the platform, not just kit lenses and budget options. What they don't have is the full size, low F number high performance lenses. You have to use a speed booster from another mount to get that. If Oly really want to keep M43 going, I think it's time to try and dance with the big boys. It's risky, so just start with the most popular lenses to test the waters, but it's the only thing I can really think of to build up some hype and bust the myth that it's just a beginner platform. Consumers have changed - people do not like buying things perceived to be for beginners these days. Also if you're going to drop that massive EM1X, for the love of god drop some glass to go with it. That should have absolutely come out with cannon sized/priced/quality lenses, and if they don't think there's a market for an Olympus 12-35 f1.4 or 42.5 f0.7 or whatever then they simply shouldn't have made the EM1X as far as I can tell. Nobody, anywhere is buying a $3000 or whatever it was camera body that has no native lenses anywhere near the quality that price point dictates

[@martinhommel9967]

Olympus are having a dreadful time

[@jamesoren7238]

@@martinhommel9967 In what sense? They just had a bad year due to not releasing any new models through 2018 due to moving production. We'll have to see how they do with the rumoured new hardware moving forward from likely october (their 100 years) to really get a feel for where they are.

[@martinhommel9967]

@@jamesoren7238 Sales have dropped considerably and the imaging department is currently loss making if reports are to be believed.

[@TeaJayPhotography]

People said this since the introduction of M43... ten years ago.

[@biggusbestus551]

and Tony sold it!

[@dp8460]

and after ten years.. the format is still alive.. why? because there are people who need this kind of format..

[@osiris4260]

I own full frame, aps-c and micro 4/3 I use each one accordingly, and of course my favorite travel camera is m4.3 is just so good at letting you move about with out people thinking you are some super pro photog with lots of expensive equipment. I go as far as changing all my neck straps to no name generic ones. @@dp8460

[@eagleeye8916]

Tony needs the views . He's running out of content.

[@thethirdman225]

Jared Polen was predicting it five years ago in a rambling podcast and he was still wrong.

[@ge48421]

Full frame is not a replacement for M4/3, mostly because of its volume and weight. You seem to assume that people buying smaller sensor cameras do not understand the trade-offs. Micro Four-thirds may be dead, but I doubt that a lot of these ‘dead’ cameras would be replaced by full frame gear, especially if the trend towards ever heavier lenses continues. I for one will not be lugging a heavy backpack like the one you took to Norway, Ansel Adams at least had a mule.

[@youknowwho9247]

Have you been to this comment section? Most MFT shooters do not understand the trade offs. It's a group of people brainwashed by marketing, consistently claiming that the image quality of MFT is 'just as good as full frame', that the noise performance is 'essentially identical' and that 'nobody needs dynamic range anyway'. Those are all quotes from MFT users in this exact comment section. MFT has a place if you absolutely need the smallest gear possible. But it's a niche product that most people shouldn't buy because of its huge compromises as far as quality of results goes.

[@youknowwho9247]

@@OmarZ77 First of all, crop sensor lenses are neither smaller nor lighter than full frame alternatives when they bring equivalent optical performance to the table, because physics can't be cheated. Full frame is also consistently the most cost efficient option when comparing equal glass. The smaller size and cheaper price of some crop sensor gear isn't magic, it comes from the fact that their optical performance is below what's deemed acceptable on full frame, therefore equivalents don't exist. Second, with the advent of full frame mirrorless, kits can be decently small and light. And even with DSLRs, I don't know where this myth that full frame isn't portable enough comes from. If you're serious about photography and doing landscapes in particular, you're carrying a tripod anyway. That means you've got a backpack with you more likely than not. Does it really matter to you whether your backpack weighs one or two kilos more or less? Is that little bit of convenience really worth the huge hit in image quality you're taking by shooting crop sensor? Especially for landscapes, you want all the detail and dynamic range and the least noise you can get. To stay with the Fuji as a point of comparison: My D850 gets about twice the resolution, a good stop more dynamic range and three stops less noise at base ISO than any Fuji APS-C camera. I can also drop down all the way to ISO 32 for longer exposures without ND, and have highlight weighted metering to ettr perfectly every time on the first try. Those things make a huge difference in usability and the quality of the final images. I'd certainly not give that up to carry weight equivalent to a water bottle less in my backpack. Lastly, and I can't this stress enough - KZbinrs are not representative of what professional photography looks like. Those people you mentioned are influencers, first and foremost. If someone makes most of their money primarily by posting videos rather than selling images, it makes perfect sense to care about weight more than image quality. However, for photographers who actually live off the quality of their images, consumer grade solutions like APS-C and MFT simply come with too many drawbacks. There's a reason why 95+% of pros shoot full frame, and why the industry as a whole is moving towards larger sensors and away from crop solutions. Those people you mentioned who're going the other direction are part of a very tiny minority that's way, way overrepresented on the internet. Also keep in mind that the term 'influencer' exists for a reason. Companies know that popular online personalities influence consumers. You don't know who's paying whom to say or shoot what. As such, advice on the internet is to be taken with a grain of salt and not to be trusted blindly, especially when the KZbinr in question only advocates for one specific company's system. If you take a second look, you'll notice that most of the people who highlight the advantages of full frame and use it for their own stills work usually have a history of going from one system to another, or even use gear from several different manufacturers at the same time. Those advocating for crop sensors however, Fuji and MFT in particular, tend to use and promote only one single company's gear. That's usually accompanied by some emotional 'why I switched' story and lots of talk why the advantages of the new system are ground breaking while at the same time downplaying the disadvantages, if they're even mentioned. Andy Mumford is a good example, even though this is widespread and singling him out is a little unfair. When was the last time you've seen him make a video that praised or even talked about a camera manufacturer that isn't Fuji, but offers competing products? Now, why would a photographer be so loyal to one particular brand that he won't even acknowledge, say, the strides Sony has been making with af recently? Interesting, isn't it?

[@youknowwho9247]

@@OmarZ77 You seem to be confused on a number of fronts. First of all, a 35mm f/3 full frame lens doesn't exist because nobody would buy it, not because it's difficult to make. We get 24-70mm f/2.8 zooms, nobody in the full frame world would go for a slower prime. Given the fact that you'd require a whole bunch of primes to get the same optical performance on a Fuji, it's pretty safe to say that the full frame zoom is the more convenient deal. And yes, it is a huge hit in image quality. Again, a D850 gets twice the resolution, a good stop more dynamic range and three stops cleaner images at base ISO than the X-T3. Then again, if you're the type of person who actually believes a tripod is optional for serious landscape photography it's no wonder you're happy with the consumer grade results of the Fuji. Good for you. I did test the X-T3 extensively because of the hype, and found especially the noise performance severely lacking for landscapes. At ISO 200 there's very noticeable grain in primary colors and shadows, especially when you've raised them in post. Does the Fuji make decent images? Yes. Are they good enough for causal use and social media? Absolutely. Can they compete with a top end full frame? Not by a long shot, there are worlds of difference between the two. You've also not understood the bit about influencers. Their whole game is that they don't disclose who's sponsoring them, and make it subtle enough for you not to realize they're marketers. I'm not saying the two particular KZbinrs you mentioned do that. The point is neither of us has any way of knowing whether any given KZbinr is paid by any manufacturer. As such, you shouldn't necessarily get camera buying advice on this platform. You can also look for clues as to how likely it is that an online personality is affiliated with a company, and using only one company's gear is a decent indicator I'd say. I'm not saying he should buy tons of Sony gear, but if he's only using Fuji he has no point of comparison and isn't a useful reference for comparative camera advice. It's also remarkable how much you cherry pick. There are many, many more professional photographers who are using full frame gear than crop sensor gear. Why are the people you mentioned, who just so happen to shoot the same stuff as you, authorities to be listened to, even though they represent a tiny minority among professionals? Why aren't you listening to the vast majority of pro shooters who use full frame? Put bluntly, there's a lot of confirmation bias in your way of arguing. You bought a Fuji and you want to feel good about that decision. Well, that's fine. You can feel good about it. It's a good camera. It's just not going to deliver image quality that can compete with high res full frame options which cost more than twice as much. Which is perfectly fine. The X-T3 is a consumer grade camera, and a fantastic piece of kit in that sector.

[@ajinkyathorat7502]

@@youknowwho9247 I would recommend jumping from M43 to medium format. You will see better dynamic range and sharpness plus crop factor and bokeh compare to full frame. If he want to be professional photographer.

[@friatankar]

He can carry that heavy gear if he wants to, but maybe he'll get arthritis like me by carrying heavy gear.

[@OrlandoPla]

The older I get the more I love the M43 systems .... and I am seeing where I live more photographers as they reach the golden age switching to M43. The less weight you carry the more you can walk, the smaller the camera bag, the easier it it to have your camera all the time with you. The safer you feel that your camera will not be stolen. And if you look like a tourist the less problems you have where there are people, policemen and people asking if you have a permit or asking who do you work for. Then you have the cost factor of lenses .... more money on the savings account than on glass and the faster you reach your ROI if you are a microstock photographer. M43 should be the camera for the masses or at least for people like me over 62. With lighter cameras you do not need heavy tripods nor heavy gimbals .... This is similar to owning a gun .... the lighter the gun the more time that it will be in your pocket.

[@gasdive]

All that would be true, if the basic premise, that m4/3 systems are lighter was true. But since it isn't true, that pretty much goes out the window. Put a 40 mm f/2.8 USM pancake on a 6d and you've got something just as small and light.

[@OrlandoPla]

@@gasdive I left Canon ... and I am very happy I did.

[@gasdive]

@@OrlandoPla Your happiness doesn't alter the facts. I don't dispute that you can shoot m4/3 and be happy. I dispute that m4/3 is lighter for an equivalent system. Sell the Canon, buy m4/3 by all means, but the same trade off of weight for quality could have been made and stayed FF.

[@gasdive]

@@OrlandoPla oh, and equivalent glass is generally far more expensive for m4/3.

[@OrlandoPla]

@@gasdive ¡Wow! ... you really want to start an argument. You most be a fanatic.

[@BobK58]

My EM-10 makes me happy. That's all that matters.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

True! I love the E-M10, and even in our last "Which camera should I buy?" video, we feature it (sdp.io/whichcamera).

[@mr.l6982]

Great choice- I love that camera!

[@JeremyGalloway]

Bob Klarquist I honestly want to see no camera brand disappear. They are all unique. Olympus is so special and the colors are so pleasing. Honestly Sony is the only brand I wouldn’t mind disappearing lol. Maybe Canon and Nikon could merge in the future as well, wouldn’t mind that at all.

[@mr.l6982]

Good points Jeremy!

[@CDNChaoZ]

@@JeremyGalloway I would pay an exorbitant amount for a modern full-frame OM-1 with Olympus' sensor stabilization. Especially if they have an adapter for OM lenses.

[@giorgosg8760]

2021. What you say is nonsense. M4/3 is not dead and we expect new cameras and lenses from Panasonic and Olympus. Btw what kind of truck and crane you recommend for the full frame gear?

[@youseftomar]

Update from 25-10-2020: M4/3 is alive and kicking and I am in love with my new EM1 mk ii and its 45mm 1.2 lens.

[@nkf_gh]

For this nonsense I just bought and MFT 🤣

[@laurencegr9978]

Totally.

[@youknowwho9247]

I'm sure you're purchase will save the system. Never mind that the market share of MFT, which is already minuscule, is shrinking rapidly.

[@leventeberkeczi]

Landscope 360 I just bought an Olympus camera also so he and me??? Just us you think??? Just because Olympus has four kind of camera and like canon has way more doesn’t mean that Olympus is dead!!! Just because Apple jade iPhone and others are android based doesn’t mean Apple will die!!! Isn’t???

[@youknowwho9247]

@Aaron NoneYa I think you're misjudging the state of the market. Olympus is dead. Panasonic ditched MFT for stills in favour of full frame. The demand for MFT stills cameras is virtually zero, and a few people who need the smallest possible system due to very niche constraints won't keep the system alive. What's more, mirrorless full kits can be just as light and portable. It all depends on lens design. An MFT f/2.8 lens does the same as a full frame f/5.6 lens, which would be equally small and light.

[@patraulea84]

And im sure you don't regret, i personaly just love olympus,is so good as other camera's and a lot more cheap, a combo em1x+300mm its just 4500 euro, while newest sony FF are 4000 euro only the body, and is much more heavy

[@alandimery3379]

If the M43 system is to die, which I don't think it will, I am glad I got in with my Panasonic G9. This, along with the 100-400 lens, allows me to do what I cannot do with any other camera. That is to enjoy photography. Mainly wildlife, but other genre as well are enjoyable with this system because I can get home without a back ache. Photography to the non-professional is all about enjoyment and this system gives it to me. BTW why is the Panasonic G9 a taboo subject with you. Is it because it is so good you cannot put an argument to lessen it's high quality, build, usability and features. It is that good an M43 stills camera that you cannot even bare to mention it's name.

[@colininglis8918]

probably, I have not got the bank account to justify full frame equivalent of what you have, also I have a g9 plus the same lens as yourself, the video was written 3 years ago, its now nearly 2023 and the g9 still performs well, agree with all your comments ta

[@tearitloosetearitloose4670]

Well said.. the G9 is a cracking camera coming into 2023.

[@wherezthebeef]

G9 is every bit as much a 'Legend' as Nikon D700 ... it literally kills Full Frame snobs that something as good as the G9 exists, sort of shatters their world view...

[@MichaelCozineSounds]

Make more videos like this so it drives down the value of MFT gear on the used market and makes me a happy lad :)

[@fraufuchs9555]

Hahaha I was thinking the same.

[@scottydmonbot01]

my phone also takes great cameras ;)

[@rainerbuesching1]

my camera doesn't take any phones - so I like it better than my phone, which eats cams.

[@PossMcLeod]

haha I was going to post that too but assumed others had posted already. I wish my phone took great cameras, wouldn't have to lug around my giant camera bags :P

[@groovymotion5706]

And don't forget that with the Pixel 3XL you will get a notch above! 😂

[@JuggleZephyr]

At 10:25 you compare a kit lens with a pro grade lens, it might compare with equivalence calculation, however not in build quality or optical quality. m4/3 has some unique offering if you take that in account. As someone who travels and walk a lot for wildlife photography, in all kind of environment (Mountains, deserts, rainforests...) and weather, I value that a lot. Is there a pro grade weather sealed 24-70 f5.6 from the full frame guys ? Is there a 600mm f8 ("equ." of the oly 300mm f4)pro grade weather sealed as well ? a weather sealed 120mm f5.6 2:1 macro ("equ." of the oly 60mm macro) ? a 200-800mm f8-f12 ("equ." to the pana 100-400) ? a pro weather sealed 80-300mm f5.6 ("equ." of the oly 40-150mm) ? Actually for this one canon has the 70-300L I think. and there is many other example. In my opinion m4/3 simply shine when it comes to travel/hiking/wildife photography.

[@jay4627]

Thank you for pointing out the obvious. Tony is such a tool bag with these half assed comparisons where shallow DOF is the only thing that matters

[@leanderhoefler7054]

Definitely, because not everybody want shallow dof. For landscapes I‘m so happy to have that 2x crop factor that enables me to shoot at f4 all the time while getting all the dof I need

[@filipmartin9642]

that's exactly what I think. i think it's easier to make sharp lens from corner to corne for m43 sensor than for full frame sensor.

[@GodfreyMann]

That’s fine if you’re happy with not being able to print as large as full-frame and the poorer low-light performance (you have to square the crop factor for FF ISO equivalence i.e. MFT ISO 200 = FF ISO 800).

[@JuggleZephyr]

@@GodfreyMann I know that I could get better IQ with a FF setup, however I value more the ability to carry around all my gear during my hikes and travel. Frankly the IQ of MFT is vastly underestimated. And don't forget that you can print just as big as FF with a MFT, because of viewing distance. So unless you want a super detailed print that you can view from a few centimeters only, mft is perfectly fine.

[@rockrat440]

Tony, I have enjoyed some of your videos although I don't always agree with you. This video however is irresponsible. You have a rather large voice in the online photography community, and you choose to use it to take a self-serving cheap shot at an entire format. You support a personal opinion with some very logical sounding arguments, some of which have more merit than others. You could have titled this video "Future of Micro Four Thirds" and presented some opinions and predictions - but you instead pronounce M43 dead for click-bait to boost your ratings - no matter what the consequences for Olympus or Panasonic or their users. If you and other vloggers work at it you can make this a self-fulfilling prophecy. Congratulations - you will have destroyed a very cool system. If M43 is to fail and die, it should be because it could not compete in the marketplace and did not fill the needs of enough photographers - not because new users were scared off by wild predictions. Remember the Alar scare? Although totally safe, environmentalist groups started spreading the idea that Alar, a safe chemical used to treat apple trees, was a genuine health concern. Regardless the fact that was total nonsense, that hoax cost the apple industry over 100 million dollars. Not everyone wants full frame - I sold all my FF Canon gear (5DM3 and L Glass) and went to M43 over a year ago and I have no intention of going back. Your assertion that there is no size/weight savings with M43 is just plain wrong. There is no way you will be able to get anything in FF as small and light as a M43 body and a set of 1.8 primes. You purport that you make videos and write books to help people learn photography. Maybe you can get back to that. As soon as I post this comment I will be unfollowing your channel and FB page.

[@clayknowles7382]

It's just a KZbin video with one guys opinion. Take it or leave it. Don't get a rash over it.

[@rockrat440]

So, I am the one that's rash here?

[@photobillyexplores]

same, won't be watching any more of his videos.

[@Tig510Tig]

Clay Knowles, Its not just a video when it comes to someone big in photography world because people trust his opinion and will take his word as gospel. Someone as big as him could potentially steer away hundred of thousands of dollars from M4/3 platform and maybe even help its demise. 👎🏻

[@grahamfloyd3451]

@@rockrat440 Alar, still being illegal to use on food crops, is a terrible analogy to attempt. The comment and unfollow act is cliched tripe. Otherwise your counter-argument is fine. There is more value in paying attention to an argument you dislike than surrounding yourself with confirmation bias content.

[@axeltorreta9959]

Funny how the man talks about sales& revenues and not present actual facts and figures to support his claim. And mention Budget, R&d, innovation etc if he isnt even running a company or business of his own. Panasonic is a very big company. Olympus and Pana have been the leaders in innovation for introducing good image quality (photos and videos) with a smaller sensor and lighter, mobile, and more portable and cheaper system. FF will have one or two advantages over m43 i understand but thats it. Its a good system but its only for few people, definitely not for everybody.

[@CallMeChato]

The stampede to FF is irrational insofar that many camera buyers are dilettantes who will vacation with family and their massive lens collection and the cameras will be deposited in a closet and rarely used next to the fondue set. Taking out my Canon was a chore. Since buying my pathetic G85 two years ago I have rarely kept it out of reach. It is a joy to use. While I don’t disagree with your prognosis I will be buying a G9 tomorrow as there isn’t a 13x19 printer that can resolve the sharpness and the dynamic range of even a G85. Logic be damed.

[@joanarling]

I am 64, and I have both APSC and FF. If I were to start anew, I would certainly choose MFT. Better to live with the limitations of that system, than not to be able to carry my camera bag.

[@karls6802]

TITLE - Title - title! Tony, I was sorry to see you choose that title. Words matter, you know that, and in these troubling times more so then ever. “Micro Four-Thirds is DEAD” is meant to shock, But sadly, it’s the kind of hyperbole title used by those on the lower rungs of the needier youtube world desperate for attention. I expect a more measure presentation from you. “Don’t shoot the massager” is rather disingenuous when you deliver your message in a rather harsh fait accompli style. I believe, like the many comments below it was needlessly so. I know you use 4/3 and C sensor gear but you clearly favor full frame. This is were I believe you missed the mark and were rather tone-deaf to a sector of your subscribers and those who respect your advice. I suspect if you go back and listen again to your episode you might hear it too. Your main point was cost. Why buy 4/3 when the cost of full frame keeps dropping. Underlying that assertion is 1) full frame is way superior! 2) And, of course everyone wants full frame...they just couldn’t afford it. but, now that prices are coming down, there will soon be no need for anything but full frame and your camera/phone. What you left out & didn’t touch on: 1) Weight - I came from 35mm film to digital using c-sensor Canon. Two years ago I purchase an Olympus E-M 5 mkII and by the end of six months my heavy backpack with my Canon T2i gear including four lens was at home sitting in the corner permanently. Replaced by a small, light weight and very compact shoulder camera bag carrying my E-M 5 mkII with four lens. Because of this form factor my E-M 5 mkII is with me far more frequently and in many more places than my Canon gear ever was. 2) Cost - Full Frame bodies have come down but the cost of full frame lens is still quite high in many cases very high. There is a lot of weight and bulk in FF lens, another negative factor. 3) Quality - the quality of 4/3 cameras and lens has proven to very good to excellent. Summing up: Even if the cost for camera & lens were to become the same for 4/3 and FF I would not choose the FF because of the advantages the 4/3 offers that you over looked or deemed as of little value. The 4/3 offers: Weight, size, and excellent photo quality, allow me to carry a very small and light camera bag. Most importantly because of these features it’s with me! As I’ve gotten older the three most important factors besides image quality have become weight, size and 5 axis stabilization. So if 4/3 goes away I will not be buying and lugging around a FF camera. Ergonomics - the wonderful feel of a camera in your hands vs the slippery wafer-thin over-sized flat rectangle called a phone. I like the phone for its immediacy but I love the feel and controls of my E-M 5 mkII in my hands. Lastly I hope you will find a more tempered and generous way to communicate your opinion and ideas when you decide to take down a camera form.

[@Bolton115]

$Karl S Agreed. My Oly gear has great ergonomics, and it is smaller and lighter than even my Fuji X-E1, itself not a giant among cameras. I've gotten some really great images with even the older, lower end E-PL1, mainly because of its size *it was always with me* versus a bigger camera and lens combo. The best camera for a job is the camera you have.. M43 makes it easy for that camera to be in this format.

[@buckfynn]

Micro Four-Thirds Is Dead = Click Bait BS

[@youknowwho9247]

Modern full frames are almost as compact as MFT, and the image quality and autofocus are miles ahead. There's simply no reason to shoot MFT anymore, unless you're going on an expedition where you absolutely have to have the smallest gear possible, or are 75 and have a bad back. Anyone else can just carry the half kilo a full frame kit outweighs an MFT kit and get rewarded with much higher quality results.

[@adamvaz9097]

Landscope 360 man I see you everywhere, if you like full frame embrace it man, if someone else like MFT let them, it's honestly hard to tell the difference in image quality unless you've cropped in and put them side by side. Not up to professional grade standard, but anyone who isn't a professional doesn't have full frame cash to drop on a good lens and body.

[@youknowwho9247]

@@adamvaz9097 I'm perfectly fine with people shooting whatever format they want. What I can't stand is people spreading misinformation and marketing nonsense. MFT isn't up to full frame standards in terms of technical image quality. That's just a fact. If someone tells me they shoot a smaller system for the convenience - great. But don't go around telling people who're looking to get their first camera that MFT is "just as good as full frame" and that there's "no visible difference" in terms of quality. Those are just false statements that can lead a beginner to make bad decisions.

[@sephirotic87]

Jesus Christ, no one claims that m43 gets the same performance/noise ratio than FF. The point is compactness, it has always been. If you want bigger why not go Medium Format with a Hasselblad? M43 is good enough and has the ideal bang for buck for enthusiasts, videographers or street photographers on a budget.

[@RaghunandanReddyC]

Is it though? Apsc cameras are about the same size.

[@ryanhamstra49]

I’m not sure whether it’s center size, or just the amount of effort that Lumix has put into making their cameras good for videography, but my GH4 is is impressively close to my brothers Sony aiii. Even after we mixed the clips together into the video it was hard to tell which was which and no one who doesn’t do video would notice.

[@risingtide_official]

This isn't aging well.

[@kevinroberts9999]

Can't see a FF camera replacing my pany G9 and 100-400 anytime soon as a walkaround setup in the mountains. I agree with the aperture (and DOF) equivalence disadvantages for MFT with current tech, but if future MFT sensors could be 4 times as sensitive then the light gathering ability (and noise) would then equal current FF. You could also achieve this effect with high speed stacking for each image...

[@jeffreytong]

TechnoBabble for photography, you can get by with much less stabilization using the larger, more sensitive sensor. The best middle ground is currently the Fujifilm X-T3. It's very close to the full frame sensors while benefiting from a more compact package.

[@oBCHANo]

When you start saying shit like "lower heat" to justify M43 you're just admitting it's dead.

[@jasone2240]

FF won't but phones will - they will eat everything up to apsc.

[@tosvus]

@@TechnoBabble How much do you need? Does the Porsche get you to accelerate fast enough and keep up with the speed limits, or do you really need a Ferrari? If you don't drive on a racetrack, do you really need anything more? Most people can get unbelievably good results in most situations with m43 equipment. The biggest risk of m43 going away is people like Tony telling everyone that they are - not because they are inferior cameras (at least not in a way that matters in most situations)

[@terrycullinane5963]

@@jeffreytong APS is not very close to FF & it's much easier to stabilise smaller sensor cameras than larger ones.

[@Astrolavista]

An interesting theory Tony. I'm personally hoping m43 has a bit more life left in it. Let me know when your phone has 5 axis IBIS, interchangeable lenses, and an M43 sized sensor, EVF, physical dials and a grip like a proper camera....I could go on. You make a good point regarding concerns about Panasonic splitting R&D between M43 and FF, but I can only hope they consider their fan base....M43 is still extremely versatile for hybrid shooter like myself. My G80 won't be going anywhere soon, it's just far too useful in so many ways.

[@PJ-ku5lp]

Sure, they may ditch the smaller format, but I would doubt its because they couldn't handle R&D for two lines. With Sigma and Leica developing the lenses, it's all a matter of scaling features between the systems. Heck, Fuji makes their own glass and seems to be doing just fine with two formats.

[@dengor45hd48]

You missed the point; the smartphone is good enough for most people, is what he said. And it is, because those people don't want to be encumbered by all the features you mentioned. You pretty much have to be an enthusiast to spend the money, learn photography, and spend the time required to be able to produce decent results with any camera system. Smartphone users have it all at their fingertips, actually much more than in any camera system.

[@Astrolavista]

Dengor - Want to take a picture of a distant bird resting on a roof, phone user gets the ladder out and the camera user slaps on a 300mm lens. In real life the phone user just wouldn't bother because they ain't that into photography else they'd have a camera. No phone users don't have everything at their fingertips unless we're talking phone only features and not photography whatsoever? want to take a picture of a distant galaxy? camera user attaches camera to a long prime or telescope using t-adaptor and stacks a bunch of 120second exposures, good luck trying that afocal with a phone, so again they don't have everything at their fingertips unless it's just phone features? These smaller chipped cameras do fill a purpose between phones and full frame as not every 'photographer' want's the weight and expense of full frame, so I feel it would be a shame if they go.

[@dengor45hd48]

Put all that in your phone and most people would leave it at home. That's a very weak argument for cameras. I still have a camera, but I certainly don't take it with me unless it's for a specific reason, it's too clumsy, and obvious. There are also so many places you can take a smartphone that ban cameras. It's just life, you shouldn't feel threatened by these little phones, there'll always be cameras and big, clunky, expensive lenses. However, from my personal experience, and it's unfortunate, they're becoming less and less accepted at many events. What an irrelevant thing to say; phones don't have telescopes; reminds me of the saying, none of the super telescopes looking for intelligent life are pointing at earth.@@Astrolavista

[@Astrolavista]

It's a weak argument in your opinion, and you keep missing my point completely lol, the telephoto lens was only one of many examples. I'll try and put my point as simply as possible because I'm obviously not being clear enough. all I'm doing is suggesting M43 and other small sensor cameras fill a market between phones with tiny sensors and fixed tiny lenses and big full frame cameras with massive lenses. I don't think they will die out because of this market gap. I'm really pleased for you that you find your phone is enough, but try and realise that you're not speaking for everyone, there are other people with other needs.

[@noahwood8411]

An obsession with a blurred background is a sign of an amateur... It has it uses but is seriously overused these days... It takes much greater skill to work with a background than it does to simply blur it out...

[@rumporridge1]

noah wood I guess my clients just paid me big money for my amateur bokeh. Go figure :-)

[@noahwood8411]

@@rumporridge1 Hopefully your clients are paying for your skill as a photographer regardless of bokeh :-)

[@rumporridge1]

noah wood now I definitely respect that. I certainly hope so. But of course I’m always learning and evolving. I listen to you and everyone in this craft. But yes, there are times when one needs to stop down to decrease dof. Lol but u must admit creamy bokeh taste good :)

[@gabl8a89]

totally agree, I have the tendency of taking bokehicious photos, but I often ask myself, what is the point of doing the same repetitive process? is there something else I could do to provide better highlight of a subject? Then I learn about light and shadow, then I learn about motion blur, panning the lens, and now, I know a good kit lens can be as good as a F2.8 Pro lens in many situations. Nowadays, i prefer my do anything 17mm F1.8, 20mm F1.7 & 25mm F1.4 nifty leica over a highly priced but quickly depreciating PRO lens.

[@A.P.1821]

Bokeh and pixel peeping are the pillars of Full Frame propaganda...

[@videojeroki]

Let me shot the "messenger" here. You cannot compare yourself to weather guy that actualy report a weather prediction that has been computed and analyzed by thousands of engineers and scientists. You tell what you thing with very poor evidences or proofs. Plus, if everyone start to title their articles or videos "Micro Four-Third is DEAD", then yes it will be dead, but not because of itself, but because of bad publicity (like yours). Words mean something, and I'm sure you know it. Sorry Tony, I like your stuff. But I would be Olympus or Panasonic, I would take actions again that kind of claims because it is misinformation that may affect my business and so my employees.

[@dukenukem5768]

I'm a FF fan, not M43, but this comment is bang on. People are influenced far too much by the opinions of media people - including KZbin makers.

[@silbay]

No children are influenced by KZbin makers adults have other sources of information and realize that KZbin like Facebook is where mediocre video comes to live and is slurped up by millennials that don't have a clue about life.

[@BikeLife154]

M4/3 was dead years ago to photographers.

[@rossthefiddler5890]

I would not be sad if Olympus, Panasonic or resellers of MFT gear did take legal action over this video & its title with the effects it might have on sales. It's as bad as wild headlines of less than trust worthy news papers/media. They get sued at times too!

[@Brianuyahoo]

Yet, the weather guy is the original “fake news” .. and many have gone on to become comedians! . Where the can make stuff up and get away with it. Wrong weather forecast: “Hey dude! Did you actually look outside when you reported that BS?”

[@watchandproduce]

Here is what I would like to know. What are you going to do if your predictions about MFT prove to be dead wrong? Are you going to create a public video in two years from now where you admit it? MFT is the only universal mount that any manufacturer can join and receive published specs for. It's not just about Olympus and Panasonic, it's about Blackmagic (they have both sd-card less studio cameras and the updated pocket camera) that are actively being sold, DJI, industrial camera manufacturers, it's quite a long list. The only thing I see is that more companies are adopting this very universal and compact format. In my eyes there are so many things with your arguments (like comparing a 3.5 to a 2.8. a 2.8 is a 2.8 ...) but frankly my feeling is that they format doesn't work for you so you assume it can't work for anyone else. Ultimately the people who receive the photos and the photographer that have to be happy with the results. The way I shoot MFT is definitely lighter and more compact than anything comparable from full frame. And yes I shoot a lot of lowlight and ambient. I'm super happy with Micro Four Thirds and will continue to buy lenses and camera bodies. Because it works for me. Sucks that it doesn't work for you. So can you stop crapping all over the format and trying to ruin it for everyone else? Or is your motivation to publish videos like this one just about click-bait and driving up views. You don't seem to get M43/MFT and I just don't get you. For anyone looking for Tony for advice on this format he's wrong. Instead spend a few moments with an Olympus or Panasonic camera. In Europe for example you can rent an Olympus camera and body for a few days for free. Try it and don't let individual KZbinrs make up your mind for you.

[@bibzang]

And also wrong in lens filter video

[@laurencegr9978]

I've finally reached the point where I don't care about the gear anymore. I'll go shoot and enjoy whatever camera that's with me. Savor the discussion guys. 👋

[@CreativeExperiments1]

So now we're all supposed to carry giant duffle bags and cases because all cameras will be huge? M43rds is still better than a smartphone for telephoto and macro video/photography, even anamorphic, and I don't want to carry around huge equipment.

[@gasdive]

Did you watch the video? The cameras and lenses are about the same size.

[@Reyfox1]

did you watch the video? I guess the 300mm M43 is the same size as a 600mm FF lens. He showed just one example where it is.

[@bryjam]

They really aren't, Tony chose a very unfair example. The G9 is massive for a M43 camera and he completely ignored the plethora of tiny prime lenses.

[@gasdive]

@@Reyfox1 The 600mm and the 300mm lenses are completely different equivalent apertures. *equivalent* lenses are about the same size.

[@gasdive]

@@bryjam If you want to include tiny primes, fine, but compare them to equivalent primes. Have a look at a micro 4/3 20mm f/1.4 vs a Canon 40mm f/2.8 for their FF camera. They're the same size (well close).

[@michaelhall2709]

Well, I have to admit to a certain feeling of melancholy about all this, as the Northrups have always struck me as nice people and I can at least partially credit their blog with reviving my long-dormant interest in photography in the first place. But when Tony begins by stating - somewhat disingenuously, in my opinion - “Don’t shoot the messenger,” he might reasonably consider the fact that viewers like myself who have invested thousands of dollars in these systems might not take kindly to his purely speculative assessment that they have wasted their money. Or, indeed, that given the size of his audience such speculation can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. I understand that he hasn’t thought much of this format for some time, though I’ll credit him for producing some very useful videos on how to use the cameras nevertheless. But it seems to me a pretty foolhardy business to alienate a fairly significant portion of your viewership in service of a click-worthy headline that is, at best, an educated guess as to what might happen years in the future. One last thing: I have to say that I also find this post representative of the fetishization of gear I see infecting far too many KZbin blogs devoted to the subject of photography. Speaking only for myself, as an amateur who hopes to continually improve and eventually capture the kind of images that will make the investment of time and money worthwhile, I find the videos of a Thomas Heaton or Adam Gibbs, which emphasize lighting, composition, and a simple love of being in the moment, infinitely more valuable and inspirational than endless patter about megapixels or focusing systems. So, I guess, it’s time to move on. And sincerely, thanks for everything. 😊👋

[@jaujud]

Year late but I recommend you check out Sean Tucker channel on KZbin. He has quite unique content in photography field.

[@blazingheartproductions]

I completely agree with the gear worship. I first began studying photography in 1988 and so much has changed, which is expected, but most disappointing is so much crass sponsorship and ad-like gear elitism that has taken over the entire field. Maybe it’s the way it’s all going, but I won’t be following.

[@tearitloosetearitloose4670]

@@blazingheartproductions here here. It's sickening.

[@masterjeyt]

I'm actually very happy to have moved from FF to m43. I took my FF for sensor cleaning the other day and I think I just hurt my shoulder shooting with it again.

[@camerafann]

just switch from canon full frame to micro four thirds, so happy with olympus!

[@watchandproduce]

Welcome to MFT. It's a great system.

[@derJackistweg]

same for me, PEN F. But that actually is not a clever move and does not change what Tony said: It is dead.

[@ajinkyathorat7502]

@@derJackistweg How, its dead When it clearly outsold most of the companies in Japan. i am not m43 user though. I have tested their camera for any matter.

[@danieljcox]

Who knows you might be right. But without a doubt your ongoing negativity About MFT will certainly be at least partially responsible for your self fulfilling prophecy. You can offer all the disclaimers you want about not shooting the messenger but in the end you have a lot of power to influence people and that can change the market. Additionally, your claim that the Nikon 600mm and the Olympus 300 mm are not the same is technically true but I know many, many photographers that are perfectly happy with the two lenses being relatively close at a fraction of the cost and weight. I for one wished you would stop being so negative on MFT. If it dies so be it, but please stop working to shove it over the edge under the guise of helping people truly understand. Just my two cents.

[@gasdive]

If you think they're close and the quality doesn't matter, you can just buy a 600 mm f/8 FF lens for a couple of hundred.

[@eurobum2012]

Good point. If it's not what you want, Tony, then why try to convince people that it's not worthile?

[@watchandproduce]

Fortunately, ... just looking by the reaction in the comments ... people will take what Tony says on the matter with a grain of salt and make up their own minds. MFT isn't going anywhere. More manufacturers than ever support the mount and the range of lenses is extensive.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

I don't believe that this is a self-fulfilling prophecy at all; Panasonic already developed a FF camera system. This has been unfolding for many years. If I made a series of videos talking about how MFT was the future, I'd sell a few cameras maybe, but I don't believe for a second that I could shift the entire future of the lens mount. And if you like the 300mm f/4, there are plenty of slower FF telephoto lenses that have a similar size, weight, and cost. Having shot them side-by-side, I *much* prefer a D500 + Nikon 200-500 over an E-M1 Mk II + 300mm f/4. The Nikon's focusing is much faster (especially tracking flying birds), the background separation is better (really important when shooting in cluttered environments like the woods) and the images are sharper and cleaner.

[@watchandproduce]

@@TonyAndChelsea i think that's the issue in a nutshell. You prefer Nikon. It's o.k. to admit it. But that doesn't mean that shooting M43 isn't a valid choice for those that prefer it. And background separation on a telephoto at 300mm (600mm equivalent if you are comparing the Olympus) is an issue? On a Telephoto??? Using your comparison the Olympus has 100mm more range. Plus 6.5 axis images stabilization if shooting with an EM1 MK2. So once again an Apples to Oranges comparison to me.

[@DanniPortillo]

2021 and the M43 cameras are still here.

[@BrentODell]

Noise level is about pixel density, that's a real thing, and there isn't any way around that. The background blur thing, however, drive me nuts. It presupposes that shallow depth of field is GOOD, and deep depth of field is BAD, which is absurd, and everyone who's every shot something like landscapes knows this. Yes, the option for shallow DOF is nice, but the idea that if you can't get super bokeh the system is useless is insane. Also, since the best camera is the one you have with you, there is NO WAY anyone who isn't on safari will have that giant, $13k lens with them. I took a 200-500 5.6 Nikon out to Colorado and carried it around the mountains for a week. When I came home I sold my D500 and got a Panasonic G9. When people say that, for example, the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 is the equivalent of a 90mm f/3.6(3.5?), that may be true, in a sense, however... by that logic, the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 is ALSO a 90mm f/3.5. That's how the f number works. A crop sensor crops the image, optically. That's it, that's all it does. The smaller sense/denser pixels means more noise, but that's the case across the board. Every generation gets better, and the new micro 4/3 cameras out perform older full-frame cameras, and no one thought they were crap.

[@Bayonet1809]

Incorrect, a sensor with greater pixel density can just apply some pixel binning, down-sampling, and more aggressive NR to achieve the same result as a lower pixel density sensor of the same size. Sensor size is what is important.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

You can always just use slower, smaller FF lenses - plenty of lightweight options exist. No need to compare small MFT lenses to huge FF lenses. "the new micro 4/3 cameras out perform older full-frame cameras" Well, the E-M1 II is pretty close to the original Canon 5D from 2005... but the 5D Mk II (2008) still solidly beats the best MFT cameras. So you could say MFT is about 13 years behind FF, except that sensor technology improvement has levelled off, and MFT sensors will almost certainly always use the same tech as FF sensors.

[@BrentODell]

Fair enough, but the fact remains that comparing the image quality of a lens the size of a small child and the price of a good used car vs a $1500-ish lens that's about the size of a liter of water isn't really apples to apples, either. As I said, the best camera is the one you have with you(pretty sure you've said as much in the past), and there are very few people who will have that lens with them. I have my G9 and 100-300 with me right now, at work, at my office job, because I bring it with me everywhere. If I didn't, I wouldn't have anywhere near the practice with photography that I do, and wouldn't have most of the pictures I have. The G9 doesn't focus like my previous camera, the Nikon D500, but it gets the shots I need, and the silent shutter has allowed me to get shots I would never have gotten with the D500(and yes, obviously, the other mirrorless cameras can do that, as well). If I want the reach/angle of view of my 100-300, I need to get something like the more expensive, heavier, much larger Tamron/Sigma 150-600 lenses, or the 200-500 Nikon I rented when I took my D500 out to Colorado earlier this year. i wouldn't be carting those around with me all the time. I could used a 300mm and crop in, but then I lose a lot of mega-pixels. Micro 4/3 may disappear, but I don't see myself going full-frame until I can get 80MP and ~6 stops of stabalization. I've taken sharp shots at 1/8th sec, hand held, at 300mm, and had the view of 600mm, with 20MP in that frame, with a body/lens combo that cost me about $1700. I don't feel like that's going to happen with the current full-frame cameras, but maybe I'm wrong?

[@keithvlogs1]

@@Bayonet1809 can you explain... why Sony with their engineers dont makr the a7s line with higher pixel count than the a7r? Maybe you can lecture them about your theory? 😂

[@Bayonet1809]

Keith Domingo Because the A7s is designed for video, where such things are not possible.

[@chrisklugh]

I doubt m43 is going anywhere. I agree, there is no Replacement for Displacement in theory, but that's what makes these mid size sensors so great. There smaller. There so much potential in adding bigger lens to little senors to 'make up the difference'. For the most part, fast Pro m43 lens are cheaper then Pro FF lens. The entire m43 ecosystem is cheaper. You pack lighter, and don't have to lug around heavy equipment. Who would not buy a GH6(?) with a slightly improved GH5s senor, and be able to shoot 4k 60p 10bit All-I? Your not going to see that in FF for a long time. There will be a GH7 by then. And that's the point, at least for video shooters, that smaller senor makes it easier to put in computers/buffers to get the most out of the senor. FF will always lag behind, or have a astronomical price tag attached to it. I look forward to Panasonic's 10-25mm f1.7! And I look forward to its bigger brother, the 25-50mm f1.7? For run and gun video, lighter, cheaper, more feature packed, there's a market for that! Long Live m43!!

[@Bayonet1809]

And the GH7 could have 8k 30p, 4k 120p, and a global shutter for all we know.

[@hausner8584]

" For the most part, f1.2 m43 are cheaper then FF f1.8's" What??? That is bullshit.

[@chrisklugh]

@@hausner8584 I'm talking Pro Lens vs Pro Lens, not the cheap consumer lens.

[@hausner8584]

@@chrisklugh Name a pair. Without going to something like Leica or Zaiss

[@chrisklugh]

@@hausner8584 Why not use Leica or Zaiss? As close to apples to apples comparisons, smaller lens are cheaper. Its cheaper to get a Pro lens in m43 mount then the Pro FF mounts versions. There's a lot of lens options/needs/used vs new options to compare. To many variables to point out as a defining illustration as there would probably be some examples to go the other way with too. But as I've observed, its much more economical to get a fast pro m43 lens then it is to get a pro lens from the FF ecosystems.

[@ravineelakantan6417]

Sharp had announced a forthcoming 8 K camera based on Micro Four Thirds sensor developed by Sharp...Looks like Micro Four Thirds is far from dead and may continue to develop for years to come.

[@tedbowling5036]

Great commentary as always Tony. I sure hope you are wrong about M43. I have been an enthusiast photographer for almost 15 years, and I can tell you that my favorite photos have been taken with the M43 system. I have owned both FF and APS-C as well. To me, it boils down to this: If you need good low light performance or if you need a high degree of control of your DOF (control exclusively via aperture as oppposed to other factors that effect DOF), then FF is the way to go. HOWEVER, I think 90% of enthusiast photographers could thrive in the M43 system. Your video was an advertisement for why M43 is great. You say the results from the Canikon 600/4's are signicantly better than the Olympus 300/4. Of course. But the 300/4 is real and the IQ is GREAT, and how many of us can drop 13K on a lens. I know you know this, and I'm not trying to point out the obvious. I think chances are that you are right. My M43 system will die. But its not because it has to. Its because people are buying into heavy systems that they don't need. N=1 though. Right? People's mileage will vary. Cheers!

[@KelvinKamsg]

I totally agree with your sentiments, I've got m43 olympus & panasonic and FF A7II. Yes, if absolute ISO quality and DOF control is needed FF is where it's at. However most of my favourite photos are taken with m43 equipment. I especially love the shooting experience with my olympus em5ii and the A7ii just feels too clinical, almost like a simple tool. Not to mention the features and quality at this $1k+ price point between m43 and FF is currently unbeatable. Problem is, many if not most enthusiasts and casuals are still chasing their "optimal" kit/GAS syndrome. Also with the size and price of FF going down and down, it's attracting more and more buyers. They however forget that comparably sharp FF lenses will be more expensive, often regardless of aperture equivalence. But despite all our logical/practical points, the reality is with more people picking up FF camera bodies to the detriment of the m43 market, it's hard for m43 manufacturers to justify long term investment in R&D, marketing etc to continue production on m43 gear. I know I'll be keeping my m43 stuff till the day it breaks though.

[@Ryomichi]

You disregarded the argument that you will get a better performance with the same package size and price of a bigger sensor camera. Yes you do okay with your M43. But you will do better with a bigger sensor camera. Enthusiast thrive on M43, so does with their phone camera. Like you said if we don’t need low light performance and DOF control, phone camera do just fine. I love my iPhone8 Plus.

[@tedbowling5036]

@@Ryomichi Great point! The iPhone 8 and X are spectacular tools. Too be honest, if you gave me the choice between an iPhone and a M43 camera with a 28mm equivilent lens, I would probably choose the iPhone. The images are that good. However, as a photography hobbiest, I may be shooting architecture at 16mm today and birds at 600mm tomorrow. Computational photography and cell phone optics are currently not capable of giving me this type of diversity (yet). An interchangaeble lens system is still necessary for me, and in my opinion, M43 provides me this ILC capability in the most portable and enjoyable package.

[@tedbowling5036]

@@KelvinKamsg Its funny you say that about Sony. I think its a very personal thing, but something we obvisouly share. Despite the incredible cababity of the A7 line, there is something un-ininspiring about the handling/interface.

[@KelvinKamsg]

@@Ryomichi nah. Personal preference here, but I just don't like using smartphone cameras for anything but quick snaps. I find that I really miss the manual control adjustments that I love for fine tuning exposure triangle. As an issue of the automated system, I instead feel like control is taken out of my hands, it's like a manual Vs auto car kinda thing. Also your comment of doing ok with m43 vs better with FF is based off mainly technical comparison. I find I get better content with my m43 gear, BUT I can see the argument that if Olympus make a FF with the same UI, features and feel as the omd series, they can have my all moneys! If still feel the sting of FF lens price and size though! :)

[@markhoffman9655]

LOL - now Sharp has joined the Micro Four Thirds consortium with an 8K (34mp) video camera as their first product. Oh dear they didnt read this article ...

[@ajinkyathorat7502]

@@markrigg6623 Olympus is still outselling most of the cameras in Japan.

[@ajinkyathorat7502]

@@markrigg6623 Enough to still make camera, plus they are medicine company which made like over 4 billion of revenue.

[@JR-uy2nd]

Social media: M4/3 IS DEAD! Me: I'll take walking tours with my M34 camera and a 300-600 eq lens, and take pictures of eagles and other birds prey in mid-flight with a set that weighs less than 1kg.

[@samuelmingo5090]

As an Olympus fan boy... I think they will be just fine. Olympus has always been an innovator in imaging technology. They own the patent to technologies Canon uses. Olympus is also owned by the same parent as Nikon. The Olympus R&D is to valuable for anyone to just let it go belly up.

[@samuelmingo5090]

@@mutley3136 lmfao Maybe. Then again, Olympus will say they aren't going to do something, and then do it to stay in the race. I don't trust that they wont build a 35mm sensor camera. Hell... If it's good enough, I might ditch m43 for an oly ff

[@dfotos]

Please stop your agitation against mft. You are trying to make it dead. I love mft and need no Kleinbild-Camera (FF). In a few years you will us tell that FF is dead because of mediumformat cameras. And the lenses will become bigger and bigger.

[@JodyBruchon]

There's a seasoned photographer with an interesting white beard who did a video about this exact thing. He said it's all BS and full-frame fetishism is not based on reality, only on gear-whoring nonsense.

[@thethirdman225]

If I want to shoot "full frame" I'll use my Mamiya RB67 thanks. Meantime, M43 it an excellent choice for so many things. I don't agree with Tony's claim that there's no substitute for big glass. I'd rather be looking at shots I have than thinking about the ones I wish I had but didn't get because I couldn't carry all that weight for 10 kilometres.

[@martinhommel9967]

@@thethirdman225 Unfortunately it's not about anyone's opinion, but sales in a generally shrinking market. In that market M43 makers have the smallest share and the term FF frame serves to make people believe that other sensor sizes are inferior (not helped by the term crop sensor). There are a number of videos that demonstrate that in most situations people cannot tell if a picture was shot with a FF or "Crop" sensor. Of course M43s are very capable as are FF and APSc.

[@thethirdman225]

@@martinhommel9967 All true. Probably not helped by the continual rubbishing heaped on some very worthy cameras on the basis of technical differences which, as you point out, are mostly undetectable. As a user of both "full frame" and M43, I find that I am increasingly using the smaller format and most of the time, even I can't tell. The problem is that people spend so much time looking at things in Photoshop at 100%. Then they compress to 1200 x 800...

[@thethirdman225]

Mark Robinson Of course I did. My comment related to his claim about there being no substitute for big glass. I stand by that. I agree with the contention about market trickery but the biggest offenders there are people like Polen and in a lot of ways, the market itself. Everyone wants to feel good about their choices, right? On paper, “full frame” is theoretically better. The spec sheet says so and who wants to argue with the spec sheet? In practical terms - and I know this from my own experience - there’s not enough difference to justify the extra size, cost and weight.

[@CalumDavies]

I only shoot m4/3 and native glass! Full frame is to bulky for traveling

[@A2Z1Two3]

Calum Davies yep, I cycle tour , and not getting any younger , I need M43 even if it’s not the best .

[@friatankar]

Exactly my Point!

[@morcjul]

My G81/85 with 24-120 kit and 90-400, both weather sealed lenses + my carbon tripod. No smartphone has the range and no FF is close to the size and weight of this system.

[@DEVUNK88]

yup I'm seriously considering picking up a used G9 and the lieca 100-400mm after taking a tamron 18-400 on my 80D out to shoot wildlife on a wilderness trip, it was good but didnt have enough reach, the G9 has some serious capabilities and that lens gives me nearly double the focal length that I'd have to pay huge money for otherwise

[@johnvillalovos]

@@DEVUNK88 Why buy a used G9, when Samy's Camera on Ebay is selling "open box" G9 for $999.00. I bought one from them and it had 42 shots on the shutter count. The box was open, but not sure if it had ever been used.

[@leticiali]

And no FF system produces such noisy and crappy images as what you use either. Watch the video again - EQUIVALENCE!

[@DEVUNK88]

@@johnvillalovos thats exactly what I have saved in my watch list. used /openbox its all the same to me, I buy open box all the time

[@greentokyo]

Yes but you are trading smaller size for image quality.

[@glen-draketoolworks7186]

Wait a minute. You're saying that phone cameras have killed the point-and-shoot market. What happens to FF when MFT makers adopt the phone-camera technology? The world gets smaller every day, so I'm wondering if FF will survive.

[@Bayonet1809]

If m43 adopt said phone-camera technology then what is stopping FF from doing so too?

[@instantsiv]

@@Bayonet1809 FF would need 4 times the processing power, no? m43 would have a pretty sizable advantage in that regard.

[@Bayonet1809]

instantsiv Yeah, but FF also has four times the surface area for heat dissipation, so that is a moot point.

[@instantsiv]

@@Bayonet1809 I'm talking heat issues with the processor not the sensor.

[@Bayonet1809]

instantsiv The processor makes hardly any heat. The one on the Z7, for example, sinks to the body via a thick thermal pad. The most heat sensitive part of a mirrorless camera is actually the sensor.

[@jackwestcott4469]

M4/3 is alive and well and I LOVE IT. There is nothing better than my E-M1 Mk III with the 100-400 on my hikes and as my secondary camera when I’m carrying the monstrous Nikon D850/5 w/ 600mm F4. If you can tell shit from shinola, then you’ll stay away from Tony’s opinions and form your own by using the gear. Take it from me, nothing is more fun than M4/3. It’s small, it’s comparatively cheap, the high quality gear, it’s just fun. If nothing else, get a used kit with E-M5 Mark II with the 12-200mm and for under $1000, you have one hell of a kit that is ridiculously weatherproof and it’ll take you everywhere. Want some primes? Around $350 will get you both the 45 1.8 AND the 25mm 1.8. I love my Nikon gear for when I have a strict assignment but my Olympus gear is always with me because the joy in photography lies in the unexpected.

[@irishrose89775]

Omg if tony says it, it has to be true, right? Not! M43 is here to stay. Who wants to carry a tank full frame and carry 10 Lb lens, not me!

[@JohnAudioTech]

I got a Panasonic GX85 dual lens kit. It all fits into a very small case and is quite light. The dual OIS is great. To get into a full frame mirrorless body with a set of lenses to match what I have means spending 3 or 4x the price. Sure I could shoot at higher ISOs but I'm happy with what I get from my current camera.

[@isaacsloan4146]

Same thing. Lenses are big and in general there aren't many good aps-c lenses.

[@josefweisleitner2559]

@@NoMoreForeignWars bodies might be at similar size, lenses are not. And as most of us use several lenses on one body (and not the other way around), M43 is unmached in this regard. Which APSC-mirrorless cameras are much cheaper than comparable M43 cameras?

[@thequantaleaper]

Yeah.. the 85mm equivalent 42.5mm f/1.7 is light as a feather and I can fit it in any pocket I want without issues. Let's see someone casually put the Sony 85mm E-mount lens in their back jeans pocket lol.

[@andreik3096]

it's not only the question of iso... you can't autofocus fast (like concert or dansing party) in low light with g85, you can't even see it in viewfinder in low light, it becomes utter crap. event sony's a7 viewfinder is crap in low light, so some of us have no choice, we stay with dslr for now.

[@obidamnkenobi]

@@NoMoreForeignWars yeah,... what's a MUCH cheaper apsc ML?? I have a canon DSLR, looked at canon's ML offering and was not impressed. Expensive, and lenses are still big, and few of them. M43 is small, cheap, and tons of lenses. And IQ is plenty good for my needs.

[@JLiu-fn5gv]

It seems that Tony never has any real interest about MFT system. I remember once he compared EM1 with XT1 about AF performance. Without trying any optimization of the settings, he claimed EM1 failed focusing moving subject for all photos. And another time Chelsea used a Panasonic lens on Olympus camera body showing chromatic abbreviations, then easily concluded that Olympus had no good lenses. I am afraid this is not a good attitude to do reviews if you have no interest in certain products. Indeed, you may probably right about the future of MFT system. If Olympus or Panasonic make any mistake in their marketing plan, they may easily lose market to competitors. But MFT does have its own beauty to both amateur and professional users. As a famous youtuber, it might be nicer to prevent prejudiced attitude that may mislead your followers.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

We've shot a TON with MFT cameras. We regularly use something like 12 of them. They lack PDAF with the native MFT lenses, and that's a HUGE disadvantage. "And another time Chelsea used a Panasonic lens on Olympus camera body showing chromatic abbreviations, then easily concluded that Olympus had no good lenses."

[@JLiu-fn5gv]

Tony & Chelsea Northrup Thank you very much for your reply. It is my honor to receive a reply from a professional photographer of your level. I totally understand that MFT system has no chance to compete with FF system in term of image quality. Given the same level of cutting edge CMOS technology (where everyone is watching SONY), MFT sensor always gives more noise comparing with FF sensor at same iso for sure. However, the pro lenses from Olympus or Panasonic are awesome in other aspects. For many photographers who are not that pixel picky and care more about portability (and there are quite many of them), the MFT system is definitely more suitable. To be honest, I don’t really understand the claim that MFT lenses do not have proper motors for on chip PDAF. Why would Olympus introduce PDAF sensor without producing lenses that work for it? Are you testing this with Panasonic lenses or Olympus pro lenses? I can imagine Panasonic lenses are not designed for PDAF sensors. If MFT is dead for sure, then how long will apsc survive? Following this logic, there will only be medium format professional cameras in the future. So everyone should go to Fuji. I am actually quite new to photography and you are one of the first channels that I followed when I started. It is the continued criticism attitude towards MFT system and some quite obvious logical mistakes in your videos that makes me worrying the reliability of your judgment about this ‘small’ area. In addition, I am a scientist for my career and I am not convinced by the way you prove the reliability of your statement. Please don't believe too much on what you 'see'. A reliable analysis requires intense discussion with other professionals, which we also call 'peer review'. When giving any conclusions, it is necessary to take a more serious attitude. Cheers

[@marcelobaltodano7507]

Is it better a ferrari or a volvo truck? Comparing M43 with FF is like comparing Ferrari with Volvo trucks, both are good and powerful, but they are built for different purposes and work in different ways. M43 is a great system, FF is a great system, both are different, both are good. We know that news headlines can cause a lot of damage and this one seems to want that. sorry for my english

[@MichaelWTurner]

I hope you're wrong Tony. I like the panasonic m4/3 cameras. They save space in my bag :) Don't want to carry around humungous lenses.

[@duncanwallace7760]

I think if they get good results now, they will still do so in the future. You might even be able to get some 2nd hand fast lenses cheaply. I also like my little gx8. It lives in my bag and I take it everywhere!

[@MichaelWTurner]

@@duncanwallace7760 I'm a videographer, so I mainly shoot with a bigger cinema camera, but I also carry around a panasonic G85 for the excellent stabilization and the better low light performance. And because it is pretty small. Got a canon m50, bigger sensor and even smaller, but use that more as a hobby camera. Hope they keep that one around too.

[@johnwilcox7826]

I have aps c lenses and they are no heavier than four thirds

[@TheMPTV]

Not really, Fujifilm crop sensor camera line up are about the same size as m43. Most of their prime lenses are small, plus Sony A73 body is small

[@FabienMathey]

@@johnwilcox7826 that is because they are engineered to cover a bigger circle than m43 actually, so ibis would have more "wiggle room". However, when comparing the systems, the m43 are way ahead in features and keeping cool than apsc at this point...

[@alexgrant311]

It won't die for video because Panasonic is a beast

[@volt416]

In the video world we love still MFT! If you want to use vintage lenses or any of the new budget anamorphics MFT is always the way to go. Bigger sensor means bigger lenses, and while photography lenses stay relatively cheap, good larger format cinema lenses can get very expensive very fast.

[@AnxiousEducator]

I think apsc is gonna die before micro four thirds. MIcro 4/3rds is what a lot of video guys use so the market is propped up by them. APSC on the other hand, isn't really supported very well by any of the manufacturers. Sony for example has been focusing a lot more on their full frame cameras.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

I'd kill Sony's APS-C cameras if I could; their APS-C lens lineup is awful. I think Fuji could make APS-C work; they're putting out FF-equivalent fast glass, like the 200mm f/2 (300mm f/3 equiv) and the 33mm f/1.0 (50mm f/1.5 equiv).

[@borderlands6606]

Fuji are solidly behind APS-C, other manufacturers use the format for their entry level cameras, mostly. Currently Fuji are competing with full frame for IQ and surpassing them for price.

[@DaveHaynie]

Unlikely.. that would mean the death of Fujifilm X and Canon EOS M, as well as the near certitude that both Canon and Nikon will release APS-C bodies for EOS R and Nikon Z, repectively. It's certainly true that most companies who aren't Fujifilm treat APS-C as a consumer format, and don't release high end glass specifically for it. But you can always buy FF glass on Canon, Nikon, and Sony.

[@keithvlogs1]

Have you not heard of fuji? Anyhow looking at sports photographers and wildlife shooters I dont see them killing apsc... same reason diff type cars...

[@cyabdelnour2320]

Like everyone else says, Fuji. They don't need a full frame, they have the medium format and the APSC market. Their glass is defintely one thing keeping them in the business. If Sony wanted to get into a battle with fuji over frame size for cameras, just watch the medium format video camera come to birth.

[@HigherJr]

FF will never match TRAVEL & IBIS capabilities of m43.

[@youknowwho9247]

Full frame already exceeds MFT in both. The IBIS in the new Sonys and Nikons is much better than anything MFT offers and modern mirrorless full frames are nearly as compact as MFT and produce much, much better results.

[@erikfarkas7868]

@@youknowwho9247 Yeah but the mirrorless fullframe LENSES are much bigger than the MFT lenses, its not only about the camera body. Seriously, those lenses are TINY!

[@maciekgut8375]

@@youknowwho9247 Seriously, where did you get this: "The IBIS in the new Sonys and Nikons is much better than anything MFT offers". Anything legit to back it up?

[@ixoye56]

@@maciekgut8375 Ignore him, he is a troll...

[@no-trick-pony]

@@youknowwho9247 lolnope

[@cesarebonazza]

After viewing twice your video, I totally disagree that m4/3 is dead. Mark my word I’m a full frame user, but so many features of M 4/3 are amazing especially weight is the winner and portability. Let me remind you that if your phone as great technology imaging what they can do with this bigger M4/3 don’t count them out. Look at the new lenses Olympus as created lately just amazing in size. Last most important part that need to be discussed is printing size and what professional photographers or amateur are outputting there work with ink jet or lab prints but I’m willing to bet the majority is using inkjet printers they default at 150 dpi plentiful of space M 4/3 to be successful up to 30x20 prints and let say lap prints at 16x20 at 300 dpi. But if you are using the output for blogging and internet or website this will fit any demand. I’m a Canon user but seriously looking at buying G9 Panasonic because of portability and ease of usage and I did forget image stacking that is major advantage in product photography. Last M 4/3 is still king on video period.

[@pty_foto]

Well, having a G9 at hand and no review? You say that you have a large number of MFT cameras but you guys rarely give any time and the last was the gh5 a year ago. Causally I searched yesterday your KZbin channel looking for a G9 and found nothing.. I could not believe it, searched again with Panasonic and found nothing... not everyone can afford full frame cameras, others like me just love the flip screen and way better menús, functional app, etc

[@uhu4677]

@@svbow6347 Bullshit. Not everyone wants bigger glass. And the only reason you might have that impression is, that lots of small glass is already available. That's one of the main-reasons, people are switching to MFT. They don't want to carry around 3kg lenses to shoot some birds.

[@scriptosaurusrex]

@@uhu4677 depends on the purpose. If all you want is a memory of a rare bird the m4/3 is great, but for serious work? Nope. Most nature pros shoot full frame, not even crop. In the film days, medium format was even popular. Maximum quality of equipment and fieldcraft & skills will always win.

[@uhu4677]

@@scriptosaurusrex I don't care, what "most pros" do. And don't talk MFT down as the pictures were not good. If there's enough light, you won't see ANY difference between FF with 13k f4 lens and G9 with 100-400mm.

[@scriptosaurusrex]

@@uhu4677 the reason what 'most pros do' is relevant is because that's the gold standard, particularly in nature where quality sells not marketeering. Unlike wedding photography you cannot be a terrible photographer and still have a career. I am not talking m4/3 down overall, as I outright acknowledged its merit. But the thing is, you can tell the difference. You mentioned good light, but at the end of the day wildlife photography, when taken seriously, is not done in good (in this case meaning ample) light. Andy Rouse once said that the lowest Iso he uses is pretty much 800. M4/3 is nice and convenient when your idea of bird photography is a stroll at 10AM. But when the day starts at 4am it doesn't cut it, particularly not when the glass is slow to boot. Heck, even a decade ago the then lowlight king d3 wasn't really considered that good for image quality - it was just the best available.

[@derekmidgley]

@@uhu4677 Sorry i disagree. I shoot Nikon D500 plus NIkon 200-500mm F5.6 which on the 'crop' sensor D500 is an equiv. 750mm (at 500mm) most days. When I need to pack light I shoot Olympus EM1 II plus Panasonic 100-400mm (or equiv 200mm to 800mm). So I thought in great light my 20mp Oly/Pana combo would out-resolve the D500/Nikon combo. But in practice it always seems to be the other way round. Even in good light. Maybe I have a very very good copy of the Nikon lens and a very poor copy of the Panasonic. Who knows. But I wish what you said was true for me... it's not close.

[@MM-zm9lh]

Guys, Sharp has just officially joined Micro Four Thirds system. What's the title of this video again?

[@thrallingFRglory]

mark rigg Why not ask Nikon what they’re up to? The rumours about Olympus shutting shop have already been discredited whereas Nikon has admitted that it’s in really choppy waters now. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s Nikon that goes down first.

[@ajinkyathorat7502]

@@markrigg6623 Do you even know, how old is sharp company is. Lot of people care they are launching shape 8k micro four third camera.

[@ajinkyathorat7502]

@@markrigg6623 That's true, most of the people don't use 4k monitor on cameras to get the best out of that camera. plus I doubt there's great 8k monitor with solid color accuracy.

[@d3xmeister]

This video hasn’t aged well, and there’s no surprise since this is the most short sighted video Tony ever made. You could throw arguments back and forward all day long (and this actually proves that there is no “one side wins” situation) but here’s my liberating kit that I shoot with since 2017: Panasonic GX85, Laowa 7,5mm f/2, Panasonic 15mm f/1.7 and Panasonic 45-175mm X, a super sharp power zoom that with an equivalent reach of 90-350mm that smaller than any FF lens ever made including most primes, and much sharper than all consumer tele-zooms on any system. This kit can do everything I need, I never been in a situation where I couldn’t get the photo, and I never had anybody commenting anything on the image quality, which is fantastic, including well-stabilized 4K video. I have a included flash that can bounce, I have fast AF, I have everything I need. And here’s the cherry on top: this hole photo kit weights 1,6 KG and can be carried in a fannypack. If any of you can look at my galleries and can tell it was shot on m43 or not FF, I’ll quit photography. You won’t, believe me, nobody did, even with my photos printed big or presented on a large 75 inch TV.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

This video dead-on predicted the gradual decline of MFT and Olympus' exiting the camera industry. If you watch it, even just the first few minutes, you'll see that I was never saying you wouldn't be happy with your MFT gear. I say just the opposite! Just read the video description.

[@d3xmeister]

@@TonyAndChelsea Tony seem to go out of his way to make it look like there is such thing as a free lunch, when it comes with photo gear. There isn’t. It’s all about what compromises each is willing to take. From a market standpoint, yes, FF is the rage right now and Sony took over. I personally think it’s more about having the latest and greatest than anything else. I would quit photography if I was ever forced to use any Sony camera, in my opinion nobody who designed a Sony camera ever made actual photography. At the same time, when I hold a D780 in my hands, I immediately remember why Nikon is Nikon and how photography gear should be designed. In my opinion we should have full systems of 1-inch, m43, apsc, ff and medium format. They all have strengths and weaknesses and this will be different for each of us. I shoot FF and m43, and honestly m43 is just better for more than 70% of what I shoot, and again I never had anybody commenting on the technical image quality vs my FF shots or others. But I know the limitations, for example I never shoot 24-70mm equiv type lenses on m43, the DOF control isn’t there and low light events without a flash are a no-no, so that’s when I use my FF gear. Wildlife and travel ? Forget it, I would never lug my FF kit, for that extra image quality that nobody including me won’t going to see. In 2014 I went to an Formula 1 event just as a spectator with a Panasonic GH4 and a cheap 100-300mm. I had no problem focussing and getting great shots, though admittedly that lens was quite soft over 200mm. After some time I managed to sell some of those shots to a publication. Yes, they were panning shots of very fast cars, and I could do them with not much effort. And yes, my keeper rate would have been better with a sports camera and a faster (aperture mechanism and focus) lens. I would imagine a OM-1 with a 40-150mm and a TC is all I need to shoot something like that at the highest level. And carrying only that kit with me was like a vacation to enjoy the event, which is what actually was. Do you think in this scenario (wit he Olympus) people would look at the shots and say “Hmm, these look to be shot on m43, they are too noisy and low resolution” I very much doubt it. I understand if you’re full time pro photographer, then that’s a different “program”

[@d3xmeister]

M43 is dead when is dead. We have a new GH6, we have the OM-1 from apparently dead Olympus, which looks like an awesome camera. We’ll see. You could say the same about APSC if you just forget about Fuji for a moment. But I hope you realize this is a bad thing for photography.

[@michaeld5888]

Olympus are the one company that actually adapted to the new order. The traditional companies just limp on pushing the people without unlimited budgets to one side with ageing kit and no development. Sony even dump the E-V10 after no time at all. These youtube bloggers are buried so deep in the latest luxury kit, which is all that appears new or is in stock nowadays outside of m43, that they have no real hope of grasping of what things are like for the average photographer and how they think. The industry with all their chips piled on 'full' frame, mainly on the instant marketing pull of the name name rather than for any photography reasons, are heavily pulling on the chain of the reviewers so I take it all with a pinch of salt.

[@raaisma]

As a person who switched from FF to M43 system for shooting weddings and events, I think m43 death is overrated. Panasonic and Olympus will continue support it. Shrinking market share? Maybe but we see new m43 users too. For example KZbinr uses a lot of m43 cameras and lenses. Whenever my friend something very light and portable for travel or other stuff, I always recommend m43 cameras such as the tiny Panasonic GF/GX series or Olympus E-P series compromising so much about quality. Yes, smartphones are convenient but a dedicated camera is still relevant. m43 dead in 5-10 years? It's alright by me. I'm sure there are companies which acknowledge users who want smaller cameras without compromising so much about other things.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Yeah, as KZbinrs, we mostly film with M43 now. But I suspect we'll replace our GH5 not with a GH6, but with a FF camera from Sony, Canon, or even Panasonic.

[@borderlands6606]

The GH series are great but they compete with APS-C and FF cameras for body size. However there's little to compare with compacts like the GX80/85, especially with a pancake lens. High quality and truly pocketable. The truth is camera innovation is all but dead with current sensor technology. All manufacturers can do is offer more megapixels - when there's already plenty for all applications including professional ones - or higher ISO performance when even small cameras are good at ISOs film users could only dream about. They've run out of ideas, the market's shrinking and they are desperate for new cash cows. So they want us all to get full frame and buy everything over again.

[@MrSonicAdvance]

The market will decide. If Panasonic and Olympus withdraw from the market, but there is still demand for m43, then the demand will be met.

[@maddercat]

It's interesting I found this video a year later, and olympus is still making cameras and nikon and canon seem to have hit a wall. I think m4/3 fills a roll of architecture/landscape and hiking that the other brands never will, they're the smallest feature packed camera that you can get. The entire thing with m43 right now is that it has incredible stabilization that bigger sensors will never be able to realize because they dont have the area to work with and keep a relatively small body. My m4/3 camera's sensor can wobble in its stabilization a full frame sensor width it's crazy, and the newest m43 camera has a 6 second compensation which means you never need a tripod, there's no way sony or any other manufacturer is going to beat those times any time soon. I think that right now all the big manufacturers have hit a wall with better sensors and pixel density, and m43 is going to be where the real camera innovation and software is going to be developing.

[@ArthurPJohnson]

Dear Tony, I have all the respect in the world for you, own a Sony a7rIII system with loads of glass and ALSO an Olympus EM1 mkII with loads of glass and guess what? In the last week, I've been doing a thought experiment: if I knew for sure that MFT really were dead, would I sell my MFT system now before prices plunge? And after a week of hashing it over in my gut, I have decided, NO FREAKING WAY! Tony, I wish you no harm, but not until you have injured your rotator cuff or have needed shoulder surgery or have experienced any other number of disabilities -including being 20 years older than you are now - will you realize that MFT is an incredible blessing for those of us unwilling or physically unable to tote a six pound lens around all day. I am not yet at that stage and have even - heaven help me - pre-purchased the Sony 400mm f2.8. I look forward to using that lens for important wildlife and sports shoots, but never will it replace the thrill of using my Olympus 300mm f4 with 1.4x teleconverter for many many more money shots than I would have otherwise been capable if shooting.

[@mssapmaz]

Arthur Johnson absolutely awesome observation. Thank you very much

[@PedroDVC]

I don't want big cameras... I want small cameras with big features! Also, M4/3 bodies might be the same price, but when you go for the lenses, guess what's cheaper and more compact?

[@Misigun99]

I don't want to buy overpriced crap, so I'm gonna switch to this "dead" system.

[@Slider93]

Have to disagree. It's 2021.5 now and I just bought an EM10 MK2 and it is an amazing camera with amazing video and amazingly cheap lenses and amazing photo quality and amazing super zooms which cost 100$. And it is so compact, I just have it in the bag with 2 lenses. I see very little point in going full frame or APSC. It has HDR, decent autofocus even in low light and wifi. And it has an ability to adapt almost ALL existing lenses (which I may want, like canon 85 1.8 with a speed booster for niche portraits). I'm not a professional, but I definitely didn't enjoy using older huge cameras. This entry-level 2015 camera is just amazing for ~250$ I got it for. Now I'm getting 20mm 1.7, 75mm 1.8 (about 600$) already have 14-42 ez, 45 1.8(probably will sell for 150$) and 40-150 (for total about 250$). So I have all the ranges covered, an amazing video and photo camera, nice lenses set for about 1000$ total. And again, it's very light and portable. And in several years I will update to EM5 mk3 with amazing features.. for something like 500$. This is bargain!

[@shaocaholica]

If you are buying from the used market then that does not mean the system is alive. Plenty of dead systems trading fairly large volume on the used market.

[@AdamFavre]

Not enough clicks, eh? Well done Tony.

[@tom5216]

Tony, I’ve watched your videos for years now and have your books. I cannot understand your continuing disdain for M43. I have a fair investment in the Olympus system and find the cameras and lenses excellent. Also Olympus customer care is excellent and they issue free firmware updates regularly which improve the performance and add features to your existing cameras as they age. You keep giving the impression that their lenses are a cheat with respect to f stops. An f1.8 lens on M43 gives a deeper depth of field than a FF F1.8 of the same focal length but the f1.8 holds good for exposure.

[@keithgoreham1463]

Yes, you don't multiply against aperture for exposure. Only depth of field.

[@StrikeFromTheSkies]

@@keithgoreham1463 you don't multiply against either. It's just that if you want a comparable frame you either move further from your subject (therefore widening DoF) or use shorter focal length (again widening DoF).

[@keithgoreham1463]

@@StrikeFromTheSkies DoF is dependent on focal length. Sensor size doesn't matter, it's just that full-frame lenses tend to be twice as long as M43 lenses for the same subject framing.

[@yoshiyakusamura7405]

I don't know if the micro 4/3 is dead, but I know that you're contributing to this.

[@tearitloosetearitloose4670]

Coming into 2023 and MFT's is more popular than ever. Lumix G9 is still getting great reviews and the Lumix GH6 was released earlier this year and has been getting positive reviews so.....

[@excalibro8365]

@@tearitloosetearitloose4670 Yup. Bought a secondhand G9 in Japan for the equivalent of around 600 USD. There's no trouble when it comes to general photography, but I have to admit that it'll be a much easier time birding if I bought Olympus instead.

[@williamcaubet5128]

I'm unsubscribing because I'm tired of these videos you produce. I switched to m43 a couple of years ago and I'll never go back to carrying around the weight required with FF cameras. I am completely satisfied with the performance of my Olympus EM1 MkII. I'm just tired of the undeserved bad-mouthing that M43 gets and the glorification of "FF" sensors. Remember when 35mm was "miniature" film?

[@andimaniac]

your next step will be a smart phone, believe me 👍

[@gabl8a89]

@@andimaniac if getting lighter gear is his goal, then going to smartphone is a inevitable trend for William. M43 is not about being light, it is about making sensible comprises to achieve optimal image quality and the joy of traditional photography.

[@laurencegr9978]

@@andimaniac | smartphone? Perfect. I'll take that as a challenge. Smartphones are great for macro photography and I have seen countless photos that won photography contest and used as book and magazine covers.

[@John1MN]

Olympus forecasts that, in Fiscal Year 2019, they will sell 520,000 mirrorless cameras. That's small compared to Canon/Nikon ILC sales, but is far from dead,

[@youknowwho9247]

First of all, it's their own forecast, so it's overstated. Second, units sold isn't nearly as interesting as earnings.

[@ajinkyathorat7502]

@@youknowwho9247 Currently the have sold more camera tha last two years.

It's 2022, and some weeks ago I bought a G9:))) instead of Sony, or Nikon. This system give me more freedom, than FF system. The new GH6 will be released on february 22. Hm really died the MFT system?.)))

[@justyjust]

I have a Panasonic G9 and it's great for telephoto work, leneses are a lot smaller and double the focal of FF, I want to buy the new full frame Panasonic S1 but I won't use this for long distance work as it would cost a fortune for a decent lens. I will use it for low light and portraits. I love the MFT system and there a lot of FF people still moving to MFT check the forums out you will see lots of people posting moving to MFT..

[@The_Glutton_FPV]

I am in the midst of selling off my FF Nikon kit for Oly m43 right now :) I've been shooting long lenses for 10+ years and Tony doesn't know what he's talking about. Greater DOF at wider aperture is an advantage for wildlife and sports telephoto work. I get more light, and more in focus action shots, all with a kit that weighs 1/4 as much as FF and it can be handheld with the OIS + IBIS. I'll get about $11k for my Nikon Kit, and the replacement Oly kit will cost $6k, so thats $5k in my pocket, and lighter kit in my bag.

[@rogerquenault7207]

Myself I don’t care what you say about MFT I swapped from FF because my back and shoulders and you might be right about light and depth of field but again I don’t care because the kit I have is used more than my old FF gear as I can take it with me, could you please tell me how you think that Panasonic and Olympus got the images of wildlife on their websites, do you think that they took them with FF gear?

[@TL-xw6fh]

Talking about light coming into a lens. Well, an f1.8 is an f1.8, irregardless whether it is an MFT or FF glass. Ever tried a Panasonic 25/1.7 or a Olympus 45/1.8? They are so small and light, but the results are amazing! The Oly 45/1.8 is the sharpest lens I have ever owned.

[@youknowwho9247]

Not unlikely. No reason they wouldn't hire a pro with a full frame to shoot for their website.

[@youknowwho9247]

@@TL-xw6fh That 45mm f/1.8 takes images equivalent to a 90mm f/3.5 on full frame. That's not great for a prime in a world where 85mm f/1.4 lenses exist.

[@terrycullinane9437]

@Landscope 360 What is it with you & this constant bashing of four thirds format ???? Just understand that not everyone needs paper thin dof or shoots at high ISO....many like Olympus four thirds cameras for their world leading IBIS, lenses, weather resistance, unequalled ergonomics, excellent autofocus, compact form factor & unequalled sensor dust removal filter!!!!!!

[@JonathanAkosah]

@@terrycullinane9437 They're crazy man

[@jb678901]

On my M43, I shoot with quality-vintage manual lenses, paired with focal reducers. I like to show off my growing collection of vintage lenses (in a few glass display cases) and enjoy selecting from this collection for street shooting, portraits, landscapes and vacation shots. The scenery where I live (Switzerland, for the past 22 years) makes for wonderful photo opportunities and the M43 platform hasn't let me down. I still use a venerable OLY EM-10 and now, the Lumix GX9. Both IBIS bodies work well for this purpose. As people seem to be moving to full-sized sensors, I was happy to purchase the GX9 from my local camera shop for just US$355 (mint with only 699 shutter cycles, incl. a 12-32 kit lens, OEM grip extension, and battery). Is it the latest and greatest (?)...for sure not. More than I need for what I enjoy, absolutely. Of course, I still use some M43 lenses (zooms, OIS spec'd, etc) where I prefer a smaller, light combo to carry around. Nevertheless, the vintage experience is something I tend to gravitate toward. I suspect these cameras will last me for many years...so if the M43 is ever discontinued...replacements will be even cheaper. Who knows, in 4-5 years I might even "upgrade" to a G9, GH5, EM1 mk ii or EM5 mk iii! With the threat of inflation looming around every corner, its nice to grab the deals now. PS: keeping the lenses with caps off and under protective display keeps their coatings fresh and away from the dangers of fungal attack.

[@poolboyinla]

Flickr is dying.

[@artemorbid]

Dead and buried

[@user-jh1uz7mf1y]

Whatever you say, I love my GX85 than the expensive camera in a show window. :)

[@laurencegr9978]

They have been paid by Sony® to brainwash people.

[@aaronrobins9953]

I love my Olympus system for travel. I can't imagine travelling around with my Nikon D800 now that I am getting older. I have no opinion on if it's dying or not, just know I like my Olympus M43 system.

[@AlexZafer]

Just more click-bait from these people. If my eyes rolled any further back into my head they would stay there. I know how to prevent that from happening. By unsubscribing.

[@tommyjacobi2054]

realy? You read the titel "MFT is dead" from TONY and don't get immediately that this is some kindy of an click-bait!?

[@jaypob]

Good riddance! Buh bye!

[@mikecar52]

cya

[@andrear9500]

So the future will be mobile phones or FF? Or, in other terms, mobile user wanting great pictures and pros? Come on, there might be room in between! It's more likely APS-C will die being so close to FF. M43 could well be the ring between those two worlds. M43 producer just need to fine tune their offer, scaling down in size and price offering second hand specs already seen and appreciated in FF world maybe a couple of years before. In the end I think the point is not who's going to die but how they will evolve. M43 and APS-C are in the same mess, with M43 having the advantage of being not so close to FF in sensor size. If they proof they can go back to their original "micro" meaning, of course.

[@martinhommel9967]

Err no APS-C has more advantages in terms of market share and lens compatibility and cheap entry level models. The market will decide and it's not always the best product that will survive. See Betamax and VHS back in the day

[@poetsguide]

Sensor tech is probably the greatest technical hurdle of m43 right now. Olympus and Panasonic need to start using new sensors. Not necessarily sensors with higher megapixels, m43's current ceiling 20mp is more than good enough, but sensors that are better in low light and better dynamic range.

[@trinimedia19]

There is already a 34mp MFT sensor

[@terrycullinane5963]

@@trinimedia19 Higher megapixel sensors only produce more noise ..... Olympus should have stopped at 16 megapixels, which is the sweet spot for four thirds.

[@alantaylor6595]

I think a better argument could be made that APS-C could phase out. Full frame mirrorless could take its place. M43 is nice because of its size. I just sold all my Canon gear and switched to Micro Four Thirds. I love not lugging around all that gear. Remember, some folks still shoot film in all formats...

[@AlanRobertsarchitect]

Well, let's see where we are in five years and if you are correct. I use both a full frame, Nikon D810 based system with a very nice collection of Nikkor lenses and, M4/3 Olympus E-M1 Mk2 based system with a very nice selection of Pro Zuiko lenses. Specs like sensor size, DoF, pixels, etc., are not the most important factor in determining the camera to use. IMO, the type of shooting you do, the quality of images you produce and how you use your images are the major factors when it comes to choosing a camera. I find that for about 85-90% of what I do and produce, my Oly gear is stunning and it never ceases to amaze me. I did a test recently using shots I took in Glacier National Park in Montana taken with my 36MP D810 and 20MP Oly E-M1ii. I printed uncropped images from each camera at 36"x24" and, from the standard viewing distance, it was absolutely impossible to pick which was the full frame with 80% more pixels and at over $1,000 more for the body, not to mention $500 to at least $1,000 more per comparable professional grade lens. Yes, in the final analysis, my full frame is marginally better but, it had better be at the much greater cost for the body and lenses. Then, you also have a far heavier and much larger system, if you are prepared to carry it. On my last trip to Montana, with some angst, I left my D810 in Texas and took only my E-M1ii and, had some stunning results. Unlike many, I don't rely on cropping for my shots so, with "only" 20MP to play with in my 4/3 camera I have to work harder to frame the shot as I want it but I think that's a good thing. Whether I'm shooting FX or 4/3 I always try to get it as right in camera as possible. Yes, Cannon and Nikon are entering the full frame mirrorless arena, with disappointing yesteryear bodies at the moment, smaller, but still with massive lenses to cover their sensors so my Olympus E-M1ii, due to its amazing quality, lower weight and compact size, is still the camera I pick up first most of the time. I hope you are wrong and that 4/3 does not die but, time will tell.

[@video-carl]

I reckon phone cameras will pick off most consumers who aren't post-processing and that will shrink the R&D pie for all players regardless of FourThirds, APC or 35mm sensors. In parallel: all the current main camera companies are electronics companies and not software companies - if they don't become masters in software they'll be outside the pie altogether.

[@colinstock325]

Years ago I got a 4 mega-pixel image from a canon a80 printed to 16x20 inches. At normal viewing distance and in isolation you couldn’t see any issues with the photo. When compared to the equivalent enprint you could obviously see the loss of quality. I spoke with a magazine publisher once and was told for magazine quality prints at A4 you only need 10 megapixels

[@mromagnoli]

@@colinstock325 Perfect example of how the megapixels are too much a focal point for many people. I remember people drooling over 6 megapixels and how *that* was what you needed to be a professional photographer!

[@mikesch0815]

Today: G9II with PDAF....

[@Buck-Buchanan]

Some didn’t understand my first post, so to make it simpler: As Tony says: at the same camera settings M4/3 gives you more depth of field/focus than full frame. But he doesn’t mention that more depth can be an advantage sometimes. He also doesn’t mention that with M4/3 you can open up two stops and gain two stops of shutter speed while maintaining about the same depth of field you get with full frame. Also check out his video on lenses where Tony mentions how much he likes the Olympus f/1.8 75mm. Let me say it’s not hard to get a shallow depth of field effect with that M4/3 lens or most any other fast telephoto in the system.

[@eccentricthinking]

To quote Luke Skywalker: "Amazing, every word of what you just said was wrong".

[@mongini1]

turns out you were wrong... Panasonic alone brought 3 new lenses this year, the G9 is selling good, Olympus released a new lens and has 2 more to come, the EM1X came out etc... My guess is, that M43 will be around for another few years :P

[@borisliberman1990]

If, as a consumer or a customer in this industry, you take "the newest", "the latest" and "the greatest" out of your routine, all this talk becomes all but noise. If you are a hobbyist, your camera will likely serve you for very long. And your lenses will be just as good as they were when you bought them. If you are a pro - do you really need youtube to tell you how to work your craft? I do agree on crop factor reasoning except that f2.8 lens light gathering ability does not depend on the area at which the said light is being projected. All in all... The real weather is just outside your door not in the TV box wherein a person is talking. Go out, take your gear, enjoy taking pictures.

[@marcbowen5559]

As long as M43 systems keep the cameras and lenses relatively small, light and inexpensive they will remain valid indefinitely. As full frame mirror less camera systems gain weight, size and expense they make themselves unappealing to many consumers. Tony is wrong here.

[@xristosLARISA]

@Tony & Chelsea Northrup When you compare the Nikon 600mm f4 with the Olympus 300 f4 its equivalent to focal leght , light gathering , but the Olympus has a larger deapth of field is that right? Anyway in wilflide photography you want larger deapth of field to have your subject in focus to me have a lens that cost 11 times lowers weight so much lower then the nikon gather the same amount of light as nikon does but it have a larger deapth of fiels seams like an advandage for the olympus lens. Idk what you think?

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Check sdp.io/crop

[@xristosLARISA]

@@TonyAndChelsea Mind that you wanna photgraph a bear that is far away(usualy you always need more deapth of field , expect if you are in a blind and they come close ) and you need more deapth of field on the nikon lens you have to change your aperture to F7.1 f.8 but you lose 2 stops of light , on the olympus one you have already the f8 deapth of field w/o losing the 2 stops of light , and generally if you are not hunting shallower deapth of field it sound like an advandage to me that you can get double DOF, olympus pro 12-40 zoom lens for example might behave like 5.6when it come to deapth of field like you said and thats right but i still gather light like the f2.8 FF lenses does. In your videos you let the people mistakenly thinkink that if they gonna buy a f2.8 lens this lens it gonna behave like 5.6 when it comes to DOF and light gathering and thats a big mistake. Dont take me wrong but you need to clarify this in your audience!

[@Rick--A-F]

You seem hell bent of talking the format into an early demise.

[@_rhapsodist]

but Fuji also splits up their R&D between aps-c and medium format, how do they do it? or maybe those are far enough apart in price range?

[@thomasfeldbauer5025]

And Sony splits up their R&D between cameras and playstations: Completely different markets that don't cannibalize themselve.

[@_rhapsodist]

@@thomasfeldbauer5025 nope, the imaging department has its own R&D

[@barclayjb]

Fujifilm is taking advantage of areas where there is much less competition. They are playing it very smart.

[@_rhapsodist]

@@barclayjb I agree, but this also keeps them in the niche category. Which might actually be financially more viable.

[@thomasfeldbauer5025]

@@_rhapsodist Sorry. I expected you to be able to think around the corner - my fault. Let me explain: You can consider Sony cameras and playstations as two complete separate companies. People with Sony cameras maybe also buy a playstation because they want to play. Camera department has no influence about playstations and vice versa. They "don't cannibalize themselve". Fuji Medium Format is a studio camera, it is not used for travelling nor for videos. A studio photographer that owns a Medium Format will very likely buy also the APS-C line, if he wants for casual photography something better than a smartphone. And vice versa a APS-C user that wants to do professional sudio work, will buy also into a Medium Format System. At least if he wants to be professional and not just just a so called "pro". Same as with playstation&Sony-cameras: Separate markets, no cannibalizing themselve. Fuji Medium Format could survive if APS-C is ditched and APS-C could survive if Medium Format is ditched. And if the company splis up into a APS-C and a separate MF company, both can survive. And both would not be competitors to each other. Tonys example of ditching four thirds because og micro-four thirds is a complete different story. Why should one with a micro-four-thirds system also buying a DSLR-four-thirds system? Both systems cover he same market, both aim to the same customers. For every micro43 camera a company sells more, is sells a DSLR-43 camera less. This is called cannibalizing own market and here it makes no sense to split R&D. Even if the company splits into two separate companies, one with micro43, the other having DSLR-43, each company would be weak because there is a house-made competitor. Bottom line of thinking around the corner: You can split R&D into two different markets, because with different markets you also gain a wider customer base. And it does not matter if Sony has different R&D for playstations and cameras, while Fuji has different R&D for APS-C and MF.

[@davidkelsey2864]

Sorry but this is the first time I am considering a negative for you. I just switched from Nikon to Olympus 4/3 and it is the best move I ever made and I am hearing that a lot. Sure some die hards may not want it but I absolutely love it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hmmm you got a 70% negative response to this one and that is the largest I've ever seen on YT. Not everyone wants to carry a huge phallic lens around!!!!!!

[@darronsharrock2341]

He wishes micro 4 thirds disapeared. I am happy with m4t and it is not the camera, it is who is behind the camera that does it that is important. M4t are light enough to carry and still do almost same as full frame. It is mobile phones I am worried about. I am an Olympus fan and always be.

[@youknowwho9247]

MFT image quality is closer to point and shoot cameras than full frame. I don't invite why MFT shooters suffer from so much confirmation bias. Just go out and actually shoot a larger format once. It'll immediately be obvious that full frame beats MFT for quality of results, and by a mile.

[@snowwalker9999]

Can we discuss why FFs are more desired? Or are they truly more desired? Are they being increasingly sold at higher volumes than the smaller sensor cameras? Are they popular only because they are called "FULL-Frame" instead of something smaller or we just think newer is better? Are they really advantageous in all situations? Should we completely ditch and get rid of m43 and APS-C's and equip are smartphones with FF sensors too?

[@SerienchiIIer]

For me it's more about what's available. For example, an 85mm f/1.4 lens on a full frame camera can give me amazing background blur for portrait photography. Yes, I could get the same results with a 42.5mm f/0.7 lens on an MFT sensor. But the issue is that no such thing exists. So for a professional portrait photographer, FF is the only way. The same is true the other way around. I have a GX9 with some tiny zoom and prime lenses. Following the philosophy that the best camera is always the one you have with you, this setup is one that I can almost always bring along. My 42.5 f/1.7 lens is not perfect but good enough for portraits, which is all I need. I make my money elsewhere, so I don't have to satisfy any pixel peeping clients. And yes, an 85mm f/3.4 lens for a full frame body could probably be built just as small - but it doesn't exist. So if they actually start making tiny full frame lenses with smaller apertures and great image quality, along with smaller bodies, maybe that would be the end of MFT. But I don't think they will, because people who buy a FF camera and buy expensive lenses for it, expect to get "full frame results". For me, the MFT system sits in a niche between smartphones and big full frame systems. It's more versatile than smartphones, which as of 2022 only come with one high-quality camera. You can usually take great photos with the main camera, but you're limited to one focal length. The other cameras tend to be more gimmick than really useful, my phone gets better detail from a main camera crop than from the dedicated telephoto lens. And the main camera is usually pretty wide and tends to get wider with every new generation of larger smartphone sensors. The Xiaomi 12s Ultra comes with an impressive 1" sensor, but it has a 23mm FF-equivalent lens. That is approaching ultrawide territory, which can be a lot of fun in some situations, but most photographers wouldn't call it a "universal" focal length. I'm sure if they could have built it with a 35mm equivalent lens, they would have. But size constraints didn't allow for it. So yes, at wide angles your MFT system won't give you noticeably better pictures than a modern smartphone. But what about 50mm, 85mm, 200mm, 400mm? I don't see any way you could build a 400mm equivalent lens for a 1" sensor into a smartphone body.

[@paulemma8125]

It’s 2022 and I just bought a lumix GX9. Really great camera so far. ☺️

[@topg2820]

By your calculations we need to ditch Full Frame because Medium Format has 10 times bigger sensor, gathers 1000 times more light, and equivalent lenses have 100000 times more DOF than FF LOL Not everyone wants to spend 2000 bucks on a DSLR, that too these are US prices, in the other 200 countries they are way more costlier M43 will not die for the same reason APS-C is still alive, it's cheaper, there is a big niche of hobby photographers/normies who buy the lower end DSLRs like Nikon D3000, D5000 series because they are cheap Smaller sensors does have more noise but you forgot about pixel density, that's the reason why smaller sensors have lesser pixels, D500 and D850 both have about the same pixel pitch inspite of having different sensor sizes, and you said this while talking about M43 manufacturers misleading about information, talk about hypocrisy! LMAO at your great work of being the self proclaimed 'Weatherman of Cameras', we actually get our rumours from other sites that have leaked images and actual confirmed news while you guys just leach off their content inspite of being insiders with the industry yet never giving us any prospective information. Also there is no connection of PDAF and M43, Olympus EM1 series has PDAF while the upcoming Panasonic S1 and S1R still don't have PDAF Looks like the payroll of Canon and Sony is really good

[@LDWilliams]

And two years later :D

[@auroraflash]

MFT was important to push technology apart from sensor size... so they created many many workarounds for high quality imagery but then it was adopted into full frame too.

[@paulm8157]

My hunch is that the mid-term fate of M43 depends on what Olympus releases next. Read that the company has/has filed for a patent on a new sensor that is larger than M43, but smaller than FF - perhaps aps-c. A new line of lenses having a new larger cam mount would be consistent with the big idea of pushing out new lens lines from Nikon, Panasonic, and Canon.

[@ryanthomas9306]

I dont understand why Panasonic would ditch a market they dominate a majority share... maybe 20 years from now? But g7 is 400, 25mm is 150. 45-150 is 150. And 42.5 is 300.. that's cheap as shit

[@kevinkim271]

I also don’t get why this video dismisses Panasonic for being involved in two mounts when Sony, Canon, Nikon and Fuji are doing the exact same thing. At least Panasonic is making a better decision by skipping an entire mount size. On top of that Panasonic could wholly devote their R&D to their new full frame line and rely on Olympus to continue developing m43 if they wanted. But we’re getting another zoom lense from them. The full frame frenzy is being overblown by YT. Sure m43 May fade away in America but I can assure you I’ll continue in Japan.

[@TheDarkhorse228]

Sam Santana it doesn’t matter if they are going to release a new lens. That is completely irrelevant to the future of the mount.

[@beuker87]

If you want to go on trips BECAUSE of the photographs --> choose FF If you go on trips for fun and want to take great pictures --> go M43 I've got a M43 and most of the people (and myself) really like the pictures that it produced. I primarily use F.17 prime lenses to compensate for the difference in sensor size. Most of my friends that have a FF only take it with them when they are planing to shoot, and that's not that often. It's clumsy to take it with you. I just have my M43 in my bag and use it more spontaneous, and have a higher variety pictures because of it. Phones just don't handle RAW that well and if you compare the quality it's not comparable,, M43 ic much much better. For an amateur M43 is absolutely not dead. This video is discusses a view between the high profile photographers, but is targeted on amateurs. Go carry your 5 kg lens Tony, I'll settle for my own M43 kit that a normal person would actually carry.