Micro Four Thirds Is Not Well -Some Thoughts Why That Is

[@mattisulanto]

What an overwhelming amount of comments! Thanks everyone for leaving your thoughts. I can't reply to each comment individually but I read each one carefully. Many thanks.

[@williamstatt8651]

My impression why it is not doing well is because of peer pressure. If you have a micro 4/3 camera you know that sooner than better than later you will get comments from other photographers about why you bought such a bad camera. And, let's face it, for the same price you can get a good functioning full-frame camera at about the same size.

[@gallowaystx]

@@williamstatt8651 body yes - lenses definitely not. I think part of the problem is that while they are good for beginners they require an experienced photographer to master them to get truly great results.

[@italianplanes]

Thank you Matt, I totally agree with you. Size matters but the possibility to be increasingly creative while evolving with the experience too. Street photography in this regard represents the natural test bed for evolving creativity and skill. So why exceed the size of a compact and why let it cost as much or more than as src. The pen f could have possibly been the perfect camera if it had been priced less. But we all want speed. I have between the many an old Olympus c 770. It still today could be fine and I would use it if not for its annoying lack in speed and battery life. Switching on, pointing and shooting must be immediate to guarantee a satisfactory experience. This is why people buy a Ricoh GR. This is what phone cameras are pointing to.

[@henryrogers5500]

Great straight forward video! Thanks for your thoughts and insights, Matti!

[@daysofgrace2934]

If you look at Jeremy Paige said a 85mm@f1.4 makes beautiful photo were the subject is sharp and the background mushy. This creates a contrasty scene which our brains like, easy to spot predators, so brain gives you a dopamine hit so stay in those safe areas. Jeremy said it's the equipment that's making those images and not the photographer and he shoots at 28mm and 35mm, where you're not going to get that mushy DOF and it down to the photographer to construct a compelling composition. Most of this FF is so professionals can produce mushy photos as by product of the equipment and not really have to work hard construct a photo....

[@agylub]

I stopped using M43 when my daughter started stealing it to shoot live band performances. Her work is fantastic

[@alvaro5162]

The problem with the micro 4/3 and the APC is that many mediocre photographers prefer to blame on the size of the sensor rather than accept their lack of talent.

[@Raist3db]

I think the real problem is that a lot of m43rds owners can’t accept the limitations inherent to the system and instead try to prove again and again the mount is viable. Yes it is, but the manufacturers need to make products that really play to the strengths of the format.

[@alvaro5162]

@@Raist3db I can't imagine Cartier-Bresson complaining because Weegee uses a larger negative camera than him.

[@masssssy]

​@@Raist3db It is viable. M43 cameras have several positive traits vs full frame and several negative traits. One positive is lens size. I can bring all my lenses including 100-300 or 100-400, I would hate carrying an 800mm full frame lens. The image stabilization is better due to smaller sensor size, i.e easier to shoot handheld etc. The performance in dark environments is worse due to sensor size and so on.

[@SMGJohn]

​@@Raist3db What limitations though? I own all formats even 1 inch sensor pocket cameras, they pretty much do the same, but you wont get as blurry images as compare up full frame at f3.5 since vast majority uses cheap lenses thats what they work with, you might not get as clean ISO at 3200. But again, most people shoot at auto. The only limitation on the sensor size matters in jobs that require huge prints.

[@vladimirkarphotography]

Had using olympus em1 mk2, and lately om1 since 5 years with pro lenses.. Love the system much more than my ff camera.. Everything is better, the grip, ibis, features, depth of field… But as a very long exposure photographer, i must admit than the m43 raw files suffer when working on them.. So.. There are limitations.. And believe me, i really wished they were not !

[@BartechTV]

I watched my first "MFT is dying / dead" video around 2014, it's nice to watch another one for the 10th anniversary. and I look forward to watching another one in 2034.

[@mattisulanto]

What was the 10th anniversary "MFT is dead" video you watched? I'm happy you came to watch this after that because in this one I hope MFT will survive and express my fondness for MFT😀

[@BopKitBill]

@@mattisulanto Don't cha think he's referring to your video here? I don't think MFT is going anywhere but if it is...why would I care? I love it myself.

[@angeloplayforone]

Who made that video in 2014? The dead videos comes from 2020, so 4 years ago.

[@melgross]

But now it’s actually happening. OMDigital is finished releasing new bodies or lenses. Everything it released was already in progress when Olympus unloaded its camera division. Now that there’s nothing left in the pipeline, they can’t release anything themselves, just rebranded products. It’s sad, but that’s how it is and people see that.

[@angeloplayforone]

@@melgross The “MFT is dead” videos that I watched never talked about the quality of the system, but said that for the future, where the market is compromised of mostly enthusiast and professionals m43 system will have it difficult. Their arguments where mostly around the market preference for full frame by most customers and the falling prices of FF cameras. Besides that argument an other argument they used is that the lenses of FF will fall in prices as Chinese manufacturers will enter the market and sell cheap lenses. Tony Northrup even envisioned a USD 500 FF camera. So all their arguments where around failing prices as the sensor is not the most important part that dictates the pricing of a camera. As a matter of fact, Panasonic S5, Nikon Z5, Sony A7 III and Canon RP are selling between USD 900 and USD 1400. So their predictions where somewhat correct. Only the USD 500 did not materialize and the cheap Chinese lease also as Canon and Nikon has a thigh grip on third party lenses. But the trend they predicted is correct. Also compare the sizes of many FF lenses and FF camera this have decreased making the argument of smaller cameras of m43 disappear. The whole argument of dead of m43 was around economics, market preference and the most used photography style which is shooting people. Having a FF camera and m43 camera for the same price will lead that a majority of consumers will chose FF as they don’t need the extra features of m43. High frames shooters and birders are a minority. Hence the m43 will have a shrinking market to sell until the system is not profitable any more.

[@SeanSun]

I recently bought GX8 with 14-140 on a family trip, leaving all my full frame gears at home, and was very happy with the results. For MFT to survive, it has to capitalize on its unique advantages - the lens size. Go after enthusiasts market with retro styling, that’ll be a winning combination. GR3x, Nikon Zf/Zfc are all on top selling lists. Revive pen f, push for smaller/retro styling lens to go with it.

[@hedydd2]

Yes, you can contrast the 14-140 lens [I have two copies] with a 28-280 Sony lens. The Sony is three times the size and feels like four times the weight for no advantage. Yes I have one of those too but while the Panasonic 14-140 10X zoom is my most used lens, I hardly ever use the Sony 10X zoom.

[@MinnieCee]

I totally agree. The format's downfall has more to do with poor managements (both Olympus and Panasonic) than the format itself. Make a new Pen-F and new GX9 with PDAF, weather-seal them if possible, and along with some fast pancake lenses that are also weather-sealed, they sure will sell like hot cakes. OM should really use compactness, weatherproofing, and durability as selling points. Another thing that I'd like to point out is that when you purchase a lens from Olympus/OM, you seldom get a bad copy. I think OM should emphasize this when they are marketing their products. Anyway, I hope m43 will do well in the near future with some exciting products that people would desire to own.

[@Kukimuncher]

I agree. Even tho other systems have caught up with the technology and body size they still can't beat the compact lenses mft has.

[@wkghrs]

After using the Sigma FP I don't wan't a DSLR-style body anymore for general use. I want a compact rangefinder body that can be modded for cinema work if needed.

[@LTPottenger]

Yes the larger size for a smaller sensor is making zero sense, a tiny camera is what mft is good for. Give me that with ability to take long videos for reasonable price and I would be sold.

[@LenMetcalf]

It’s not dead. It’s only dead in people’s eyes who keep saying it is. It’s now a mature system with an incredibly well rounded lens line up. Two incredible leading cameras. Some more entry level ones would be good as would a rangefinder style one. But personally I am incredibly happy with it and their latest offerings.

[@sonyviva308]

I think this system takes abit too long to be developed enought for it to convince people its good to buy one. Back then M43 cams were almost non existed because nobody heard of it. The sensor only takes like 12 megapixels and some Lumix bodies dont have in body stabilization... Only now is the time to get one because they get better and better.

[@formermpc10]

Mature = ready to die. All formats have a life cycle. The four-thirds fans also thought that format would last forever.

[@petercollins7848]

@@formermpc10 It doesn’t matter, as there are so many m4/3 cameras and lenses on the used market. This will last for the next 10 or 15 years . By then there will be something completely revolutionary on the market which wipes all the formats out. I have 5 other cameras of different formats including a lovely ‘clunky’ dslr which takes absolutely fabulous photos. I print to A3 and people beg prints off me. I would only ever buy used, as why pay full price for something!

[@ytdufy]

​@formermpc10 Last time I went shooting wildlife with my friends, everyone was asking about my gear, the cost, I got offers to sell it, and heard regrets about choosing other brands not that good for wildlife. We must live in different universes.

[@m4rcin847]

Same with film, technically theres still many people shooting the old way, witch is the true soul of photography, but its a niche, just like M43.

[@teratism143]

I live in Southern Africa and spend as much time in the bush as possible. I adore my 100-400 zoom on g95. A FF 800mm prime costs more than my 4x4. Love me my MFT universe.

[@WSS_the_OG]

I have nothing to dispute, or add, I think you covered it. I guess I've become so used that MFT is dying, or dead, or not doing well, that started ignoring it at this point. And the truth is, even if MFT went away tomorrow, my MFT cameras would probably continue to work for at least another decade, and certainly outlive my next camera purchase(s) anyway.

[@formermpc10]

Yes, but it would be harder to get repairs/FW/software after a while. Having owned an older car in my youth you get tired of the obstacles.

[@mmadmic]

MFT was declared dead when it was presented at Photokina in 2007, a year prior its introduction to public. Mirrorless, EVF, IBIS, weather sealing, retro compatibility with MF lenses were mocked or considered as useless by majors and magazines. Nowadays, all majors have just or mainly mirrorless cameras with IBIS, EVF, weather sealing and retrocompatibility, lots of praised systems or brands are dead .

[@gregfeeler6910]

PART I Matti, I have followed your videos for years and have great respect for you, so please put my comments into that context. First, we need to determine if there is a problem before trying to solve it. Your title to this video is “Micro Four Thirds Is Not Well…”, but you don’t provide any data or define why you make this claim. Done this way, this video does more harm than good when people just assume your statement is true. You make many interesting points - too many for me to cover in a single reply - so I will comment on four: MFT is “not well”, “Size is not everything”, MFT bodes are “too expensive”, and other camera manufacturers have “caught up”. I’m not avoiding the IQ discussion, but it’s not an issue for 95% of photographers and would require a very long reply. I agree that perception is reality for many, and MFT is still fighting that battle. This is a long post, made in two parts, and I hope some will read it to the end. MFT IS NOT WELL Let’s start with your premise. You say “MFT is “not well” but by what measure? At the end of your video, you make a quick reference to “MFT losing market share”. Again, no data, and said out of context or without definition that statement is not helpful. Highly successful and growing companies can lose market share because the market itself is growing. Secondly, companies can identify a specialized market for which they have a competitive advantage and be more financially successful even at the expense of market share. That is exactly what OM Digital Solutions is doing with their MFT camera line and their emphasis on outdoor and wildlife photography. The better question to ask is, “What level of sales are needed for OMDS and Panasonic to be profitable with their MFT products?” There is an Internet “truth” that cell phones are taking sales away from digital cameras, and all manner of doom comes from that especially a shrinking digital camera market. Certainly, cell phones have all but killed off the traditional point-and-shoot digital camera, but they are also driving a greatly increased appreciation of and demand for ever better photography. As is the growing interest in film photography. The market for digital cameras in growing - not shrinking. Imarc Group has a report on the digital camera market based on 2022 data: www.imarcgroup.com/digital-camera-market. Anyone interested in this discussion should read the introductory page of this report. They predict significant growth in global digital camera sales, and that interchangeable lens cameras will account for the major part of that growth. They list many reasons for this, but this quote is specific to this discussion. Pay special attention to the last sentence. Apparently, OMDS has because the “adventure market” is exactly the market they are attempting to dominate. “…the increasing number of people taking photography as a hobby is catalyzing the demand for cameras that can capture high-quality images. Apart from this, the widespread adoption of mirrorless cameras, which are smaller and lighter than traditional DSLR cameras, is gaining traction among both amateur and professional photographers due to their advanced features, portability, and ease of use, which is strengthening the market growth. In addition, photography is used as a means of relaxation and stress relief. As people are becoming more aware of the importance of mental health and well-being, they are adopting photography as a means to cope with stress and anxiety, which is fueling the market growth. Furthermore, the growing interest of people in wildlife and nature photography, which requires specialized equipment and techniques, is increasing the sales of cameras with long zoom lenses, fast autofocus, and rugged, weather-resistant bodies, which is driving the market worldwide.” I will say that no other camera brand/format is better equipment for “adventure” photography than OMDS/MFT because of their environmental sealing of their newest bodies and lenses, and the inherently much smaller size of longer telephoto lenses, and Lumix cameras are also highly capable. But, let’s look at other indicators of health of MFT and OMDS in particular. It’s been the case for years that MFT is the top format in Japan. More significant though, is an April 2023 BCNreport report published on www.42rumors.com (www.43rumors.com/bcnreport-mft-lenses-keep-being-the-second-most-sold-mount-lenses-on-the-market/) where their data shows MFT lens are the second highest in sales only behind the E-mount. Read that again. People buy more lenses because they are doing more things with their cameras, and they are committing to that system and showing confidence through their investment. This report also shows that OM Digital Solutions lens sales percentage is larger than Panasonic and Fuji combined. Money is flowing into the MFT market. Lens share by mount: E-mount 32.6% *MFT 13.8% Canon EF 11.4% Nikon F 9.3% Fujifilm X 8.8% Nikon Z 8.5% Canon RF 7.7% Lens share by manufacturer: Canon 17.1% Sigma 16.0% Tamron 15.1% Sony 14.2% Nikon 13.8% *OM Digital Solutions 8.6% Panasonic 4.6% Fujifilm 4.2%

[@MostParticular]

PART II of MY COMMENTS: SIZE DOESN’T MATTER Some other sensor format mirrorless bodies are as small as some MFT bodies, but MFT bodies are not any smaller because a camera body must be big enough to use. The real difference is with lens sizes, and FF or APC will never “catch up” or match MFT for compact lenses at longer focal lengths. Lens sizes are determined by sensor size. Even when an MFT lens is about the size as a similar focal length FF lens, the MFT lens is almost always a PRO lens with weather sealing, faster max aperture, and metal body. True, some people have all they need at less than 100m (35mm equivalent), and for them lens size may not be significant. But many want and need longer lenses (see the report above about the growing outdoor photo market). For example, I can get the following into a 20-liter Peak Design Everyday Backpack. (www.peakdesign.com/products/everyday-backpack?variant=29743300771884) 1. OM-1 body with Olympus 100-400mm lens. 2. OM-1 body with Olympus 12-100mm lens. 3. E-M1 Mk III body with Pana Leica 9mm f1.7 lens. 4. Both the 1.4x & 2.0x teleconverters. 5. Olympus 60mm macro lens. 6. Godex TT3500 flash. 7. Extra batteries, cables, snacks, iPad, ear buds, and a water bottle. That gives me THREE bodies and four lenses with focal lengths (35mm equivalent) from 18mm through 1,600mm - ready to shoot out of the bag without changing lenses. I can substitute just about any combination of other MFT lenses other than the Olympus 150-400mm f4.5 in this same bag. This can’t be done with any FF or APS system that I know of. MFT CAMERAS ARE TOO EXPENSIVE You say MFT bodies are “too expensive”. Compared to what? Find me any camera that has the features and capabilities of the OM-1 or G9II at anywhere near their prices. According to every video test I’ve seen on KZbin the OM-1 is the only camera on the market that can produce about as many good bird shots (keepers) as the Sony A1 which is almost three times the cost! The new Nikon Z Nikkor 600mm f4 lens sells for US $15,497.00 and that’s not a zoom lens!!! Compare that with the Olympus/OM System 300mm f3 IS PRO at $2,999.99 (which can go to an equivalent of 1,200mm withthe2x converter). Or the zoom OM System 150-400mm PRO IS f4.5 which is 200mm longer than the Nikkor and half the price at US $7,499.99. Who is more expensive now? Sure, some small, fun pocket sized MFT cameras would be awesome, and I hope for a PEN-F II, but MFT started with those cameras and has been struggling to overcome the reputation of being cheap and not professional grade ever sense. If a brand has a reputation for owning a piece of the high ground, then that provides a halo effect for the less expensive and used models. OTHER MANUFACTURERS HAVE CAUGHT UP WITH MFT You say that other manufactures have “caught up” to MFT. That statement says to me that Olympus/OMDS and the MFT companies have been doing the innovating - not Nikon, Canon, Sony, or Fuji. Would any of them be moving to mirrorless but for the success of the mirrorless MFT format? Dominant companies in a market are NEVER innovators. The major auto makers didn’t innovate Electric Vehicles - Tesla did. IBM did not create the personal computer - Apple did. Olympus and Panasonic are both innovators. If not for them pioneering mirrorless cameras and advanced technology do you think Canon, etc. would have ever built any? Look at the other MFT innovations: automatic sensor cleaning, still world class IBIS, extreme high-quality lenses with the most lenses of any mirrorless format, extreme weather sealing for many years, professional grade video, and now on the cutting edge of computational photography and AI. Many of the newest non-MFT bodies have many of the MFT features - that’s just competition - I know of no APS or FF camera body will all of the features of either the G9II or OM-1. Instead, the top FF camera in many ways offer less for more money. SUMMARY Matti, again, I respect your integrity, but I think in this video you are making some statements which can and should be challenged. You ask for our input about what can or should be done. Let me state that I believe there is no perfect system and there are advantages and limitations to all of them. Having said that, I believe that current MFT technology and capability, taken as a whole is, more than competitive with any other camera system. The problem is that the camera buying public just doesn't know the truth about MFT. Worse, many vloggers who believe they support MFT seem half-hearted in their support and are always talking from an inferior and defensive position. I think the time is long past to stop defending why its OK to shoot MFT, and rather go on the offensive explaining its advantages and start asking why anyone would want to spend more money for heavier and bulker gear with less features. Thank you for the chance to discuss these things and for all your work.

[@gordon3988]

For me it is the lack of smaller MFT cameras…you can largely match or beat the size and weight of new MFT with APSC (ok, maybe not at the long end). So the solution, get back to some smaller cameras. I have a small Sony and it works very well but to quote a recent comment from your friend Robin Wong ‘ Sony has no soul; it delivers results and a lot of pros use it, but when shooting for fun they go for MFT or Fuji etc” I would say that sums up my experience. Kind of reminds me of the iPhone (mft) vs Android arguments. I’ve chosen to wait 3 more months and if no new small MFT I’m off to Sony. As for sensor not good enough I recall a KZbinr who did a comparison of 1 inch, MFT and FF sensors and large prints and there was effectively no difference at all at normal viewing distance… hey wait a minute that was you! I think you raised some good points..and yes folks buy a big sensor camera and then only post on KZbin, where a camera phone would be more than good enough. We are simply too wealthy perhaps for our needs, especially since probably the biggest purchaser of cameras are recreational users.

[@LazyJ-3000]

I'm waiting too and like you if nothing new soon I'm also off to the "dark side" (Sony).

[@borderlands6606]

I agree and my GX80 continues to serve (with the help of gaffer tape). Nevertheless, compact aps-c cameras offer most of the m43 experience, with advantages of their own.

[@12symmo]

Go for canon! My a7r4 sensor is a dust magnet, I can’t change lenses without having a dust blower on hand. Also not a fan of the non articulating screens, we’re not in 2012 anymore.

[@johnr.watson7500]

I think you've hit the nail on the head, Gordon. Especially the "too wealthy for our needs" comment. It's sad because, as an MFT user, I know that MFT cameras and lenses are capable of producing great image quality, albeit allowing for the sensors' inherent limitations. That said, with the latest software, even noise issues aren't really a limiting factor anymore.

[@alexmilesg3]

Try the Olympus ep7

[@harvanderveen4188]

Hi Matti, thanks for sharing your thoughts on this subject. I moved from APS-C to MFT last year, and never looked back. Bought a second hand Lumix GX85, and couldn't be happier: great photos and stunning 4K videos! Even paired the body with a vintage Sigma lens (with adapter) - perfect results.

[@nicojan]

I just started again my photography journey with MFT with the EM5.3, and as far as Im concerned it's doing great! As you said though, OM and Pana don't seem to be rushing for innovation, meanwhile powerhouses in other formats are getting smaller and smaller. For my usecase, the compacity and the format are still a big selling point. I can fit my camera and 4 lenses, including the 12-40 F2.8 Pro and the kit telephoto in an insert bag that fills less than half my backpack, which allows me to carry everything with me all the time. I've also found the MFT community to be incredibly supportive, so it's a great experience for me overall.

[@tomfenn7149]

The EM5.3 and the 12-40 2.8, a brilliant combination imho. 👍👍👍

[@FrontRangeGardener]

@@tomfenn7149 Agree. That was my first MFT camera and lens. Unfortunately I lent the EM-5 Mark III to my wife and I never got it back.

[@christopherlyon4946]

Thanks for this video. I have been a Nikon user for 40 years (I started with a Nikkormat FT2) but two years ago I added Olympus to my kit. I have nearly always bought second-hand gear. My biggest Nikon sensor is 36.3 mp, and the files already a challenge to process. I’m not about to give up my Nikon gear for wildlife and macro work, but I am really enjoying using my 3 Olympus cameras - EM5, EM5 ii, and EM1 ii. I value the build quality - especially the solid metal bodies - the portability and the software capabilities. I hope OM Systems and Panasonic keep developing new products, but even if they don’t it won’t be the end of the world for me, because the second-hand market is likely to be strong for many years to come - at least for the rest of my active life. Best wishes for 2024!

[@papa.alfredo]

You do not have the best of Olympus, the OM D E M1X, the specs of this camera is much better than all those you mentioned in your text! There are many videos in here about the camera. Check it out! Many greetings

[@vladimirkraus1438]

What repels me from MFT is the fact that they do not offer new models of small and cheap rangefinder style cameras. They only produce bulky and expensive DLSR-style cameras like Panasonic G9 or OM-1. If you decide to go with small sensor, then you want a small camera. And vice versa, if you are willing to carry a large camera, then you have no reason to stay will a small sensor. I am now looking at Sony A7C... that's the style of camera I am probably going to buy...

[@davidszep3488]

True. The advantage of the m43 is weight and size, yet manufacturers make 650g+ big cameras... it's a joke. At least the lenses are cheaper and smaller...

[@Bhakti-rider]

There's another important reason for anyone who intends to use telephoto lenses going for a smaller sensor: The longer focal-length lenses are much smaller and lighter, not to mention less expensive.

[@MrRicky120985]

Hello Matti, Having the chance to possess and use both systems (FF and M4/3) in parallel, what strikes me the most when I use my G9 or my EM-10 is the « fun factor » that I feel in comparison with their FF counterpart (Z5 for me). Each time I take my M4/3 cameras, I just enjoy the simple act of taking pictures, without any unrealistic expectations, knowing that the overall IQ will be more than enough for my usages, leading me to be much more creative and experimental in my shootings. With my Nikon, I feel unconsciously that I have to « produce » something much more refined out of it, leading to a less spontaneous experience and less enjoyment for me. Progressing more and more on my learning journey, I think I will get rid of my Nikon because of this « expected quality » burden that distract me from the real progression axes that I should follow. Beside this feeling point, I also like this David vs Goliath mindset that comes with the M4/3 and the efficiency aspect embedded in the system (size, cost, solidity) I hope my comment is understandable :) Cheers, Ricardo

[@petegleeson1]

Very understandable @MrRicky120985 and it made me smile.

[@stefanwagener]

Agree to, that M43 was and still is also a fun factor to use. And at the time of having a big, clunky DSLR as well, that was a big positive difference. But now with a Z7, not being bigger than an M1-III but having a much bigger viewfinder with less noisy and sharper pictures, the fun factor is actually now more on the Z7 side. I still use M43 for its overall compactness but the fun-factor hasn't really been much updated in the M43 world and a little bit of disappointment is when I work on the M43 afterwards at home on an 4k monitor. The differences are unfortunately very obvious and even if it is not a deal breaker, like Matti said, I am not really happy with the result because I know, it could be much better if M43 would update their technology.

[@MrRicky120985]

@@stefanwagener indeed I cannot deny that the IQ gap between my G9 and my Z5 is noticeable on some occasions. But again for my usages, it still ok. But in the future, I’ll compare much more in depth both systems as the size factor is indeed less and less relevant. I may check the OM-1 at some point but again not sure that the price is competitive against Nikon or Sony FF.

[@PH61a]

I really don't understand why MFT should have a bigger 'fun factor' than other systems. You yourself determine the fun factor.

[@stefanwagener]

@@PH61a Correct, it is very subjective. And it is not about MFT in general, in my case the fun factor of the M1 compared to - the M5 is much higher because the M1 has a very comfortable grip and is more ergonomic than the M5 or Pen-F. Otherwise features are basically the same. The Pen-F I take on bicycle tours for its smaller size but otherwise the M1 is more fun to use for its ergonomics. - the DSLR Nikon D800 because the M1 is again just more comfortable to hold than then much heavier DSLR with a typically heavy lens. While I enjoy more the result of the D800, the M1 is just more fun to use and to hold because of its much lower weight. So ergonomics and user experience while shooting are the key factors for me to define "fun factor" ... and that is very subjective and not related to sensor format.

[@ariel_fpd7]

I think the advantage of MFT cameras is the size of their lenses and their performance relative to FF equivalents, and portability. But in the last two years, both Panasonic and Olympus opted to create camera bodies that are just as big and heavy as FF's, and when using the system's lenses, the imbalance is very noticeable. I used an OM-1 for a few months and although it is an excellent camera I decided not to continue with it. Whenever I had the chance to shoot, whether in my free time or work, I ended up taking my old EM5 and EM10 with me. And for the everyday use, an EPL1 that has been 15 years since it came out. That's the problem with the system, it lost innovation, it gained weight and volume and it's just uncomfortable

[@FieldingSmith]

I have back problems, so even if the newer bodies are as large a FF, the difference in lenses isn’t to be ignored. But I’d really like to see highend compact m43 bodies being released again (like the gx8, pen-f, or em5ii lines… none of which were upgraded to the same level as when they were the flagships)

[@GarrettLucasWV]

I would agree with most of this, especially about having high-end ultra-compact cameras. To go with that, I'd like to see Oly come out with absolutely top-shelf lenses that are very small as well. Instead of the large F1.2 primes, how about a 17mm or 25mm F2? It would be smaller and easier to pack around every day but it wouldnt' work for me unless the glass was stellar. The current 1.8 primes just aren't good enough for me as far as optical quality. For street photography and travel photography, most folks aren't going to be shooting at F1.2 anyway. But I'm afraid it's too late for all of that since Oly was sold to JIP and I don't think there's the same level of commitment to the format of the original Olympus company.

[@EmilyStoneMarxistFan]

F2.0-2.8 lenses on the FF do not look so bigger than 1.2-1.4 olympus lenses

[@FieldingSmith]

@@EmilyStoneMarxistFan and those f2-2.8 primes let in 1-2 stops less light… yeah no thanks. What’s really fun is to compare the Pany 2.8 zooms to the FF 2.8s, it makes me laugh how comical small that duo is for what you get from it.

[@EmilyStoneMarxistFan]

@@FieldingSmith not less light... Less light per square inch, but the same amount for the entire sensor. Of course you will need to set ISO higher to achieve the same brightness. But the (integral) amount of physical light will be the same.

[@FieldingSmith]

@@EmilyStoneMarxistFan shoot with some strobes. Given some variation for how companies measure ISO and F-stops… 2.8 is 2.8 for the amount of light that is exposed, regardless of the sensor size. I’ve tested that on sensors ranging from a cellphone to a MF film camera. The “same amount of light for the entire sensor” argument is just silly, and I’ve seen no proof of it in any real world scenario. Only DoF, pixel performance due to pixel density (ie high iso performance) , and the total number of megapixels that can be squeezed onto the sensor changes due to sensor size.

[@iivarilappalainen9836]

As Pentax user I find the "MFT is dead arguments" somewhat funny.

[@Marco_Chiappetta]

Matti and Peter F are clowns. The 5 best MFT cameras in the history of the system have been released in the last 2 years, along with maybe 1/2 dozen excellent lenses, including an amazing macro lens and an ultra long telephoto.

[@birdboy92]

@@Marco_Chiappetta Not a very convincing take. Yeah the cameras are the best that have come out recently, but that's a redundant statement because the best camera of every system has come out in the last 5 years - that's how progressing technology works. The point is that M43 cameras cost the same as full-frame cameras, aren't substantially smaller (body wise), and aren't selling well. Hence the video.

[@IanTindale]

Some years ago I was a Pentax user - I had the original Pentax Q with a range of the lenses, and had rather a lot of fun with those, the quality was generally excellent, surprisingly good - if only they'd bring back a 2024 model

[@brugj03]

I think it`s because you`re working with a dinosaur, and that what is already dead cannot die again.

[@snowcat20]

Haha, there are different grades of Death :) Pentax style Death, MFT style Death, Nikon style Death :)

[@ogonzilla]

I love how you explained each reason! It's interesting. For me, the pricing and image quality were two big points. Once you compare full-frame images, there is no contest. The companies should offer smaller and faster cameras with some Topaz/DXO/Google Pixel internal features for consumers. Focus on the "snaps" young crowd that can't afford a GR3 lol

[@frumiousgaming]

Omar the legend

[@mickeli7155]

"want a camera that is as far away from the phone camera as possible" That was a good argument. I will never go FF, no way, and its not down to size of camera, its all about the size and cost of quality optics.

[@Todd-v9y]

I just bought a G9 kit for $900 and bought additional 3 very good used lenses. Mint condition. I'm an old film guy and I'm excited about this new system.

[@harryniedecken5321]

You will really enjoy it, especially if the lenses are the higher end ones with a fast aperture

[@ceaabe]

I think something like a PEN-F was the perfect MFT camera. Light, small enough, with a viewfinder. Still like my old PENs for everyday use.

[@Sven-R]

Plus the PEN-F is such a great looking piece of gear 🤩

[@keithholland4322]

The problem was that it was overpriced and didn't offer professional features like dual card slots or weather sealing. If it had been about half the price, it would have been immensely popular!

[@ceaabe]

@@keithholland4322 Overpriced, yes. But I don’t need the rest in a PEN.

[@keithholland4322]

@@ceaabe In order to sell for that price point, it should have had those features at a minimum. Since it didn't, it should have sold for about half that price.

[@iAribeth]

The reason to use MFT for me is I can grab a body+lens combo with 800mm equivalent FOV in my hand and walk around for 3 hours without breaking my shoulder and wrist. The image quality is not ideal of course, but with AI de-noise nowadays, it's usable.

[@TrevorEMayo]

Show us how the images from your walks with M43 are lower in quality than full frame without pixel peeping.

[@0ooTheMAXXoo0]

@@TrevorEMayo Any photo printed a decent size will show individual pixels and APS-C seems about the smallest sensor to not give you shimmering digital-looking pixels... It is physics which gives you diffraction if the pixel sites are too small... Absolutely, smaller sensors need AI to not look crap!

[@TrevorEMayo]

@@0ooTheMAXXoo0 You haven't included one word in your response to show factually how images from the OP's M43 photo walks are lower in quality than full frame without pixel peeping. Not one word. No facts on what constitutes "decent size". No reference to available light. I doubt you could go over to Flickr and look at the uncropped images of professional photographers taken with modern M43 and full frame cameras at 16x20 print sizes (which is laughable because almost no one prints anymore) and tell the difference without pinching and zooming. In fact the producer of this video beginning around the 2 minute mark simply admits that people just "want" the IQ when they don't even need it. They are suckers for the industry trying to sell more product.

[@rydinorwin]

I just bought an Olympus E-1MX, going to get the 40-150, want to photo sailing racing from a boat. £1100, is going to be good! iPhone rest of time. Niche eh? Good video, but I don’t think you highlighted the quality and value of the lenses?

[@Bhakti-rider]

@@0ooTheMAXXoo0 I've made 13x19 prints from 16MP M43 cameras that are perfectly acceptably sharp. With 20 & 25MP sensors, there's even some scope to crop a bit and still get perfectly sharp 13x19 prints.

[@stephenbrasure4331]

Many good comments! I especially agree with your thoughts about the lack of affordable micro 4/3 cameras being introduced. I'm still happy with my micro 4/3 gear and feel that it meets all my needs. Another reason for folks to choose micro 4/3 gear is the low prices of used cameras and lenses. Your comment about people buying more expensive/higher end gear than they need is something I agree with. For most amateur photographers, the micro 4/3 system is more than capable for 90% or more of the shooting conditions encountered. Thanks for an interesting and thought provoking video!

[@lumilikha]

Does it look like the Lumix G9ii is not enough to give enough life to M43? Looking at getting it over the Lumix S5ii

[@dickrichards566]

Indeed, I will buy now a gh7 over the s5ii. s5ii in his fullframe class of course also a great camera.

[@argusc3310]

Isn’t the whole digital camera market, not just MFT, “not doing well”? Last time this was brought to my attention, the story was that mobile phones were killing the consumer camera market. The hobby-enthusiast and professional markets for stand-alone digital cameras are pretty darn small.

[@poobs2361]

Recreational photography (mostly retro film shooters due to cheap film and cameras) surged during COVID. Coming out of the lockdowns the cost of old film cameras (and especially good film) shot up due to the high demand and a lot of people went into digital cameras to get their fix. Just within the past 3ish years the industry has had a small boom (I've heard numbers from last year dipped slightly but this was after a big surge). While phone cams are now extremely sophisticated, they do still have downsides that even a simple point and shoot can remedy. Things like optical zoom (big one), manual exposure controls, physical dials; cameras with larger sensors unlock even more benefits like more dynamic range (better graduation between color changes), more control over DOF subject separation, vastly improved low light performance, EVF for tough shooting situations, weather proof bodies, etc. Even from a hobby-enthusiast perspective, having more control over the exposure with the presence of physical controls is more than enough reason to use these digital cameras rather than the phone that is so conveniently always in my pocket, and that's ignoring all the other benefits. I think a lot of people are waking up to the reality that having something that does 1 thing very well is better than something that conveniently does many jobs okay. It also has the added benefit that your phone is just a phone and having a ridiculous camera is no longer a selling point to you when choosing one to buy.

[@andrewknowles6731]

Global digital camera market size 2024 is $5.4 Billion dollars set to grow at 4.8% CAGR until 2029 when it will reach $6.8 Billion. The point and shoot cameras declined through phone camera improvements and take up but the enthusiast market is growing at a good rate.

[@angeloplayforone]

Sony grew from 1% to 24% marketshare in 20 years that the smartphone exists. Please stop making excuses.

[@miso56]

​​​@@angeloplayforonesony rised due to the knowledge from konica minolta. original sony cameras where weak. pana will cut all model lines without perspective and will share a lot between ff and m43 (see g9ii), so m43 can survive. but om has no chance ...

[@argusc3310]

@@angeloplayforone Excuses for what? MFT market share? I am a Sony shooter, with 3 Sony digital cameras, including the RX-100, A7ii, and A7Rii. Is that 24% growth in market share out of a shrinking pie? What’s the net growth in sales & profits? That was my main question.

[@MrHasherd]

You always talk sense Matti. A few years ago I switched from Canon to MFT for my bird photography. I’m getting good results with the OM1 and Panasonic 100-400mm lens. Less weight and less cost.

[@teesee03]

E-M1 MkIII + Pan 100-400 user here. That lens is wonderful, and it's a great combination.

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

Happy new year Matti and thanks for another great video. Interesting take on the MFT market Matti. I agree on many of the reasons people are choosing FF over MFT but I’m much more optimistic on its future. It’s never been a sales leader (except in Asia) but that doesn’t mean it’s dying. On the size question yes, the bodies are now comparable, to the point where the G9ii and the S5ii use the same body but lenses are still far smaller, lighter and more affordable, they are easier for R&D and production. I also do feel that for many people that weight and system size is a major factor especially as we get older. Where I really do agree with you is your last few sentences. Both OMDS and Lumix have left the small camera development behind. I have said for years that a GX8 replacement but with up to date sensors,IBIS, focus and all the other features is long overdue and I’d swap that for my big G9 any day. Best wishes and thanks for your vision

[@stevebonn3463]

Perhaps the increasing number of retired people who want minimum weight burdens will help drive more micro 4/3 use.

[@hedydd2]

I have a GX80 and G9. Wouldn’t like to choose between them if it came to choosing only one. They serve different daily circumstances. The GX80 is more compact and discreet but the G9 is a workhorse and satisfying beast to hold and use.

[@PabloMatsumoto]

Many MFT (Micro Four Thirds) users value the portability of the system. Manufacturers have overlooked this and stopped producing small, high-performance cameras. The latest MFT models are even larger than Full Frame. This has been a mistake, and it doesn't seem like they will address it in the short term.

[@Culturelens]

We love the size just the way it is. You don't speak for everyone

[@tsbrownie]

I have 2 GX-8s and 1 GH5 Mii. The GX-8s are great for 4K video as they can run until the battery is exhausted without overheating (my Samsung S-21 runs 2-4 minutes). They are also much smaller / lighter than the GH5. Then there are the lenses which are much smaller and lighter than full frame equivalents allowing you to pack smaller or pack more for the same weight as full frame. I don't blame my equipment for the quality of my work, it's way beyond my skill level.

[@TheCruisinCrew]

The main advantage was the small size. I would love a tiny camera like the GM5 (which is next to impossible to get), but with modern features (4k and Panasonic's new autofocus system)! Now that most of their camera bodies are as big or bigger than other manufacturers and just as expensive, I'd rather stick with Sony...

[@Healthy_Toki]

main advantage now is weight (lenses) for telephoto, ibis that absolutely destroys full frame, and the various goodies in video/photography that are exclusive to panasonic and olympus

[@sonyviva308]

I think one the major key feature that I love the most in M43 systems is the incredible In body image stabilization. A cheap mirrorless full frame or an old DSLR wont probably have one, and if it does have one, especially for mirrorless, is far too expensive than M43 cameras. I believe M43 are still the best choice for street photography and casual, travel cameras because they are super small. I dont want to carry a "pro FF" camera for travel. Its ridiculous.

[@peterleung8731]

I switched from Nikon D700 to Olympus EM1 Mk II four and a half years ago. I agree the mirrorless full frame cameras are becoming less heavy and less expensive nowadays. I cannot promise to stay with MFT and not switch back to full frame in the future. However, at this moment, using my MFT camera and lens is still a good experience for events and weddings shotting. The Olympus f/2.8 pro lens and the Sigma f/1.4 are really enough for those jobs. Hope there will be something good happening this year for MFT.

[@trlerv]

Takk!

[@mattisulanto]

Thanks for the support!

[@danncorbit3623]

I have a MFT camera I use for arduous hiking situations. I shoot almost exclusively full frame. The MFT weaknesses (as I see them) are ISO limitations and resolution limits caused by the small sensor. The strengths are possible smaller size and weight, less glass and weight and money for long lenses (e.g. An f4 300mm lens is like a 600mm full frame lens and can be a quarter of the size and cost of that 600mm lens). The problem with MFT is that the vendors forgot what made them great, and they made bigger and bigger MFT cameras. I have an Olympus E-PL7 which is teeny tiny and very light. The lenses are also small and light. However, all the latest MFT cameras are much bigger and heavier, making them useless for me. If they weigh the same as a Sigma fp L or more, then I have no interest in them unless they take advantage of their physics edge and make some good, cheap telephoto lenses. The Olympus 300mm f/4 lens is too expensive for what you get. I'm not going to pay full frame prices for MFT. Tamron and Sigma don't seem interested in making one. Here is what needs to happen to keep me interested... Instead of making bigger and bigger MFT cameras, make them smaller and lighter. Think teeny-tiny. Make 200, 300, and 400mm f4 lenses. Maybe a 200 and 300mm f2.8. You won't get full frame bokeh and resolution, but you will get the light gathering and shutter speed. I'm never going to use an MFT camera for anything but situations where weight matters and where their crop factor is an advantage instead of a disadvantage. MFT should rule the world for the birder crowd, but they don't and they won't. The are too busy trying to be like the full frame cameras. That's stoooooooooopid.

[@urswuergler3969]

I can now use Auto ISO on the G9 II since the sensor is really good.

[@danncorbit3623]

@@urswuergler3969 The ISO handling of cameras clearly improves with how new the sensor is. An ancient full frame camera, the Canon EOS 1Ds from 2002, has a sports score of 954, which indicates very poor ISO handling. The 5D from 2005 has a sports score of 1368 which is a lot better but still not great by modern FF standards. The Canon EOS R3 has a sports score of 4086. DXOMARK has not yet rated your camera, but gives a score of 1312 to the Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II, which is as good as the 5D. Since your camera is very new, I would not be surprised if it approached 2000. The medium format Pentax 645Z has a score of 4505 and it was launched in 2014.

[@VynZography]

The G9M2 is great but they put it in a full frame body…what is the reason to buy it then?

[@lgerigk]

MFT is great for everyday use, especially for its compactness. But what do hobby photographers want to shoot? Sunsets, sunrises, night photos - scenes where the small sensors have their main disadvantages. Compact FF cameras like the A7C have taken over some of the compact size market without the compromises in image quality.

[@PC-no8jk]

Thanks. I own MFT, APSC, FF... and I agree with you.

[@raldz]

I just got my OM-5 a couple of weeks ago, and it’s my daily camera to capture moments. I also have Sony for professional stuff, and Fujifilm for creative stuff. With these 3 systems I use the OM-5 the most.

[@Blogaholik]

I just bought one having FF and APS-C and since having SCI MFT has given me new life. I love it and dont find it less pleasureable than my other FF cameras. Its like the middle ground to my phone, action cam, gimbal cam, FF, sLR etc. And when I post people enjoy the photos either way.

[@camerascanfly]

Recently bought a LUMIX G9 m2, have a wide range of leica lenses and especially love the 100-400 mm Leica lens - the new autofocus is insane so are the video features, SSD recording and so on. Has the camera the same body as the FF sister? Yes. Is this a bad thing? No. I had a GX9 and GX80 and found them to be too small for my rather big hands- they were some centimeters smaller but in the end I always preferred to carry my g9 and now the g9 m2. But the big difference for me is the crop factor, the excellent leica lenses, no rolling shutter and the excellent video quality…

[@kentmemories]

m43 users since 2010, and FF 2-3 years ago. You are right, mostly. One more crucial point is m43 cannot nail their product positioning correctly. IMHO, m43 is the best system for 1/ travel, bcos lens are small from wide to long tele 2/ Vlogging, bcos IBIS is far superior 3/ VDO, bcos frame rate & IBIS Those three are m43 real competitive advantage with huge market size. Now, OM seems to be static. Their OM5 is big miss opportunity. Lumix is very clever in sharing the same body as FF (G9II S5II) so they save cost significantly. I think they will pursue this strategy going forward, while focusing on FF. I will keep my m43 since I love GX9 and few lens. I will use until they are broken.

[@gainde1137]

Why MFT if APS-C is larger but also in smaller bodies?

[@mattisulanto]

That is a very good question😀

[@jerrymiller7270]

I bought my Olympus omd em10 II specifically for traveling. I wanted an inexpensive, discreet(small) camera with acceptable image quality. That coupled with ibis was a winner for me. For good or bad I have always seen MFT as best for travel or street photography.

[@benauer3431]

Because no apsc maker has anywhere near the lens catalog of M43. Apsc offerings from canon and Nikon are a joke. The apsc lens selection for those in particular is pathetic.

[@bosamuelsson5814]

Lenses for system cameras, I mean. From landline to tele. Otherwise, you can manage, say, as you point out, with a mobile phone or compact camera.

[@christophejournoud2773]

@@benauer3431 even it is true on paper, there are as much as lens needed for APS-C, unless you choose to make a gear collection on big shelves 😁

[@shenZ007]

When was the micro four thirds doing well ?

[@joetag5429]

I use an Olympus micro 4/3 camera for bird and wildlife photography. The f4.0 300mm and the f2.8 40-150 lenses plus the 1.4x extender are my most used optics. Weight, amazing IBIS and weather sealing make the system ideal for hiking trails to get images. The shame of their system is the lack of weather sealing on the Olympus f1.8 12, 17, 25 and 45mm primes.

[@tomfenn7149]

Actually all those primes behave under harsh weather conditions, surprisingly well. The thing you must be weary about is whether or not the front element rotates. If it does, then that lens will not protect against the elements as well. Get a decent rubber collapsible lens hood, as well s a pair of Marigold (gloves) if you're really paranoid, and use the glove parts to fit over the lens. Or use clingfilm! But honestly, you don't really need to bother unless you are shooting during monsoon season!

[@urswuergler3969]

It’s interesting that you mention bird / wildlife. It’s the G9 II and dual stabilization using surprisingly light tele lenses that finally get me interested in this topic. It would never cross my mind to carry submarines to a location. M43 will allow me to shoot hand-held, which is amazing. Two big problems with m43? 1) Well, tens of millions of users already have plenty of gear. We are unlikely to buy much in the immediate future. 2) Quite a lot of m43 users I know also own FF gear. The opposite is much less likely to happen since people were told that they would be missing out. When I see an impeccably downsampled 4k120p video (from a 19 MP frame!) from my G9 II on an OLED screen, I do realize that I will be using m43 for another decade. Yes, it’s high-end enough - we just had to wait for quite some time.

[@Furry7272]

Just buy the pro versions…. Weatherized!

[@formermpc10]

Why do you need weather-resistant gear? It's paranoia.

[@tomfenn7149]

@@formermpc10Haha! Absolutely NOT paranoia! Just common sense. I went to Wales where it chucked it down all week in Snowdon and my E-M1 mk1 got drenched. But it kept on working. Now, if that had've been £1500 of unsealed equipment, say a Ricoh GRIII, I would've kept the camera in my pocket and not taken any pictures at all. So perhaps only paranoia if you are already loaded and can afford multiple non-weather sealed cameras.

[@DeepteshLovesTECH]

Super happy with my Sony A6100 with some f1.4 Prime lenses! Perfect image quality to size ratio!

[@al_in_philly5832]

A while back, I was shooting some photos at a political event with Jill Biden. While waiting for her appearance, I was chatting with a newspaper photographer who was standing next to me. Around her neck were two Canon Mk5's both with significant lenses; I was carrying an Olympus E-M1. I asked her "wouldn't you rather be shooting with something lighter like this?" She responded with "absolutely, I hate lugging these around, but my paper insists that I shoot with a full-frame camera like my Canon's." I bring that up, because even though a m4/3 body, like my current OM-1, isn't that much smaller than several current mirrorless FF bodies, when you couple those bodies to the lenses, you suddenly have a camera system that is quite heavy to carry around all day, or, heaven forbid, have two strapped around one's neck. As a street photographer who often will be holding his camera for several hours at a time, there is no comparison between shooting with a good m4/3 camera and lens and shooting full frame. That real-world advantage needs to be better exploited by Panasonic and OM Systems, as that advantage will be around for the foreseeable future.

[@Raist3db]

It used to be that way but it depends. Look at those F1.2 big primes and look at what you can get lens equivalent on FF. It’s not that simple, plus the bodies aren’t that smaller anymore in m43rds (the high end latest tech bodies). And that’s what’s really unfortunate. I don’t think it had to end up there.

[@jondough7823]

@@Raist3dbthe bodies aren’t much smaller, but the lenses are.

[@Raist3db]

@@jondough7823 Depends. If you are talking about equivalent lenses in a standard range of focals, not so much anymore. And doubly so if you compare to Fuji APSC. Truth is, m43rds has let its unique selling proposition erode. I think this puts them in a dangerous position in the market.

[@malcolmwright6948]

Hi Matti I got into MFT after comparing the cost of Flagship cameras, When I did my comparison, MFT Flagship cameras cost around about a fifth to a quarter of the cost of Full Frame Flagship cameras. I don't think that has changed all that much. Then, I looked at the cost of professional lenses as a comparison and saw that MFT lenses were so much cheaper than Full Frame lenses. I then did a wish list kit exercise, and the saving by going MFT was between £20,000 and £50,000 at that time. Then I looked at the secondhand market. Sad to say, the secondhand market for Full Frame mirrorles cameras is pretty dire. The secondhand market for Full Frame mirrorless lenses doesn’t exist, as most Full Frame manufacturers don't even have a full line up of new lenses for people who are investing in a new full Frame mirrorless system. I think the Canon decision to not let third parties make lenses for its Full Frame miirrorless system reflects how difficult it is for them to make money even when they're charging between 4 and 5 times what MFT manufacturers are charging for a Flagship camera. Will my photographs improve 4 or 5 folds if I switch to Full Frame, or will I take a real financial beating by paying the inflated prices for Full Frame in the longer term? That's a hypothetical question, I thankfully will not have to answer as I went MFT secondhand and now possess my wish list kit. It takes pictures I like, and no one can persuade me to pay 4 or 5 times more for kit to take those same pictures in the ridiculous hope that the pictures will be 4 or 5 times better.

[@thomasanderson5929]

Not exactly true. A Canon R6 Mark ii costs $2,300 at BH. An OM-1 costs..... $2,000 at BH. That's only a $300 difference where the R6 ii gets 4 extra megapixels, the best autofocus and will absolutely destroy the OM-1 in noise levels across the board... and then there's bokeh. Sure, the OM-1 has a few things going for it (HHHR, Live ND, the ergonomics and compact size). But... none of those really trump the R6ii when shooting photos normally. M43 needs to come down in price even more to make up for its shortcomings... OR, the sensors and ISO noise needs to improvement. Hard to swallow a $2,000 price tag when an R6ii is just a bit more.

[@nicojan]

Why yes, the most expensive MFT bodies are expensive.

[@malcolmwright6948]

​​@thomasanderson5929 I didn't realise the R6 Mark ii was Canon's Flagship camera? Why is the R3 £6,000 if it isn't the Canon Flagship? Are seriously suggesting I get into a Full Frame GAS burn out by spending my money on a none Flagship ie. Inferior camera in a manufacturers product range?

[@jonjones3592]

@@malcolmwright6948 For the competitively priced Canon lenses of course...

[@JessDemant]

@@malcolmwright6948 You don't need a flagship camera from the big three to match a flagship camera from MFT, that's just the facts!

[@darkarsar1365]

I see this as a cost / performance issue. General photography has been taken over by the Smartphones. For "enthusiasts / Pro" photography, M43 caramers may be smaller (but not by much) and as you said, they are not substential cheaper. For enthusiasts / prosumers, the full frame sensor just produces better technical images "most of the time". Prosumers will have the skills to create good images regardless of format, but for the general enthusiasts ... full frame has the lattitude to produce "better technical" images will lesser skills ... The above equally applies to APS-C cameras as well. Full frame and smartphones basically hit the cost / performance sweet spot for now and will continue to own the largest market share. Just my 2 cents.

[@WhoIsSerafin]

Look at the price of the om1 vs a nikon z8 which are very comparable in specs and the prices aren't even remotely close for pro cameras

[@keithholland4322]

That's mostly true, but not for real estate photography, macro photography, or sports and wildlife photography, and those are the areas where Panasonic and Olympus need to focus their efforts. Better glass for sports and wildlife photography should be the primary focus now, focusing on bright prime lenses with apertures of f/2.8 or brighter. Also, both companies should have a new MFT camera with dual card slots for around $1,000-$1,200 for real estate photographers. Such a camera need not have a huge buffer, but it should have a high resolution mode and excellent dynamic range. Perhaps wide angle tilt/shift lenses could also be a great addition for that. (Anybody from Laowa reading this?) A macro zoom lens could also be a great way to dominate the world of macro photography since that's something that no other camera manufacturer has ever produced, as far as I am aware.

[@paulemma8125]

Just got back from a trip to Scotland my gx9 performed perfectly. It’s small light and used two lenses for a two week trip. My pictures blew me away.

[@EstifanosTZewde]

The dying out of MFT has been a much talked-about topic for the past 5+ years. It always amazes me how people overlook the very fact that photography as we know it is on life support 'thanks' to advancements in AI and facial recognition technology.

[@tubularificationed]

MFT is on life support, yes, but fullframe seems doing quite well, with cameras and lenses seeing a lot of investments, in their entire price range latitude. Facial recognition is something which boosted and boosts fullframe mirrorless market, at least the leading brands there (Sony and Canon). AI internet image generators are only just that, because they don't offer high enough resolution e.g. for larger prints. AI generators are something for web resolution only, for Instagram, Facebook &co.

[@markwscrivener]

I've shot only Nikon since the F3 came out. About a year ago I bought a used GH5 and totally fell in love. Not only was it a wonderful camera body, but the huge selection of great lenses that were both small and inexpensive opened up all sorts of options. Yes, more small and "affordable" MFT bodies would be great, but perhaps what is needed is a good old fashioned advertising campaign reminding folks how fun a camera can be.

[@Culturelens]

No, don't tell them, we don't need them to come over! sh shhh

[@AspectRatioPolice]

There is no point of going to a MFT system when APSC ans even Full Frame cameras are the same size and price.

[@bsum8715]

I use MFT and has just upgraded my MFT system (from EM-5 ii to OM-1, together with a few new lenses). The ultimate reason for me to not to switch to full frame is lens weight and size, as I do mostly travel photography. Looking forward, I would be very happy if there can be collaboration (if not M&A) between OM Systems and an action cam manufacturer (e.g. dji or Insta360). The Pocket 3 has shown that a larger sensor in another form factor can be a success.

[@gramoukdoom]

Size and weight apart, do you really think your pics would be that much better with a FF system?

[@marximus4]

Interesting timing as I'm considering getting into MFT again, haha. I've got three full-frame bodies and one APS-C body, but I'm looking into selling one of the FF bodies to get a compact kit with good weather sealing for hiking. I think the MFT manufacturers need to focus on keeping the size and price down, since that's arguably what differentiates them from larger sensor systems.

[@urswuergler3969]

I am more concerned with kit size. The combination G9 II + Pany Leica 12 - 60mm + Olympus 45mm F1.2 is what I use most of the time. Could not be happier with the size and the quality.

[@theathletesmedia]

I'm a sports photographer with golf being my big money maker. I switched from Canon a few years ago to a few EM1X's because I was tired of carrying around the long 2.8's. I have the PanLeica 200mm 2.8 and the Oly 40-150mm 2.8 along with a few 1.2 primes and I couldn't be happier. I also have field sports covered, even at night.

[@JessDemant]

You don't need a flagship camera from the big three to match a flagship camera from MFT, that's just the facts!

[@keithholland4322]

@@JessDemant Canon and Sony definitely have better subject detection and tracking for sports photography, especially when the subject is wearing a helmet. They also have better low light performance and the ability to blur out the background more, but the downside is you have to carry around bigger, heavier lenses. It's always a trade off. However, in terms of value for money, it's hard to beat an OM-1 or even a G9 II.

[@zardosspinosa6944]

I own lots of micro 4/3 gear, and I just love the format, but the portraits that come out of my Sony A7R3 45 megapixel sensor are just stunning

[@geogu3images]

That A7R3 is a workhorse.. A pro-level keeper and can now be had for cheap money used. I sold my A7R4 for a A7cR but kept my A7R3..

[@WhoIsSerafin]

Can i ask where we can find the exact sales breakdown of lenses and cameras from each manufacturer? A OM1 compared to any equivalent highend sony, nikon, etc is dirt cheap and not that expensive. So i think you are very wrong about that and it's not said enough when they market the camera. My om5 with a 20mm 1.7 is smaller and lighter than my fujifilmx100v. Size is one of the most prominent reasons i pick a certain camera and will never consider full frame. Full frame won't come close to a 75mm 1.8 in m4/3 size in my lifetime

[@gallowaystx]

Lens size Matti is so much more meaningful than body. I have been shooting Nikon FF and film for 30+ years and have all the right lenses (f mount). I also have a mft kit I shoot the mft 90% of the time unless on assignment. It’s the best system for street/travel I’ve found due to the size/quality/PRICE! of the lenses. The reality is that the mft bodies were so advanced in their time that the older small bodies still compete. A gx85 (e.g.) can be had for peanuts compared to other mirrorless systems who are only catching up now. I think “real” photographers understand this value and will keep the system alive. I love your work and your videos. Been watching for years but first post. Much love from Philadelphia have a great new year.

[@adidabax6809]

I used to think those small MFT cameras were for beginners. After a few years as an amateur, I have a growing fondness for them and am amazed at the quality of the photos one can get, especially vs phones. I don't see any reason MFT has to be doomed, many "real" photographers are begging for new MFT bodies.

[@gabithemagyar]

"The reality is that the mft bodies were so advanced in their time that the older small bodies still compete. " Very true. I still use my EM5 M2 and have recently bought some PRO lenses for it rather than upgrading the body. For what I do (mostly hiking, street and travel stills) the body is more than adequate so I have no incentive to upgrade. Having said that, if they put out a PEN F M2 I would snap one up immediately.

[@brugj03]

I think you`re wrong. Real photograpers don`t pull the market. Hobbyists that want the best at the moment do. And they don`t even notice MFT.

[@joonas2265]

Did Om System release sales numbers from last year?

[@bsuthe]

The Sony α7 series and the new OM-1 are very similar in size but, correct me if I'm wrong, the MFT format allows much smaller lenses.

[@educatetube]

I think m4/3 still have its place. I am currently using GH4 for most of my KZbin videos as it is very robust video camera (long battery, 4k, 50mbs video format, wifi app, etc); great for quick KZbin videos without compromised. Other positive positive points are: native 2x crop compared to full frame- great for wildlife photography. In general m4/3 can also achieve faster frame rates and shutter speed. Think of GH6 for example, could film at 300fps @1080p. If they can achieve 1000fps @1080p and fast and natural autofocus like a human eye, I would buy it over a full frame camera in a heart beat for video function.

[@Stephen.Bingham]

I think the basic issue here is cost of manufacture. For example, building a 25mm f/0.9 lens capable of resolving 24 MPix on a M43 sensor is a massively bigger engineering challenge than building an equivalent 50mm f/1.8 lens capable of resolving the same resolution on a FF sensor. Full frame systems are therefore already becoming the cheaper option, with M43 systems becoming the domain of professional videographers where sensor readout speed is paramount.

[@mattisulanto]

Thanks. That's another very good point. Design and build ultra fast aperture lenses is not easy.

[@ShawnPerryVideoPhotoS5]

Thank you so much for this video. I moved from the Panasonic G9 to the S5 and now S5ii. My main reason for going the full frame route was light sensitivity and training. In learning photography from books and KZbin, it really helped me understand better what everyone was teaching me in full frame. Lame I know, but my brain just clicked better with full frame, and I got better results photographically. Thanks for such a thought provoking video. Excellent work!

[@JulesAndJim100]

Your video confirms something I've been feeling for a time. I've had a G9 for a couple of years and enjoyed it immensely. I've taken several thousand images with it, some of which I've been pleased with. The many bad ones are due to the ineptness of the photographer and not the camera lol. I believe the major advantages of MFT against FF were IBIS, compactness and low expense. When you consider the G9ii is similarly priced to the S5ii then the cost equation is negated. The size of the G9ii is pretty much the same as the S5ii/S5iix (same body practically) so the compactness issue is negated. The IBIS of the G9ii might be possibly be superior to the S5ii (that's speculation on my part as I have no evidence to support that) but the S5ii by all accounts has a much superior IBIS than it's nearest competitors, the Sony A7iV and Canon R6ii and certainly it's found to be more than adequate. So, that's the stability advantage negated. So Why buy a G9ii? I have literally just faced that same decision when moving up from my G9. Fortunately I only have two MFT lenses (14-140ii and PL 100-400) so no great investment. This means the move to FF was an easy one for make to mean I get better low light performance and that shallow depth of field I've been hankering after for some time. I dithered about getting a Sony A7iv for the extra resolution but in the end I couldn't stretch to that budget,. So I'm really pleased with my S5ii and the 20-60mm kit lens and 50mm f/1.8 I got in the bundle. I'm pleased with being able to leave the camera on auto iso to get the shots I want whenever the light is a bit iffy. Which in the UK is like 99.999% of the time. So where does that leave MFT? I really agree with you Matti - I think it's struggling unless it plays to the one strength it has which is to go for the small compact market. But, it will be interesting to see what happens if the rumours of putting a MFT sensor in a phone turn out to be true.

[@zenonbillings9008]

❤ I've been with panasonic lumix exclusively for the past 10 years. I shoot both micro 4/3 and full frame. each have their own advantage, I don't necessarily prefer one over the other. my choice is always based on the requirements for the situation of the day. zen billings in canada

[@laszlovasko]

Not sure - I see a lot of people either switch to m4/3 from full frame, or add it to their toolbox alongside full frame. And they're adding the highest end models. As many pointed out - lens size is unique. Both companies should push sensor development into unique areas: maybe that's hat Panny's doing with the dual readout. Can't believe Sigma's idiotic management - they should have created a m4/3 foveon camera eons ago, instead of trying and wasting time with full frame. Young people are buying film - that should be a clue to engineers - people want organic, analog, true color images - not 50MP monstrous files that are only good for massive prints or pixel peeping. So forget the competition with full frame - and give us something unique, in addition to lens size and fantastic IBIS.

[@angeloplayforone]

Matti, for MFT to survive their cameras need to outspec bigger cameras at the same price. Problem is for instance every brand has now IBIS, Sync IS or Dual IS, PDAF, Hign Res even with motion compensation, Live Composition, Pro Capture or 4K @60p. Unfortunately the OM-5 isn’t outspending other cameras at the same price point. No animal subject recognition C-AF, no 4K @60p so it difficult to sell. You have explains all points.

[@elzafir]

One thing that Panasonic has against the others: unlimited recording without overheating.

[@VanDanmark]

The reason I sold most of my MFT gear and went full frame mirrorless was that I enjoy adapting vintage lenses, and I was tired of not being able to use these lenses at their intended fields of view. I still do have an EM10 Mark III and my mint condition original E-P1 (which I do very occasionally still use with a BCL15 attached).

[@ruuddirks5565]

People are brainwashed by reviewers that image features (quality, bokeh, sharpness,....) are the most important aspects of the gear. And "bigger is better" means crop sensors are out of the picture. Very view people analyze their needs but instead follow the general trend.

[@0ooTheMAXXoo0]

More MFT and phone cameras and less APS-C and FF is the trend... The brainwashing is against caring about image quality that is good enough for larger images...

[@Hampton72]

Mitä mieltä olet croppikennoista?

[@mattisulanto]

Kaikki kennot on hyviä😀 Pitää tehdä video aiheesta.

[@OlegKorzun]

I own three Panasonic GH5S cameras and one GH6 with half a dozen Pana Leica lenses. I shoot mainly event videos and two people sitting interviews. The market in that segment is still quite weak, so I am glad I have not invested heavily into full frame cameras and glass. My planning horizon is 3-5 years so I shall use what I have and see what happens.

[@giuseppepetenzi]

I'm a professional sport photographer using MFT since 2016 when I sold my Nikon FF gears. I never regret that moment because I'm very happy with this syste. I have two E-M1 Mark III with a lot of Pro lenses , simply amazing. The AFC is fast enough for a difficult indoor sport like volleyball and the high iso are not a problem with LR postwork. For me a positive system.

[@neildonaldson2454]

I use a Lumix G9 and OM-1. The OM-1 picture quality is excellent and yes there are a few large MFT lenses but I don’t want to be carrying a FF equivalent lens around with me. 20.3mp is more than enough in most circumstances. The OM-1 performs extremely well at night with the added benefit of computational add-ons that allow for very creative pictures. The latest MFT camera’s have incredible IBIS and offer 50, 80, 100mp modes using pixel shift. That’s something I have used with a tripod taking landscape pictures. Amazing results. All I can say is do your homework and buy a camera that fits your needs. At the end of the day the choice of camera won’t make you a better photographer and you only have to look at pictures taken with film back in the 70’s where the story relies on the picture and not the sensor size!👍

[@SirMikeProvolone]

The reason why I'm not getting micro 4/3 is that some apsc cameras are smaller than mft

[@patricevignola9672]

Hi , i'm french and dont speak english very welle. I' have two photo system. i 've a om1 that i 'use evey day for animal, macro photo, travel, event etc and i' have a Canon Eos R that i'use for shooting modele ou wedding shooting because the bokeh is greater than om 1 , but for all the time i' use OM1, because it's a fun camera and less weight for tele photo.

[@magnuslarsson2323]

as an previous Nikon camera user that switched to OM with the OM-5 i bought it for the computational features that no other camera brand seems to offer, I wish they leaned into that kind of stuff even more, it does make the cameras rather unique in my view. Even though I knew that the lenses etc would be smaller it is still a surprise and joy to use them every time, not a fan over their newer lenses that are bigger, would prefer improving the smaller ones and updating them. I am refereeing to Live Compositing, Live-Time and Live-Bulb which takes the guess work out of long exposures at seascapes, cityscapes, star trails in particular. Also in camera stacking of macro shots to a degree.

[@victorlim5077]

Like Matti explained, others have caught up. Nikon has implemented auto capture, pre capture, pixel shift, eye AF in manual focus mode, etc in their latest cameras.

[@magnuslarsson2323]

@@victorlim5077those may be interesting but they are not the computational things I am referring too. It's the different long exposure as live time and live bulb where I can see 10min long exposure and hours long startrail exposure grow on the LCD instead of guess work.

[@magnuslarsson2323]

@@victorlim5077 I am refereeing to Live Compositing, Live-Time and Live-Bulb which takes the guess work out of long exposures at seascapes, cityscapes, star trails in particular. Also in camera stacking of macro shots to a degree.

[@victorlim5077]

@@magnuslarsson2323 I guess each company has their own stuff like Sony with their grids, in camera focus breathing compensation, etc.

[@magnuslarsson2323]

@@victorlim5077yeah probably, i mean these are niche things, they just happen to speak to me. And I do wish other cameras had similar features because taking long exposures without getting to see it develop in the LCD feels barbaric once u have experienced it. But from my understanding that tech is patented.

[@martingreenberg870]

You may be right Matti. I am in the M43 and Fuji systems. I like the RF bodies for street photography. I use small primes. For me, the difference between M43, APSC, and full frame images isn’t all that great. I don’t own a full frame camera due to the additional size and weight compared to crop sensor bodies. I am satisfied with my Panasonic GX bodies and compact 15, 20, 25, and 45mm lenses. As pointed out by a previous poster, camera sales are in decline. Many people are satisfied with images from their phones. They are good and becoming better. Phone cameras destroyed the point & shoot market. Will they destroy the camera market in general other than for professionals? I hope not. Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)

[@jamesmlodynia8757]

Smartphone may have wiped out the point and shoot cameras but they were being done away by camera makers, I started digital photography 15 years ago with a Canon point and shoot ,it was a way to learn digital photography, but for some reason they started doing away with the view finder and the dials became so small to be useless, then t he shutter lag and the little power zoom lens left me wanting for a camera that I could change lenses on and did not have a micro size sensor, it's one of many reasons why I hate taking photos on a smartphone.

[@brightboxstudio]

Your thoughts are solid...no disagreement here. I have a Panasonic G85, and paired with the 14-140 it has been a great travel companion, amazing range and versatility for the easily packable compact size and weight. But I did finally switch from m43 to full frame, and what let it happen was unexpected. I thought full frame DSLRs and their lenses were too big and heavy. But when the big names went mirrorless full frame, many of the lower end models were surprisingly compact. I found that the combination of Sony A7c and Tamron 28-200 was compact and light enough for me, and I switched. So it was not only because new m43 bodies were too large, but some new full frame mirrorless bodies were unexpectedly small, and it was those opposite movements that closed the gap enough for me to jump. I’m happy with my Sony full frame, but I still can’t imagine giving up my G85. I keep it because its compact versatility is still an advantage for some types of photography. And there is also a force in the other direction: For those who want to continue with m43, the impressive new AI applications that more effectively reduce noise and upscale resolution can help m43 images close the quality gap with larger sensors.

[@JohnRobertsTV]

Congratulations on being willing to adopt a provocative stance. My thoughts on M43 are as follows: (1) Smaller lens sizes are a big advantage for many wildlife shooters. I would dread carrying a full-frame 200-400mm lens, but M43? No problemo. Also M43 lenses generally cost less than full frame. So TOTAL system cost is a factor. (2) Panasonic just brought out the G9ii (which I bought, I own a G9 and love it). Usually tech flows from the flagship down to lesser models, so there may be new gear coming with that new tech. OM Systems is another matter and they may be on the ropes, I mean why did Olympus unload it? (3) I see APS-C in more danger. Except for Sony, it's another lens mount for camera makers to support. Even Sony makes APS-C-specific lenses, which costs in R&D. Why go halfway? Either choose ultimate image quality (full frame) or best portability with interchangeable lenses (M43). I think Canon and Nikon will ultimately drop their APS-C lines.

[@allenschneider1847]

Why would it be easier to shoot on Micro 4/3rds than FF? The principals of photography are exacetly the same on both systems?

[@mattisulanto]

Maybe I'll cover that in a video some day in the future. It's probably too much to cover in one single short comment. I also don't wish to be a part of a long argument here in the comments. Not saying you would start arguing but I'm playing it safe because I have bad previous experience. All the best😀

[@iandrury1542]

I love m4/3rds and have fully committed to it owning 3 Olympus & 3 Panasonic bodies, mostly bought used plus associated lenses and a few 3rd party ones too ! The system suits my needs especially the compact cameras like my E-P5, Pen-F. GX8 and infra red converted GF1. What I'd like to see is a return to smaller body format but with high end features.

[@pacificdash]

You are the first photo gear reviewer I’ve seen in a long time whose photography actually inspires me. I have no opinions on m43, clicked out of curiosity, and I feel like I’ve just stepped away from a top notch art show. Thank you for sharing your expertise and your art ❤

[@bosamuelsson5814]

The advantage of the MFT is the lens. It is indisputable.

[@mattisulanto]

Thanks. What lens are you referring to?

[@benauer3431]

Standard zooms, telephoto lens. That’s one area where m43 simple offers a weight advantage for similar focal ranges. I can go out with my 12-40mm oly or 12-60mm and have great range with reasonable speed FF can’t match this. Show me a 24mm-120mm equivalent FF lens that is f4 or below and about 11oz and I will switch to FF. Oh wait, that simply doesn’t exist

[@photovideomusic]

What you said at 1:50 is so true, and I had that same thought a few days ago. Just because 99% of people can't see the difference between m4/3 and full frame... Doesn't make me happy shoot a landscape on m4/3 when I know I have access to a full frame camera or at least could buy one. And let's be honest... they're not expensive these days. Back when a Canon 5D was $4000 (which was more back in 2006) but the 300D or whatever it was was only $1700, then it wasn't an easy choice. But these days when a Nikon Z5 or Lumix S5 II or, take your pick really is about $1000 US with a good deal, then why not... If people prefer m4/3 then go for it! But I'd rather know that I've done everything I can to capture the shot in as much detail as possible.

[@NegativeCompensation]

Great video and analysis of the m4/3 reality. I was one of those who sold all my Olympus m4/3 gear and PRO lenses last year. Why? Because a feeling that the community of urban photographers who loved those small primes that Olympus made a decade or more ago, was simply abandoned and neglected in the pursuit of birding, wildlife, and larger gear community. I got tired of waiting for an update of the small primes what brought me into the Olympus family from my Nikon past. When my Olympus 50mm lens became larger, and more expensive, than the Nikon 50mm I used to own, I began to see the writing on the wall on where Olympus (and now OM Systems) were headed. Just happened to be in the opposite direction of my reason to buy into m4/3 a decade ago.

[@hedydd2]

In other words you felt like a change.

[@tarotcaba]

I am considering a second hand GH5 but now I find out that there are not wide enough 9 or 10mm (not fish eye) lenses on a budget, while on ASPC you can find them for 120-140 dollars vs 300 or so for MFT 😢. I am afraid to invest in expensive lenses that one day [very soon] no one would buy for a dead system.

[@petercameron4380]

I use m4/3 and APS-C. The problem I have with m4/3 is that neither Olympus/OM nor Lumix has made a camera with the features I want. I'm a hobbyist, so 20MP is fine. I prefer the rangefinder style cameras (Pen-F, GX8, GX9), but none of them manages to tick all the boxes. I want weather sealing (I live in Canada so a good number of days in the year involve rain or cold). The GX8 satisfies that requirement. And I want a tilt LCD (I don't use video so the articulating LCD is mostly annoying). The GX9 has the tilt screen. A GX9 successor with weather sealing would be my ideal camera. But maybe that's an uncommon niche. I'd have considered the G9II, but the articulating LCD is a deal-breaker.

[@hedydd2]

For the most part I agree with you. However the screen is not a deal breaker for me and I work with both types and fixed screen cameras. What matters to me is the clarity of screen and touch functionality above all else. Weather sealing of all future bodies and lenses would be a great advantage.

[@dickrichards566]

Panasonic GH6, down in price now there is the new GH7, is your option. Weather sealed and tilt screen and so much more to offer. Not great but good enough af by video. For stills very very good af.

[@JoATTech]

I actually got myself OM-5 end of 2023 ... and I really like it. I got 2 FF, 1 S35 and 1 APS-C cameras already :D. OM-5 is almost all the time with my (with 9mm, 17mm and 45mm).

[@frankcarenza921]

Fuji has stopped producing compact X cameras. Olympus and Panasonic upsized the 4/3’s. we need a compact Leica like camera that can upload immediately to social media with wifi and Bluetooth. Rangefinder seems to be the domain of Sony and Ricoh right now.

[@russellharris5072]

I have all three formats and have dicovered that at 77 years of age,that good ergonomics come from bigger bodys not smaller ones.My Olympus MFT cameras have the same thing in common,they are small and fiddly to operate.My recent aquisition of a Canon APSC and a 19 years old full frame canon ,are much better in their operation.I like the feeling of having a brick in my hand as it helps stabilise my shots and also allows me to re-learn the art of photography.As for Olympus I would advise placing their MFT sensors in a larger body,with modern materials it won't have to be heavy but will give room for better ergonomics.............................

[@ml.2770]

The demise of four thirds has been foretold since it first came out.

[@ryanwenger50]

I can honestly say, for every 1 person that speaks ill of your picture, there are 12 that love it. Just do what you enjoy. And if people pay you because they love your art, then you're an artist!

[@mattipiispanen1058]

I've noticed the same and feel very sorry for that. For me as a former Canon FF-shooter the MFT systems light , compact and affordable lenses and guaranteed water resistance (Oly) and ruggedness of the system has been very welcome for nature and macro work. I still have my Canon for studio-type work or if low light capability is essential. Also human AF-tracing is better on my R6. Actually I don't see a point in selecting one system to do everything. Right tool for the right job! MFT for lightweight travel etc, FF or medium format for serious work were size and weight are less important. For MFT I really miss those GX- and pen type small rangefinder style bodies alongside bigger bodies for casual street and party photography. Not a single model is available!

[@bardofhighrenown]

The problem for me when looking at an mtf camera is that they simply are too close in price to larger sensors. The physical size isn't that dissimilar either anymore, meaning you need to find some kind of specific value in the smaller sensor as an advantage in order to really make it worthwhile. Either the telephoto reach or the deeper DOF for macro, the faster readout speeds for video or something to that effect, otherwise for a similar cost and size/weight you could have a bigger sensor and it just doesn't make sense to not buy that larger sensor otherwise

[@WaddyMuters]

Here’s my take. Generally the camera industry is professionalizing. Camera sales are continually going from a big amateur market to a smaller professional market, because of phone cameras. And MFT is generally the least viable sensor format for professionals. Sure you can produce the same results, but it’s easier with larger sensors and you have more room for mistakes with larger sensors so professionals will gravitate to gear which will a more reliable. Weight and size is also not a big concern for professionals since the equipment for professional photographers and videographers is often already more bulky and heavy then the cameras and lenses ever could be. There are exceptions of course and some pros do care about the weight factor, but a lot don’t. I say this as an amateur who exclusively shoots with MFT gear. I love the benefits of MFT and if the high ISO/dynamic range performance makes a picture unusable or you would have needed a bit higher resolution like 1 out of a thousand pictures who cares there is always a next time. But when you’re a professional risk like that can threaten the relationship with clients and even your livelihood. So as long as regular people don’t start buying cameras again the market for MFT will shrink until it stabilizes in a few niches.

[@JimCDC11]

I totally agree - you have made some very good points. I am a retired pro with 49 years of experience. M43 is the perfect camera for me. I get excellent results, I have the versatility of shooting with a variety of lenses and I now carry a fraction of the weight.

[@WaddyMuters]

@@JimCDC11 I totally agree. I recently was on a long trip. I had the em5 markiii, the 75-300 and two of the 1.8 olympus primes. My buddy had the Canon R5 with a battery grip and the 85mm f1.2 And oh boy, I would have to be paid really good money to carry that R5 around all day. That thing was heavier then my whole kit. I was really happy with my photos, just the ability to casually bring a good yet small telezoom with me is why I don't see myself switching to full frame any time soon. Such a shame that our "use case" is pretty limited.

[@elzafir]

And amateurs emulate professionals. I've seen many people in my circle who spent $4000+ on the latest Sony A7 with an f/4 zoom and a f/1.4 prime because it's "better than a crop sensor" and because "the pros use it, so it must be good", only to have the camera gather dust because they never use it because it's too big and clunky. Same thing for golf equipment, amateurs emulate the pros and buy the most expensive clubs that the pros use, even though those are designed for pros with scratch handicap.

[@davidcuellar7414]

It's true. I wish I could downsize my system for my professional work, but the reality is I would much rather carry the weight and size than give up even 0.1% on any other metric.

[@brugj03]

@@elzafir Then why is it it, that OM makes bodies that are heavier bigger and more esxpensive than FF.

[@martingarces4602]

In my opinion I think the video explains it well. The MFT camera system is generally really small (except generally for the camera body) which can be a deciding factor for someone that is totally ok. But the biggest issue is really the price, basically 2k for the flagship either on the panasonic or om-system its insanely expensive in my opinion for a MFT. Really for that price you can choose either an APS-C or even a full frame camera (Im not saying that bigger is better) so really a lot of costumers would really prefer the bigger sensor. Also Im only talking about camera body price, not the whole system, but also going 3rd party on either APS-C or FF the third party cheaper options like Sigma or Tamron makes a tougher decision because then the whole system becomes cheaper. For many people MFT would be the perfect choice tbh. They still have great cameras, great lenses and overall a great system that is trying to improve every day. For me personally I considered buying a panasonic G9 or either the G9 mkII but I backed out of it. The main reason for not going MFT for me was the lack of a high megapixel camera body. Im a pixel peeper and also I crop images to get more reach sometimes or just to try different compositions and see what works best, and for me, the 26mp on the G9 was not enough for me (For most people is plenty enough tho). Looking at the market I could get a Fujifilm XH2 used for around the same price or sometimes cheaper and that body has 40mp. Same story with the Sony A7rIII, or I could save a little bit more to get the 61mp of the A7rIV (Again overkill for most people but is just the way I shoot and how I compose my images). A downside that many people see in a small sensor is the lack of a tiny field of view due to the smaller sensor, but if you are not shooting portraits, I think you wouldnt even notice. I used to shoot with an APS-C camera and got really nice out-of-focus backgrounds even not using a professional lens. The only real downside that people, me included, is the fact of not the best low light capability but it is to be understandable due to sensor size. Again if you are not shooting in low light situations you could be really fine with any type of camera tbh. FF is not the best because bigger is better, you really have to find the camera body that suits your needs and really not be ashamed of not having a "professional FF camera" because what works for you might not work for others, even if you just like taking pictures with your phone then go for it. I have used FF, APS-C, 1 inch and my phone, and I can recommend literally every single system if that is what works for you. Do your research, go to camera stores, try things out and choose the better option for you. To summarize MFT is still a great option if you dont need low light performance, a high megapixel count or extremely out-of-focus backgrounds. I recommend checking out James Popsys that used MFT for a couple of years and he really captured amazing pictures in that time using the Panasonic G9. Chis Nichols from PetaPixel uses an Olympus OM1 as and EDC, his pal Jordan Drake sometime used MFT cameras to record videos so they really showcase the even professionals use the MFT system. A more expensive camera or a bigger sensor will not make your pictures better.

[@sdhute]

Sold my last m43 camera this week. I like lumix and also the 3 year warranty. However there has not been any new smaller m43 cameras. The newer m43 cameras do not have a savings in body size. The g9ii is a great camera for those already in the system. It’s at full frame size. You make a good point on the Ricoh GR. Panasonic where is our new street wielding camera? Where is the camera that completes with the GR and x100v???

[@keithholland4322]

There just aren't enough people making a living doing street photography to justify designing cameras for that purpose. Most newspapers fired their photographers a long time ago because they could get all the cell phone photos they could possibly want for free, so street photography cameras are just expensive toys that few people can justify. There are still some compact MFT cameras like the G100, OM-5, and E-M10 on the market, but I think the manufacturers have realized that street photography is mostly a relic from the past.

[@sdhute]

@@keithholland4322 there is a difference between street photography and photo journalism. The New York Times and several other papers still require a signed release from the subject is most cases. It’s not just a free for all world of iPhone wielding millennials offering free non stop content.

[@SMGJohn]

Your point seems like dads with ego complaining about car prices going up yet keeps buying the latest BMW just to boast about it, what was wrong with the gear you had? Did it not work? Sounds like a skill issue to me

[@keithholland4322]

@@SMGJohn I don't do street photography and don't have any interest in it. I certainly could with the gear I have. I have an E-M5 II, a Sigma 16mm f/1.4, Olympus 12-100mm f/4 Pro, and, if I really wanted a tiny lens, I could use my Panasonic 14mm f/2.5. There are plenty of other great lenses for the purpose like the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8, Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8, Pana/Leica 15mm f/1.7, Olympus 17mm f/1.2, Olympus 17mm f/1.8, Olympus 17mm f/2.8, Sigma 19mm f/2.8, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, and Olympus 20mm f/1.4. Put any of those lenses on an OM-5 and you have a perfect setup for street photography. The question is, after you spend all that money on equipment, who's going to pay for your work? Since there is no longer a substantial market for street photography, most of the people doing it are doing it as a hobby and cannot justify spending a lot of money on their hobby. Consequently, it's not very profitable to make cameras for that purpose. The money is in sports and wildlife photography because (1) people can't do that with their smartphones, (2) the equipment for it is much more expensive than most other genres of photography, and (3) full frame cameras and lenses designed for that are larger, heavier, and more expensive than their MFT counterparts. Consequently, Panasonic, OM System, and Sigma need to focus on making high end MFT equipment that does that well, especially bright prime super telephoto lenses. It's time for these companies to show the photography world that they can make a 300mm f/2 that's easier to handhold than a FF 600mm f/4 and a 400mm f/2.8 that's easier to handhold than a FF 800mm f/5.6.

[@SMGJohn]

@@keithholland4322 If you cannot use MFT for professional work, you have a skill issue, sorry but its true. The fact that I used to do sports photography with a telephoto and a GH4, I never did have any issue, back then autofocus kind of was piss on any camera except DSLR's, but I needed to do video too so the GH4 it was since nothing like it existed at least until the Samung NX1 came out. But guess what, I did not have issues with it, if people in 1920s could take sports photography with all manual, I mean I am at a loss of words when people complain about the most ridicules things in this world. There were people at our department using freaking point and shoot just to troll our headquarter in the capital, who never noticed until someone actually pointed it out, the camera is a tool, you sound like those 25 year old carpenters with their 500 dollar hammer saying they are the best carpenter because their hammer does this and that and everything between heaven and Earth, wow meanwhile my great grandfather and his worn out piss hammer does 50 times more work and far better work ontop of it all. Stop blaming the equipment, MFT may have lacked glass in 2012, but its not 2012 anymore, is it now? You can use a speedbooster and slap your favourite full frame telephoto on it and get the same effect honestly, no one cares what equipment you use and yes I used to care a lot about what equipment I used, but then I stopped giving a sh*t, I got a life. Its time you all get a life too.

[@karlgrabherr7769]

Just recently i made handheld highres shots with the new OM-1 Mark II with just a 1/4sec. exposure time. The results were amazing! Have you ever tried to do this with any full frame camera? 50MPx handheld at a 1/4 of a second? I own also a Sony A7R3 but i knowv that 1/4sec. would never be possible handheld with a 50mm lens and i think it won’t be better with the newer cameras with even more resolution.

[@MrMauriziomazzoni]

That we tend to buy "over performance", that is so true!! 👏👏👏

[@RobShootPhotos]

Have full frame they caught up? Focus stacking, live composite, Live ND & Pro-capture mode with very low rolling shutter? The biggest thing that Olympus and Panasonic fell behind is auto focus. Right now the most expensive MFT that have best autofocus is the G9II and OM-1 but it will trickle down. But how much will it cost for a full frame body get 50fps with auto focus? Probably twice the price of the OM-1.

[@mattisulanto]

I said the competitors have caught up, not full frame😀 I also mentioned that MFT cameras still have some unique niche features. Focus stacking, live composite and a pro capture like feature can be found on some other than MFT cameras as well. If you really need 50fps AF often the OM-1 seems like a good option. Then again if you really need 61Mp often the Sony A7RV seems like a good option😀 Some never need 50fps and some never need 61Mp.