Anyone on this board try micro 4/3 cameras?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by 147798, May 3, 2010.

  1. 147798 Suspended

    Dec 29, 2007
    Got myself en EP1, and loving it. Haven't been on MR for a while. Just wondering if anyone else moved to m43 and, if so, did you move up from a point and shoot, or down from a DSLR. I moved down from Canon DSLR. Others?
  2. ManhattanPrjct macrumors 6502

    Oct 6, 2008
    I have been thinking about this as well, since ultimately I'll want some sort of a companion to my DSLR.

    I am a little concerned that m4/3 will either be sort of a fad, or just priced incorrectly for the market.

    The way I think about it, I am probably not going to give up my DSLR completely - I have an investment in lenses that I like, and I like the flexibility of being able to shoot people/macro/landscape/motion/low-light. However, there are times where I'd rather have a smaller camera to take with me to a wedding or party, or just traveling casually. Do I want to pay $375 for an S90 to do this? Probably. Do I want to pay twice that for a m4/3 with a couple of lenses? Tougher question to answer.
  3. mzd macrumors 6502a

    Jul 25, 2005
    i want one. currently a little out of my budget though. seems like the perfect camera for me.
    what lens are you running on your EP1?
  4. 147798 thread starter Suspended

    Dec 29, 2007
    I've got the standard kit lens (14-42, which is field of view equivalent to 28-84 on a full frame camera, or 17.5-52.5 on a crop DSLR). The Panasonic 20mm 1.7 and the 45-200. I also have several old lenses: Minolta Rokkor 58mm 1.4, Pentax Super Takumar 50mm 1.4, and my favorite, Olympus OM 50mm 2.0 macro.

    The aperture and field of view equivalent of the OM 50mm 2.0 is a 100mm 4.0 on full frame (or 62.5mm f/2.5) on a crop camera. This, therefore, acts very much like the Canon 60mm f/2.8 on an EF-S camera.

    Here are some shots:

  5. pdxflint macrumors 68020


    Aug 25, 2006
    Oregon coast
    Why would the 50mm f/2 act like a 100mm f/4 on the smaller sensor. Wouldn't it still be an f/2 lens? On my crop dSLR my 50mm f/1.8 acts like a 75mm f/1.8 lens--there is the zoom factor for sure, but it's still the same aperture. Is there some kind of adapter you have to use which reduces the light, much like a teleconverter?
  6. 147798 thread starter Suspended

    Dec 29, 2007
    Sorry. Yes. In terms of exposure, it's still an f/2.0 lens (which is good!) In terms of Depth of field, it acts like a 100/4 lens. DOF is determined by distance to subject (for the same framing, that's driven by Focal Length. The longer the focal length, the farther back you have to stand. So a 50mm lens on a 2X crop body means you have to stand back the same distance as if you had a 100mm lens on a full frame body).

    The other factor to DOF is aperture (aperture as in the size of the opening, not as in f/stop. So, a 50mm f2.0 lens opens at it's widest to 50/2=25mm. A 100mm 4.0 lens also opens to 25mm).

    So, in terms of field of view (and therefore distance to subject and the same framing) and DOF, 50mm 2.0 lens on an m43 camera is equivalent to a 100mm 4.0 lens on full frame (or a 62.5mm f/2.5 on a 1.6 crop). But, the exposure would be as if 2.0.

    A 50mm 1.4 lens acts like 100mm 2.8, which is nice since these legacy lenses are only like $30-60 on ebay (and another $30 for a given adapter)! But for various reasons, most 50 1.4 lenses look soft on m43, so they need to be stopped down to 2.0. The 50mm 2.0 macro is sharp at 2.0.

    Manual Focus is also MUUUUCH easier on m43 because of the LCD and MF assist, with real live view (no mirror flip down/up). So, it's a lot of fun. But, it's still not going to replace sports shooting on a DSLR by any stretch! (and to get the equivalent DOF of a 50mm 1.8 lens on a Canon 5D, you'd need a 25mm .9 lens for your m43 camera -- not going to happen!) So, there are trade-offs, but for my shooting, it's a real pleasure.
  7. davegregory macrumors regular

    Jul 7, 2009
    Burlington, Ontario
    I have the Panasonic GF1. I love it, it's a fantastic camera. I currently only have the 20mm f/1.7 pancake lens. But I've gotten some really great shots with it. It's nice with the pancake lens, because it has more of the form factor of a point and shoot. However, I think the next lens I buy for it will be the 45mm f/2.8 Macro. The video it shoots is decent quality as well, I mean it's not going to blow you away, but it's definitely better than average. I chose it over the Olympus mostly because of brand familiarity (I owned a Lumix LX3 previously). I'm sure I would probably be just as happy with the Olympus though. IQ above 800 ISO gets dicey, especially in darker situations. Best of all, it's finally supported by Apple so the RAW files load up in Aperture and iPhoto. The LCD on the back is very clear and very sharp, works well in daylight.

  8. G.T. macrumors 6502a

    Jul 12, 2008

Share This Page