What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Panasonic M4/3 watchers thread

Well said. Reality is always having some distance from ideality.

Worst still, when every day M43 users are praising their beauty bird shots, and appreciated the small size of G9, OM1 or even EM1X, it would be a difficult decision for the manufacturer to put their resources on the compact models within a fast shrinking market.

If G100 will sell well, Panny might take it as the smallest acceptable size of body to the market. A further nail on the coffin of the GMs, even the GFs.
 
"Why pay big money for a tiny camera body when you can get a 'full size' one for much the same money and get all the frills supplied as well?"

So you're a "Bigger must be better" type.

Mobile phones show otherwise - the device that goes in a pocket or purse is the one that gets used, and the big fat klunker gets left behind. Many years ago I sold my Nikon DSLR full frame kit for this very reason - the camera that went everywhere was a LX3 then LX5, but the Nikon sat on the shelf and rarely got a gig. Now, mobile phones have killed compacts - they do a better job, and fit the pocket.

When looking for a new M4/3 body to replace my GX85 I looked at the Panasonic bodies - no, thanks was my immediate reaction - and bought an OM5 instead. NB Back in the film days I had a Pentax MX and LX; full-frame and smaller than the OM5 - so I'd have to say it's not impossible to pack all the modern functionality into a small body.

The G9.. that is just gross. Bigger than an S5.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately manufacturers are driven by sales - ie they have to appeal to the ordinary consumer, not a tiny niche group of diehards... If M4/3 is to survive it has to come up with something compelling that mobile phones don't do, and for most users, I'd suggest there isn't anything in it. Which is why IMHO M4/3 is almost at the end of the road.

So, Ok.. bigger lenses = modest (real) bokeh - Mr/Mrs Average wouldn't notice, or have a clue
Longer telephoto reach - Mr/Mrs Average don't buy big lenses the size of a can of coke.
Low light performance... Video ? iPhone14 does it better. Low light ? an iPhone14 may well win (I just tried auroras last weekend, the phone beat the OM5).

Just give me direct control of shutter speed, f/ratio, and ISO. Let the camera do AF and image stabilisation. The rest is done in software.
 
Last edited:
Downunder said:
Unfortunately manufacturers are driven by sales - ie they have to appeal to the ordinary consumer, not a tiny niche group of diehards.

... If M4/3 is to survive it has to come up with something compelling that mobile phones don't do, and for most users, I'd suggest there isn't anything in it. Which is why IMHO M4/3 is almost at the end of the road.

So, Ok.. bigger lenses = modest (real) bokeh - Mr/Mrs Average wouldn't notice, or have a clue

Longer telephoto reach - Mr/Mrs Average don't buy big lenses the size of a can of coke.

Low light performance... Video ? iPhone14 does it better. Low light ? an iPhone14 may well win (I just tried auroras last weekend, the phone beat the OM5).

Just give me direct control of shutter speed, f/ratio, and ISO. Let the camera do AF and image stabilisation. The rest is done in software.
Click to expand...

IMHO, totally a matter on acceptance of individual.

IIRC Tom has a good writing on this back on DPR. I am totally agreed with his suggestion, better to explain where will be the line of your acceptance before comment on various tools. A reason why the evil E always haunted on various forums, not only the sensors but also the various level of acceptance too.

To me it is very simple. Besides the artistic aspects, I wish my output could look good technically (sharpness, resolution, noise, CA, fine detail, moire etc). I don't mind a US$50 photo tool to produce a soft, lack of reslution, serious noise at base ISO, CA everywhere output but it will be a deal breaker for my few hundred US$ camera and lenses. It is why my current US$250 Samsung A21s is not a camera of my choice as my US$260 GX850 & 12-32 can do many time better output.

The issues are do you need zoom lenses? Or some specific lenses like long, ultrawide, macro etc? Do you do adjustment on setting other than auto or follow the 0ev metering for certain result? If yes, camera can be easier too.

I personally happy with M43 because among the factors, size is one of my key consideration. Phone camera is best on size (portability) but cannot satisfy me on other fronts.

As long as your phone can keep you happy, it should be your best tool. I am asking for more and so it is not for me yet.
 
Don't know if you've noticed but there are a lot of M4/3 lenses either discontinued or at serious discounts(30% or more off RRP) lately. The stock isn't moving, ie no demand.
 
Downunder said:
Don't know if you've noticed but there are a lot of M4/3 lenses either discontinued or at serious discounts(30% or more off RRP) lately. The stock isn't moving, ie no demand.
Click to expand...

Or new lens designs are coming for higher MP cameras :)
 
Tom Caldwell said:
I also have the 25-50/1.7 and it does share the new-found lighter-weight construction that Panasonic has apparently adopted for M4/3.
Click to expand...
Actually, it's across the entire Panasonic lens line. The more recent FF "budget" lenses have a similar lightness to them - for example all the f1.8 primes, the 20-60, the 14-28, and even the 70-300 are all really lightweight for what they do. Compared to the 24-105, one of the early FF designs, they are really light. Apart from the dust-gathering rubber used on the focus and zoom rings, I'm finding the Panasonic "budget" lenses great - the optical performance is fine and whilst the plastic build doesn't have a great feel to it, it is robust and weather-sealed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top