Micro Four Thirds: Is it worth it?

[DJM]

Hi,

I'm looking at DSLRs and have looked at the Micro Four Thirds system, what I was wondering was, should I get into this system or wait/get a DSLR until the system is fully established?

EDIT: I am a beginner photographer and am wanting a quality camera that is easy-ish to use and fairly cheap, as for what I would be using it for - i would take a range of photos from landscape to urban to action. Mostly daytime, the occasional nighttime snap. What manufactures use this system and what are the best entry level cameras that still leave some room for 'growth'?

thanks

 

[Overread]

The m4/3rds is already very well established in the market.

As for what you should get - the first question is what do you want from your camera system? How do you want to use it - where - when - how - what do you want to take photos of etc.. Without more info we really can't give any meaningful advice other than a stream of "I bought this so you should too" replies.

 

[PropilotBW]

I very seriously considered the 4/3 system. I am still considering it. The idea is on hold for me though because it is a very expensive change. The lenses are very very expensive for what you are getting. DSLR lenses are much more affordable in comparison.

 

[KmH]

M4/3rds have a 2x crop factor. Canon APS-C size image sensors have a 1.6x crop factor, and Nikon APS-C size image sensiors have a 1.5x crop factor.

Crop factor increases as image sensors get smaller. Canon's APS-C image sensor is somewhat larger than M4/3rds and Nikon's APS-C image sensor is slightly larger than Canon's APS-C image sensor.

The smaller an image sensor is the less it costs to make. The smallest image sensors are usually in the least expensive cameras.

Smaller image sensors make it harder to use selective focus, or a shallow depth-of-field (DoF). A shallow DoF is used to blur a background which helps isolate a subject from the background giving the subject more visual weight in the image frame.

Digital Camera Sensor Sizes: How it Influences Your Photography

 

[DJM]

Extra Info added (See my first post)

 

[PropilotBW]

I was very heavily considering the Olympus OMD-EM10. It is their lower end of the professional grade camera bodies. The EM10 is actually rated a little better than the more expensive EM5.

The Reason on I suggest Micro 4/3 is the sensor is attempting to be a standard size. You can use more lenses on this Micro 4/3. Sony, Fuji, Nikon, Canon, samsung, all have different sized sensors, and you can only use their lenses for their body.

don't get confused. There are only 2 manufacturers, Olympus and Panasonic, that are considered Micro 4/3. All others are "mirrorless" or "compact systems". A 4/3 sensor is on the larger side of the mirrorless realm. Google a sensor size comparison. The larger the sensor, the better it's performance.

 

[jaomul]

Obviously all is relative and different people need different things. I think that the image quality and specs of m4/3rds is likely good enough for most users

 

[DJM]

So would a micro four thirds camera be a good beginners camera and does it have a good selection of lenses, cameras etc for me to get more professional and a better photographer??

Could you guys give me suggestions of good, fairly cheap entry level/mid range Micro Four Thirds Cameras?
And are there any good Micro Four Thirds cameras that are fairly cheap secondhand?

thanks a lot guys

 

[jaomul]

Secondhand market is limited because it's a relatively new system. There are options. I recommend looking at Olympus Omd Em10, good specs, inbuilt stabilisation and evf. Nice camera in my opinion

 

[SnappingShark]

I say that depending on your circumstances, and wants from photography - then yes, they are worth it.

They seem to be able to do anything and everything - with the exception of performing in the dark perfectly, and also autofocussing (with the exception of maybe a couple).

I have been educating myself on them, and have borrowed an Olympus OM-D E-M1, to see what it would be like as a replacement for my D7100 DSLR.
so far, it's been fantastic. The benefit being that you can see all of the small changes in the viewfinder that you make - ISO, Aperture, shutter, angle, lighting etc ...

I wouldn't say they're a DSLR killer yet - but so far so good, and I've yet to even really test it outside of a dimly lit room.

 

[DJM]

So a DSLR is the best option compared to the Micro Four Thirds System. thanks guys

 

[TCampbell]

When you get into any camera with a removable lens, you're getting a "camera system" -- not just a camera. The camera is just the foundation but you start to accumulate lenses and other accessories that work with the camera. At some point you may decide to swap out the body for a newer body -- typically for performance improvements. But you get to KEEP those same lenses you already bought and keep using them (unless you go to full frame and you have crop-frame lenses in which case some of the lenses may not be useable).

But this means that once you get "invested" into a "system" you tend to stick with it because it becomes extremely expensive to switch systems and have to either re-purchase a whole stable full of equivalent lenses or abandon them and leave it behind.

A DSLR is going to be bigger... it'll also be more versatile.

I don't see the smaller size as being much of an advantage (Canon makes the Rebel "SL1" which is as compact as it gets for a DSLR body) because even a small bulky body is still bulky. The question I ask myself is: Will it fit into your pocket? And generally for all of these types of cameras the answer is 'no'. Ok... so it won't fit in your pocket (it's not a camera phone or a super-compact point & shoot). So that leaves us with having a camera that you wear on a camera strap or you get a dedicated camera bag... but making the camera a little bit smaller doesn't save you from needing a camera strap or a bag. Unless it can get so much smaller that it slips into your pocket, I don't see a smaller size camera as offering (to my way of thinking anyway) a significant functional advantage. This leaves me with "then why would I want to use a 4/3rds system?" I'm sure they're very good but I don't see them as being able to compete with the versatility of the DSLR.