Search Results
6/6/2025, 1:13:51 AM
>>4431806
Depends on their genre. Some pro's have discovered it as a second system to use for their personal/casual stuff.
It's popular among semi-pro wildlife/landscape photographers for obvious reasons. Some more serious photographers in this genre do use it, but not many. Definitely viable.
You'll seldom see people using it in the studio (although it wouldn't be bad here), weddings (it can be good here if you don't rely on shallow DoF to take good pictures), and portraiture (shallow DoF is often a desired look here, so no-go for most people).
>>4431810
This is a dumbass comment.
See photo.
Most cameras use a 1/2.5 sensor. Higher end ones use 1/1.8" or maybe even 1/1.5"
Notice these are a FRACTION of the size of an m43 sensor.
Wikipedia lists 20 or so niche, mostly Chinese phones, with a 1" sensor, which is further away from M43 than M43 is away from APS-C.
>>4431813
m43 amps are tuned to higher output gains, it's why a lot of m43 cameras have base ISO starting at 200 so the noise difference is compensated to a significant degree. And high ISO performance is pretty good on modern cameras regardless, and the difference is helped further by modern AI denoise.
The main consideration for most photographers when considering m43 is -- do you need very shallow depth of field, or not? Personally I shoot full frame because I'd rather have a shallow DoF available, and not need it, than be stuck with voigtlander lenses and still be limited to f/2 equivalent DoF and wanting more.
But you can still get pleasantly blurred backgrounds with a 42.5mm lens or whatnot, and I think m43 is an ideal system for the casual hobbyist and photographers who value small weight/size.
Depends on their genre. Some pro's have discovered it as a second system to use for their personal/casual stuff.
It's popular among semi-pro wildlife/landscape photographers for obvious reasons. Some more serious photographers in this genre do use it, but not many. Definitely viable.
You'll seldom see people using it in the studio (although it wouldn't be bad here), weddings (it can be good here if you don't rely on shallow DoF to take good pictures), and portraiture (shallow DoF is often a desired look here, so no-go for most people).
>>4431810
This is a dumbass comment.
See photo.
Most cameras use a 1/2.5 sensor. Higher end ones use 1/1.8" or maybe even 1/1.5"
Notice these are a FRACTION of the size of an m43 sensor.
Wikipedia lists 20 or so niche, mostly Chinese phones, with a 1" sensor, which is further away from M43 than M43 is away from APS-C.
>>4431813
m43 amps are tuned to higher output gains, it's why a lot of m43 cameras have base ISO starting at 200 so the noise difference is compensated to a significant degree. And high ISO performance is pretty good on modern cameras regardless, and the difference is helped further by modern AI denoise.
The main consideration for most photographers when considering m43 is -- do you need very shallow depth of field, or not? Personally I shoot full frame because I'd rather have a shallow DoF available, and not need it, than be stuck with voigtlander lenses and still be limited to f/2 equivalent DoF and wanting more.
But you can still get pleasantly blurred backgrounds with a 42.5mm lens or whatnot, and I think m43 is an ideal system for the casual hobbyist and photographers who value small weight/size.
Page 1