I love the M43 system. I have a EMl Mark III with a bunch of Pro lens'. I sell my work and no-one has have ever said, "oh I won't buy your pic because it wasn't shot with a FF camera"!!
@richardfink7666
10 ай бұрын
I took pictures at a friends wedding yesterday (OM1, 12-40/2.8, 40-150/2.8, Sigma 52/1.4). There was also a professional photographer there with 2 Canon full format cameras with 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8....he used my camera for over 2 hours and was amazed!
@edwardlin2941
10 ай бұрын
Great real world feedback!
@nochillkowa9493
6 ай бұрын
I feel like more context is needed. Canon full frame can vary from 200$ 5D to $$$ R8.
@kennymccormick8295
5 ай бұрын
Amazed at how bad it was. 😂
@richardfink7666
5 ай бұрын
If it had been like that, I wouldn`t have written it! You have to think first, than write!🤣@@kennymccormick8295
@elzafir
4 ай бұрын
@@kennymccormick8295I'm amazed at how immature you are
@ultramuc466
10 ай бұрын
This 75mm f1.8 and my pana Leica 42.5 noct is the reason why i am not moving to 35mm format.
@azjoe_6310
5 ай бұрын
Great video and you are right on the mark. Coming from Canon ff (6D) to m43 three years ago with the EM5mkii, I took graduation portraits of my son and his girlfriend in the Arizona desert and was absolutely blown away. I would have never imagined in my pre m43 days that this would even be feasible with this "tiny inferior sensor a quarter the size of my beloved full frame". I primarily used the Lumix 35-100 2.8 and some with the Oly 12-40 2.8 and the colors, focus, details were so stunning. My expectations were a bit low but reality was exceedingly high.
@trulsdirio
2 ай бұрын
The 85mm has a blurrier background, but it honestly is more distracting somehow.
@davejsullivan
10 ай бұрын
What you demonstrated, to me, is that if you shoot M43 you can adapt to the system when you want more bokeh. Shooting a subject farther from the background helps, along with a longer focal length. For me, full frame could have a purpose but it's not worth the investment at this time. Freezing action in a dimly lit environment is another time I wish I had it. The funny thing is that my full frame friends are often times impressed with my pictures and have never told me I should upgrade.
@Jgatti41
10 ай бұрын
I shot a few weekends at a the ren fest in Michigan. Another photographer and I started chatting after we commented on one another's photos. He said he never would have guessed I was not shooting full frame. For me in almost every situation I shoot. My m 4/3 gear works for me.
@azjoe_6310
5 ай бұрын
You are correct--adapt and overcome! 😊 When possible I try to shoot portraits outdoors, keeping my subject at 75 or 80 2.8 (actual focal length) using my 35-100 lens and the results are perfect.
@paulthomas8986
10 ай бұрын
They both look great in isolation. But there is definitely a difference when you compare. Even if you look at just the subject the full frame has more tonality, richness, and dynamic range. I think both systems have their place and their individual strengths. I went bike riding the other day and brought my Dad's original EM1 the 12-40 pro and the 75-300. I got some great picture of flowers, old churches, and cows and horses out in a farm field. There is no way I could have brought the same equivalent on a bike ride with full frame setup or even with apsc. Bottom line, I got to enjoy bike riding, photography, and captured some cool images.
@RebuildingSaad
9 ай бұрын
I agree with you. I am just getting into photography and videography with a micro four thirds camera (Lumix G100) and I think it's important to be honest about the strengths, weaknesses, and limitations of any system.
@JohnRuggero
8 ай бұрын
If you think that 45 1.8 is good, try the 45 1.2. It’s stupidly good and possibly my favorite lens for my OM-1. Shoot that at 1.2 and the difference with full frame will be nearly indistinguishable. I actually find the extra depth of field with more light gathering a serious advantage in low light vs full frame since you don’t have to stop way down to get everything in focus. Really, in the end, the photographer makes the biggest difference. All of these cameras are more than capable.
@sdhute
10 ай бұрын
Good content as always we even get a Ryan cameo 👍
@edwardlin2941
10 ай бұрын
nice comparison
@johnpouw3352
10 ай бұрын
Agree with you on the stopping down to F2.8 I have an A7R III that I shoot portraits at 2.8 on, but I also have a Panasonic G9 with the TTArtisan 50mm F0.95, but on that lens I shoot at F1.4 to replicate the FF look. Of course the resolution of the two cameras is not comparable, but, for portraits where I am not pixel peeping they are quite comparable. Thanks for the video. John Pouw, NZ
@dirtyfunk5986
5 ай бұрын
I was an amateur last year and starting out so I went 4/3 I travel a lot and love the 45MM and 75MM lenses for my Olympus em-5 mk2 great little camera honestly love it.
@CAPTOURS
10 ай бұрын
Nice to see you're having a play with the 75mm. Hope it works on some sport for you. Nil difference out in the field against FF. Great comparison video.
@WhoIsSerafin
10 ай бұрын
Just did a mother and daughter photo shoot with the 75mm. Just excellent for it.
@c.augustin
10 ай бұрын
The M.Zuiko 45mm F1.8 is incredibly cheap for the quality it provides! And the (small) size and (low) weight come in handy when coupled with a small m43 body. But I would not compare it to anything more modern and FF, it has some (small) issues wide open. Still, I love mine and use it in many scenarios; sadly not weather sealed (but I think it is more about the price, and weather sealing would raise that).
@Democratiser
10 ай бұрын
The key for me is portability. This is where it is interesting that cameras like the R8 have high specs yet are relatively small. Sure the lenses are bigger, but there are several non-L RF and adaptable EF lenses which can suit. Sony’s A7C is obviously even smaller. I’ve recently added a Fuji XE3 plus TTArtisans 27mm to my canon FF and lumix MFT collection to see how the Fuji fares in terms of a portable camera for stills.
@steveworthington930
10 ай бұрын
The Olympus 75mm is the sharpest len,s of any system, the 45mm great portrait len,s for the money. In short Oly do not make a bad len,s period.
@krone5
10 ай бұрын
it is about the lenses with portraits, on m43 I like 60mm sigma and 35-100 f2.8 lumix, I like it better than the 42.5 this year.
@GallicGarlic
10 ай бұрын
Every professional photographer: « You do NOT need Full-Frame, it’s you, not the camera 📷.. get a Crop sensor, go and practice, take pictures, improve your skills, enjoy 😉 » Every professional photographer: Shoots in Full-Frame 😅
@anta40
10 ай бұрын
Pros use whatever fit their purpose. Some are happy with the lighter M43 (which produce nice large prints). Some prefer APSC. Some prefer FF because they can use the same lenses on film bodies. Some prefer medium format because smaller formats can't produce tonality (or whatever it is) up to their standard.
@normstangl3499
10 ай бұрын
I find the words “micro four thirds is good enough” to be quite misleading. Depending on what you are shooting it is beyond good enough. I’ve owned FF and now mostly use M43. For portraits I love using the M43 combined with the 75mm and the 12-40mm PRO lenses. I don’t hesitate to use this format for portraits. I like that I can get both eyes and likely an ear in critical focus while still having good background separation. I have no concerns with shooting wildlife, landscapes and especially macro. But since this video is about portraits “ditto”. My main camera is an Olympus E-M1 Mk III. Yesterday I was using an old Lumix GF1 with the 20mm f1.7 as a light carry system. I’ve even included images from this camera in a recent photo show. After selling most of my full frame gear I still have a 5D Classic with the 40mm pancake. This camera still delivers dreamy colours and images that hold up today. Most people don’t use half the capacity of the cameras they own. How many photographers actually make large prints? Let’s say 1 metre (39.4 inches) on the longest edge. A portrait printed at that scale from a well shot M43 file is stunning. I’ll just add that it is more critical to think about your composition in M43 than it might be in FF since you have more capacity to crop. But IMHO that makes you think and potentially makes for better images. Perhaps it even makes you a better photographer. In reality though, this concept applies to any format. In the end it will come down to buying the system that you need. Always opt for the glass that suits your purpose. I’ve stopped pixel peeping and make my judgements based on the prints that I create. So print more and pixel peep less is my motto.
@eltinjones4542
10 ай бұрын
I use my Lumix GX9 and G9 mostly now, the Full Frame DSLRS are mostly gathering dust 😂📷👍
@CameraCombo
10 ай бұрын
It's all good. After, it's just a question of money and your personal tolerances in terms of IQ, weight and size. FF and M43 can create imagery that evoke.
@DivisionStreetDrums
2 ай бұрын
One think I keep coming back to with my OMD EM1's they have more features and it feels much more premium that my Canon and Nikon Cameras. FF and Crop.
@joseacarrasm
10 ай бұрын
A more close comparison will be the EF 135mm f2 since the 75mm becomes 150 on m 4/3
@GallicGarlic
10 ай бұрын
The EF 135mm f/2 L is a beast of Bokeh ❤
@jumbi555
8 ай бұрын
Sometimes - A more shallow depth of field does not equate to a better photo. A lot of times you have to stop down to get a face in focus. MFT 1.4 lenses can give you shallow DOF if that is what you need. Personally, portability, quality and image stabilization are huge factors for me, which is why I use MFT.
@SaintKimbo
6 ай бұрын
Agreed, I've got an Olympus EM-5 that I've had for about a decade, but a couple of years ago decided to upgrade and was seduced by the price and coolness of FF and bought a Nikon Z5 with a 24-200 lens, and then bought a few 'F' lenses, that I can use with the adapter, the camera is fantastic, BUT, as I do a lot of hiking, the weight of the Nikon and a few lenses is killing me, and I now realize that, for what I do, and how few people see the photos' I take, a micro 4 thirds set up is more than enough, and the portability and weight advantages ARE a huge factor. I am now seriously considering selling my Nikon gear and getting an OM-1. My old 4 thirds 70-300 is about the same size, and weighs a bit less, than my Nikon 16-35 !
@gamingwithstand6886
10 ай бұрын
The Canon had a little bit more bokeh but nothing really that would make me switch systems.
@JayJJay185
10 ай бұрын
Nice one. Another good comparison to prove that comparisons are pointless. Stick with the Olympus :-)
@ericrjennings
10 ай бұрын
Ha. That’s why I opened the video with “another useless comparison”
@JayJJay185
10 ай бұрын
@@ericrjennings Lol, the irony is perfect.
@gordon3988
9 ай бұрын
Both looked good…frankly you could have swapped the titles and no one would have known. The biggest difference would likely have been in really low light and even then marginal at best but you would get more of an arm and shoulder workout with the Canon I bet. Lens are key in either. And now I assume Ryan will have a new career as a clothing model.
@d3xmeister
10 ай бұрын
The real difference: about 2 stops at the same apertures, and much more resolution from modern full frame sensors. However, for me, it doesn’t matter, I have more than I need quality, and the small and sharp lenses I use have no equivalent in the full frame world size wise. And that’s understandable, building slow and small lenses for full frame today is kind of a waste for most systems. If you make a small rangefinder-like full frame camera, with slow and small but sharp lenses……..well then you got the exact equivalent of m4/3 so what would be the point ?
@AN-kx2dn
10 ай бұрын
Full frame cannot be matched for portraits with their sense of depth in images. I have a 6D and as good as the shots look though, focus typically misses (probably my 3rd party lens) and the colors are atrocious. Skin is too orange, no reds. Too many shots blurred or miss the subject. Mirrorless is the way to go, and I am sure the newer Canons don't have these issues. Still, the colors are kinda weird for anything BUT portraits and I quite prefer the colors on my Oly for just about anything else. My Oly also performs better in lowlight cause it has a super compact flash and cause the 1 second handheld exposures actually get me cleaner images than my 6D ever could
@Democratiser
9 ай бұрын
My 5D III also isn’t always perfectly sharp, but I know that model camera is capable of perfection. So it is either just me or the lenses. I have wondered whether it is because I need to calibrate my lenses (which I have never done). Have you ever calibrated your lenses?
@AN-kx2dn
8 ай бұрын
@@Democratiser I have never calibrated my lenses. 6d viewfinder red dot lights up when manually focused properly on subject. It does it very fast so it's hard to notice when it does it. I'd guess what you are getting is result of too fast aperture, resulting in shallow depth of field, and thus probably very slightly off focus. Try shooting a slower aperture like f5.6 or f8. May require stabilization as aperture gets slower though, and then may result in motion blur. This is why I went M43, shot is always in focus but downside is I have almost no depth of field or bokeh
@kennymccormick8295
5 ай бұрын
User error.
@cachve1154
10 ай бұрын
In bright conditions, the two cameras make almost no difference (except for the bokeh), but in low light, the advantage of Full Frame will be very clear.
@ericrjennings
10 ай бұрын
I agree
@castielvargastv7931
9 ай бұрын
Xpect you dont shoot portraits in a dungeon… i lit my shots
@k8tv546
10 ай бұрын
Compair ff to m43 without shooting at iso 1000 or underexxpourse then +2-3 rc
@ericrjennings
10 ай бұрын
That was base iso with correct exposure
@markscott4059
10 ай бұрын
I cannot tell the difference. I’m sure there is but splitting hairs at that point. M43 has all the advantages over full frame expect low light. Lighter cheaper, more lens…..
@EDHBlvd
10 ай бұрын
Wasn’t Rob Trek waiting for you to buy another system? It’s here. Lol 😂
@bigrobotnewstoday1436
10 ай бұрын
He switches systems every two weeks. LOL
@ericrjennings
10 ай бұрын
I mean… if I didn’t sell the EM1 it’s not a system switch. Wait for the Leica to show up. 😂
@EDHBlvd
10 ай бұрын
@@ericrjennings hahahaha
@bigrobotnewstoday1436
10 ай бұрын
Full frame magic I don't think really starts to show until you get to f1.4 with primes. Canon 85mm f2 and the Olympus 45mm f1.8 but looks like full frame f3.6. Going to f3.6 to f2 its not really that much to write home about. Does the Canon look a little better yes. But I'm not going to lose sleep over it.
@castielvargastv7931
9 ай бұрын
You dont want more than one eye in focus? Then shoot at 1.4
@bigrobotnewstoday1436
9 ай бұрын
@@castielvargastv7931 I don't even get your comment because it makes no sense. You can get eyes in focus at even f1.2 if the face is looking right at the camera. If the face is turned and one eye is closer to the camera then you have to stop down if you want the other eye in focus.
@hasenmyer
10 ай бұрын
I’m not saying one is better than the other but after reviewing 1000s of photos taken by all kinds of cameras FF offers a certain “richness” that is hard to be achieved by crop sensor. Can 99% of peole tell the difference…NO! There is more to portraits than blurry background though. Margin of error in terms of dynamic range being top of list
@MikePGuitars
10 ай бұрын
I agree. There’s some magic sauce as sensor size increases. Because you can see the same difference in medium format vs FF. It’s subtle but it’s real.
@victor.shpakov
10 ай бұрын
You guys are pushing me into buying the FF.
@ericrjennings
10 ай бұрын
Ha. Do it ! (Don’t take advice from me. I buy different cameras all the time)
@ockie50
6 ай бұрын
Wow man, I wish you could slow down the way you speak. It would make your videos more enjoyable to listening to.
@palaneproductions7357
9 ай бұрын
m43 is a great system when you dont want to bring the Crop or FF gear.Your shots are close in quality for most eyes.The RP would also produce similar.Very much an individual choice on what ya want to spend and carry.R10/7 and P do it for me but GM1 Pen F and OM1(3) do too.Nice comparison
@rztrk3311
10 ай бұрын
A bit off topic since you are only discussing portraiture but one big difference is the ability to shoot amazing video without gimbal! (of course Matt is highly skilled...)kzitem.info/news/bejne/snxt3nycfYSZi34
@castielvargastv7931
9 ай бұрын
Most portrait shooters i kno use full frame cameras but they usually stop down to 5.6-f8 because they want more in focus than just one eye
@jay-by1se
9 ай бұрын
I have both.. Zero difference in quality. I have some of the most amazing photos of my life with the Olympus. I switch my SD back and forth so the pictures are mixed in one card. No one pick what is Canon and what is Olympus until you pull the data.
Пікірлер: 69