Micro Four Thirds systems

[riwiho]

Could someone please explain to me what the purpose of the micro four thirds system is?

I have seen the Olympus E91, Lumix G1 & the new Lumix GF1 however I do not understand who they are targeted at and what they would be capable of. I think the new GF1 is a good looking unit but for the quoted £799 you could get any number of quality DSLRs + Lens or if you want the small compactability of a P&S a Leica D LUX 4 could be yours with some change.

Who are Lumix and Olympus pitching these at? Why would a consumer consider one of these over a D60 with extra lenses, practicality?

How capable are these units compared to a D40 at over half the price?

[RobDickinson]

Small and light with the performance of a full SLR, ish.

The E-P1 is a cracking piece of kit but I'm not personaly convinced it does enough of either job (SPR or P&S) well enough to justify its cost.

[Simpo Two]

It's so they have something different to sell and can use the word 'new' a lot. Everything else is invented by the marketing department.

I'm not saying the system is good or bad (never used it) but I believe that's why such things come about.

[Whitefly Swatter]

[quote=Simpo Two]It's so they have something different to sell and can use the word 'new' a lot. Everything else is invented by the marketing department.
quote]

just look at the 'new' nikon and cannon stuff that comes out

[Simpo Two]

Whitefly Swatter said:

just look at the 'new' nikon and cannon stuff that comes out

We'll see which lasts longer

[urban_alchemist]

If you don't get it, chances are you won't.

It's all about compromise: changeable lenses (excellent lenses in the case of Panasonic), and dSLR photo quality, with legacy lenses (OM, Leica M) - all wrapped up in a camera 20% bigger than a P+S.

For me (coming from rangefinders), Micro-4/3 is a godsend... just need to see the GF1 and decide whether to go for it or the excellent GH1.

But then again, I'd never own a dSLR...

Edited by urban_alchemist on Wednesday 2nd September 10:42

Edited by urban_alchemist on Wednesday 2nd September 10:43

[Whitefly Swatter]

Simpo Two said:

Whitefly Swatter said:

just look at the 'new' nikon and cannon stuff that comes out

We'll see which lasts longer

I bet nikon and cannon upgrade first isnt the new 8D due out soon

[toppstuff]

I have a D2X and D300 Nikon and a lot of Nikon glass and yet I am very attracted to micro 4/3rds.

The reason?

Pick up a GH1 Panasonic and it is light, small and very easy to use. I am planning a lot of travel over the next few months , to Canada , the US and Japan. I am seriously thinking of leaving the Nikon gear at home and taking a GH1 and a couple of lenses. It will be much easier to use, much lighter and with the added benefit of really good quality HD video.

As far as picture quality is concerned, the Panasonic GH1 seems to have perfectly acceptable picture quality for 90% of situations including large prints up to A3.

[Simpo Two]

Whitefly Swatter said:

I bet nikon and cannon upgrade first isnt the new 8D due out soon

You're missing the point. Making a 7D into an 8D by adding some buttons is not the same as introducing a Whole New System (body, sensor size, lens mount, lens) to the market.

[Elderly]

Put simply; it's a way of getting a larger sensor into a smaller body and using smaller size lenses.
The lenses appear to be designed down to a price but very clever software corrections in camera, automatically deal with most of the optical short-comings, so giving a good end result. The following explanation of micro four thirds is from dpreview:

"The new, mirrorless format / lens mount based on (and compatible with) Four Thirds. The Micro Four Thirds system uses the same sensor size (18 x 13.5 mm) but allows slimmer cameras by removing the mirror box and optical viewfinder. The new format has three key technical differences: (1) roughly half the flange back distance (distance from mount to the sensor), (2) a smaller diameter lens mount (6 mm smaller) and (3) two additional contact points for lens-to-body communication (now 11 points). Removing the mirror mechanism allows this shorter flange back distance, meaning lenses for the new mount can be considerably smaller than current Four Thirds designs. The format will require framing to be carried out using Live View on either the LCD monitor or an EVF."

[Elderly]

Simpo Two said:

Whitefly Swatter said:

just look at the 'new' nikon and cannon stuff that comes out

We'll see which lasts longer

I am a DX user but with the advent of FX and micro 4/3rds,
I'm not sure where it will stand in the future.
Now you you can get an FX sensor into a DX size body (I am aware of the lens size issue, to give the same focal length) giving much improved high ISO performance and an ability to make
really large prints, and now a 4/3rds size sensor into a much smaller lighter camera not falling that much behind DX quality;
it appears to me that maybe DX could go first.
Those that want the best available quality at the time may go for FX and those that want a camera that is light and unobtrusive
but gives acceptable quality may go for Micro 4/3rds. DX becomes the compromise?

[Simpo Two]

I have to say that the new, er, 'artistic flat' (thanks for helping there, marketeers) body design looks quite nice:



Not unlike a 35mm film compact circa 1960, but without a viewfinder

[Elderly]

Simpo Two said:

I have to say that the new, ...... body design looks quite nice:

Not unlike a 35mm film compact circa 1960, but without a viewfinder

I bet the EVF that will be an optional extra (essential for ME) will spoil those good looks.

[Simpo Two]

Elderly said:

I bet the EVF that will be an optional extra (essential for ME) will spoil those good looks.

Just gaffertape a bogroll tube to the hotshoe and look down that

Edited by Simpo Two on Wednesday 2nd September 15:46

[HectorOldbranch]

riwiho said:

Who are Lumix and Olympus pitching these at? Why would a consumer consider one of these over a D60 with extra lenses, practicality?

I dont know who they were aiming at but I bought one. Im no real photographer but have been fancying an SLR for ages, I just knew though that if I bought a 450d or similar it would end up being left behind most of the time. The E-P1 will 'just' fit in a jacket pocket which means it comes with me.

It really is quite small, here next to my wifes G10. Obviously the lense goes flush when the G10 is off but the actual body of the Canon is taller and slightly thicker, not quite as wide though.



As a photography halfwit I cant really comment on the quality of the pics but the Olympus seems a little sharper than the Canon in normal usage but in low light its way ahead due to the larger sensor. And then of course when theres the SLR expandability when funds allow.

[riwiho]

Thank you for the comments all. Appears like there is some split opinions on this type of camera, I suppose for the amateur who does not really want the inconvenience of a large bulky DSLR but a step up in options this type of unit is a great step.

So how does the Lumix GF1 camera compare to the Leica DLux 4? Is it the added advantage of removable lenses that sell the GF1 and justify the extra £300 price point?

[toppstuff]

I would think the panasonic gh1 would be well worth the extra over the Leica Digilux.

[omohat]

riwiho said:

So how does the Lumix GF1 camera compare to the Leica DLux 4? Is it the added advantage of removable lenses that sell the GF1 and justify the extra £300 price point?

That and the faster autofocus, 720p video and oh yeah, the bigger sensor! I don't think people stepping up from compacts realise what a difference the larger SLR sized sensor makes.

For what it's worth I use a D700 but have been on the look out for a more compact camera for when I don't feel like lugging around the big ass D700. None of the compact camers comes close to my requirements for image quality (well maybe the Panasonic LX3) but the E-P1 seemed to fit the bill pretty well, barring so-so autofocus and no flash. Now the GF1 has come along and seems to tick all my boxes (although it doesn't have in body stabilisation like the E-P1 does) so I think I'll pull the trigger on the GF1 once the launch price comes down a bit. I see these m4/3 cameras as being a good 2nd camera for someone who already owns a DX or FX camera or an upgrade for someone coming from compacts who is intimidated by buying an SLR.

[uncinqsix]

Simpo Two said:

I have to say that the new, er, 'artistic flat' (thanks for helping there, marketeers) body design looks quite nice:



Not unlike a 35mm film compact circa 1960, but without a viewfinder

I like that. It's a shame there was nothing like that around when I bought my DSLR - I didn't really want anything as bulky as a full DSLR, but I wanted something more capable than a compact. (Got a D40 in the end).

Prices seem to be a bit excessive though.

[RichB]

Rather than start a new thread this seems an appropriate place to ask; do these type of cameras take the picture the instant the "shutter" button is pressed or is there a delay as with cheaper digital compacts? I am looking to buy a decent compact digital, price not really an issue, but one of things I hate about my current old digital is that there is a delay between pressing the go button and the camera deciding go take the picture!