Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Article on MFT v FF- a professional's view


mikehit e2
5 6.8k 11 United Kingdom
6 Nov 2013 12:02AM
There have been a few posts recently along the lines of people wanting to upgrade, go FF or buy a DSLR as their first 'real' camera. I have recently stumbled on these links which makes interesting reading

http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/micro-four-thirds-vs-full-frame/
http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/full-frame-v-micro-four-thirds/

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Paul Morgan e2
13 15.7k 6 England
6 Nov 2013 12:08AM
Its becoming a very tiresome subject Smile
thewilliam 6 4.7k
6 Nov 2013 12:31AM
Lindsay is a true professional and has chosen the tools that suit her best. Lindsay does know how to get the best out a camera.

I find a larger camera easier to use but I don't enjoy lugging heavy lenses around but this is not usually a problem because most of my work is in a studio.

Some time ago, there was a very interesting FAQ on the Zeiss site about the relative sharpness of 35mm vs medium format lenses. The sharpest Zeiss lenses by quite a margin are the ZM, designed for Leica type rangefinder cameras and the least sharp in terms of raw resolution are the ZV lenses for the classic Hasselblad. But then medium-format images don't need to be enlarged as much for a given print size.

I'd wager that the MFT lenses are a lot sharper than the ZM.
6 Nov 2013 12:56AM

Quote:Its becoming a very tiresome subject Smile


As are the endless arguments on brand superiority.

As soon as any image data leaves the camera it ceases to be attributable to it, by virtue of being processed.

Only the end product has merit, everything else is simply a means to that end...
6 Nov 2013 1:29AM
Another micro 4/3 promotional article... yawnSmile I think media overdoes with it - or do we really become dumber? Private opinion of a good professional may be convincing and authoritative, especially if well paid for - but that's just an opinion. Anyone saw true vs thing with images in-depth analysis? Aha... Wink Because it would be too obvious that a larger camera with larger sensor and better optics can do whatever it's "smaller brothers" do - and even some more on the top of it.

Completely different topic would be camera suitability. Here I can agree with what industry does. Lacklustre performance from "professional" FF DSLR is not a new thing, and why they need to make them at higher cost when something smaller and cheaper will be as good (or bad) in amateur's hands?

The one who was into photography long enough to shoot, develop and print B&W film on their own may remember rangefinder cameras. They were quite cheap and advanced, and most used by amateurs who overgrew some sort of Browney. Professional journos used them as well - for they were fast, precise, equipped with decent optics, had the same size "sensor" as any SLR and were reasonably compact. Majority of studio photographers employed 6x8 contact print glass negatives at that time. My friend's dad was in the business retouching them.

M4/3 is a new "rangefinder", and there would be nothing wrong with professional or indeed amateur use of it. Just keep this industrial strength sales fertiliser out of my garden.
Paul Morgan e2
13 15.7k 6 England
6 Nov 2013 1:43AM
Most full frame users are a bit like Ferrari drivers and will never ever get the best out of there machines, but they do like to dream Smile
brian1208 e2
11 10.4k 12 United Kingdom
6 Nov 2013 6:03AM
There's what you need to do the job and then there's what you want that will make you believe you can do the job.

At the end of the day we are talking about a tool to create images so I never understand all the angst and heat that seems to surround the "Mines better than yours" debates
rogerfry e2
9 509 United Kingdom
6 Nov 2013 8:10AM
Excellent articles Mike, with enough sensible arguments to bring these pointless discussions to an end..........but they won't!
djcozzer 5 9 United Kingdom
6 Nov 2013 8:35AM

Quote:T
At the end of the day we are talking about a tool to create images so I never understand all the angst and heat that seems to surround the "Mines better than yours" debates



Is it not mine's bigger than yours Wink
mikehit e2
5 6.8k 11 United Kingdom
6 Nov 2013 8:53AM

Quote:Another micro 4/3 promotional article... yawnSmile I think media overdoes with it - or do we really become dumber? Private opinion of a good professional may be convincing and authoritative, especially if well paid for - but that's just an opinion. Anyone saw true vs thing with images in-depth analysis? Aha... Wink Because it would be too obvious that a larger camera with larger sensor and better optics can do whatever it's "smaller brothers" do - and even some more on the top of it.

I thought she made it repeatedly clear that it was her opinion for the way she shoots and what many see as 'advantages' of FF are not relevant to her. She even acknowledges that there are times she would like to use those 'advantages' but they not often enough to lug a full DSLR kit around.


Quote:Completely different topic would be camera suitability.

But that's what she is talking about.
keithh e2
10 23.2k 33 Wallis And Futuna
6 Nov 2013 9:03AM
It says something that a photographer feels the need to vindicate their use of a particular camera. Why is that?
franken e2
12 3.2k 4 Wales
6 Nov 2013 9:35AM

Quote:Its becoming a very tiresome subject Smile


It's been that way as far back as I can remember to be honest although it appears to have become a lot worse since the advent of digital.

None of my cameras are the latest models and I've no intention of changing them anytime soon.

I use 4/3rds, Dslr's and compacts and they all do a great job for what's intended.

For me the end result is what matters and not the tools that helped make it.

I can remember my photography tutor stating, " you can have the best camera gear in the world and produce crap and you can have modest gear and produce work that can be admired."

And how right he was.

For some, owning a certain camera brand and the latest models of them is more important than the results from them and I know several people that it applies to.
keith selmes 11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
6 Nov 2013 9:55AM
I thought it was interesting and rather well written. Her photographic work is good too.

Her reason for writing the article appears to be in her words

Quote:Professional photographers are often asked to write about how and why they do things

and

Quote:Aside from existing as a photographer I also help to educate new photographers and this is another thing which prompted me to write my article


And her reason for using MFT is simply

Quote:I have some occupational injuries now and I cannot realistically carry heavy stuff around


her main point seems to be

Quote:equipment choices are often personal. What matters the most is that the photographer is appropriately skilled and uses equipment which is suited to the job at hand


I don't see anything there we would need to disagree with, nor do I see her pushing any particular technology.
6 Nov 2013 10:00AM

Quote:...
I thought she made it repeatedly clear that it was her opinion for the way she shoots and what many see as 'advantages' of FF are not relevant to her. She even acknowledges that there are times she would like to use those 'advantages' but they not often enough to lug a full DSLR kit around.

Completely different topic would be camera suitability.
But that's what she is talking about.


There's not a lot of points I would disagree in the blog. It's in the name actually. "Micro Four Thirds vs Full Frame | The Arguments Continue". I have no idea who started this drivel first, but now seems that it was taken on with the advertisement industry. And the blog makes full impression of paid material written exactly in this key. It is interesting that in second part of it the author takes vindicative approach - as noticed by other member above. Almost like they feel need to convince themselves that Oly OM-D is the best option for a physically limited professional. Well, it is - I agree. Nothing better in the weight category at the moment. But giving the article a name that implies it is capable to compete with full frame DSLR ? Too much, isn't it?
keith selmes 11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
6 Nov 2013 11:00AM

Quote:But giving the article a name that implies it is capable to compete with full frame DSLR ? Too much, isn't it?
Actually MFT is better than FF DSLR - sometimes. And sometimes the other way round. I don't see any need for competing, unless you're selling them of course. I thought her problem was, and a large part of the reason for the article, she's dealing with a persistent dogma that an FF DSLR is always best, and then getting lots of unjustified, and often anonymous, flak when she explains why it isn't.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.