9 Facts About Micro Four Thirds Cameras

By Ryan Libre On May 12, 2010 · 14 Comments

Tweet

Feature photo by pittaya. Photo above by Ole1981

Documentary photographer Ryan Libre demystifies the latest in camera technology.

As a professional photographer, I place very high demands on gear in terms of quality, flexibility and full features. Now with the new Micro Four Thirds system, it seems I can get 95% of those things with only half the size and weight of an average DSLR camera.

Here are a few facts to know about Micro Four Thirds cameras.

It has an interchangeable lens system.

You are not limited to the built-in zoom range of a point and shoot camera, and you’re also not weighed down by the bulk of a DSLR. Even the best built-in zoom lenses on compact cameras can’t shoot wider than 28mm and do not have apertures wider than F/ 2.8. With a Micro 4/3rd, you can use the Panasonic 20mm F/ 1.7 fast lens to capture great shots at night or a Olympus 7-14mm wide angle zoom lens to get all your friends in the group photo.

It is an open format.

This means that any lens can work on any camera body regardless of manufacturer. You now have access to a larger variety of lenses available and you can be sure the camera system will not go defunct because a single company closes shop.

Photo by bfishadow

There is no shutter sound

Part of the reason the Micro 4/3rds is so small is because it doesn’t use a mirror; similar to the expensive Leica camera system.

An added benefit is its noiseless shutter which makes it perfect for street, travel and documentary photography.

It has a 2X crop factor.

This means that when a lens says 20mm, it is actually shooting at 40mm in the traditional 35mm sense. Most DSLRs have a 1.5 crop factor.

The benefit of this is they can make a 55-200mm zoom that is tiny and affordable but actually lets you shoot to 400mm.

The 4/3rds sensor size means more effective use of your lens and more photo size options.

Most DSLRs have a 2/3 sensor that is rectangular in shape. Camera lenses are circular so all the area outside the rectangle is essentially wasted. The 4/3 format is closer to a square and uses more of the images the lens is capturing.

Read full article on MatadorU →

Community Connection

Wondering what “sensor” or “depth of field” or “DSLR” mean? Why not sign up for one of Ryan’s photography workshops.

Trying to find new markets or become a successful travel photographer?

Grab Matador’s Free Report 15 Publications That Pay For Travel Photography and help accelerate your career as a photographer or register for the MatadorU Travel Photography Course.

About The Author

Ryan Libre

Ryan Libre is a photojournalist based in Japan and Thailand. He was awarded the 2010 Nikon Inspiration Award for his photographic work on the Kachin struggle for independence in Myanmar. Please visit his homepage www.ryanlibre.com.

More By This Author

When and how to correctly use fast lenses and high ISO (3 comments)
6 Recommended Photography Podcasts (3 comments)
6 Ways to Get Great Colors in Your Photos Without Photoshop (6 comments)

view all → Ryan Libre

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gsp100677/ Gurpreet

I have to say, I’ve been impressed with the Four Thirds system in principle, but I didn’t know it was a totally open lens format with lenses from different manufacturers being completely interchangeable – I’m now completely sold on 4/3rds cameras!

If they’d been around when I bought my first DSLR I’d have definitely bought a 4/3rds instead!

Great article Ryan – succinct and fun to read, but also informative.
http://www.ryanlibre.com ryan libre

Yes a very cool thing indeed. The story on olympus’s website says the designer was so impressed at how useful USB ports were, he decided to make his camera open format too.

however not all of the other accessories are interchangeable, the detachable external view finder is specialized for the body for example.

Thanks for reading, glad you enjoyed.

hahahoho

the “open format” is nonsense for several reasons I won’t even bother to go into here

The main benefit for it is for the mfgs, who can lean on each other to bring lenses to market. It’s a desperate move for fringe-market players, as the obvious downside is that you make the camera but can’t sell glass for it.

Meanwhile Nikon Canon and Sony will continue on their merry way making and selling cameras that take all their legacy lenses, or at least their CPU lenses. You didn’t see Sony switch to a micro 4/3rds mount for their new NEX cameras, for that reason and a bunch of others. Soon enough Panasonic will take the mount one way and Olympus will take it another.
hahahoho

…the much smarter thing would have been to support an established mfgs mount, the F mount would have been an excellent choice as it would then work with all of Nikon’s lenses, at least the AF-S and AF-I lenses.

Canon likewise, it would take any EF-S or EF lens
Sony, any alpha lens

these were no-brainer choices

There’s virtually no benefit at all to micro 4/3rds in terms of a lens-mount.
Saving a quarter-inch in backfocus distance is easily made up for by the wider diameter of the lens. I’d take that over a shorter backfocus distance any day of the week. Nothing better than putting a fullframe lens on a subframe camera.
hahahoho

They say that they can make lighter and smaller lenses with the same performance by reducing the backfocus distance

That is so stupid…just by making the sensor smaller the lens will be sharper across the frame at lower F#s. You *instantly* improve the relative performance of the lens. The only thing they do by doing this is make the body a little thinner, and perhaps the lens a little smaller and lighter, but now you have to stop down just as much if not more to get the same sharpness across the frame, so the only optical benefit is weight but in exchange for that you’re using a smaller sensor reduced pixel count or more diffraction and in any case more noise at every ISO

Overall just a worse camera

And that’s hy you don’t see a wholesale move from subframes or even fullframes to 4/3rds.

On the other hand you don’t see a move from point & shoots to micro 4/3rds because every problem and every *benefit* with 4/3rds is already in the point & shoot market. They just had to put faster glass on the point & shoots and they’re back to square 1. In the long run it’s a dead market for those simple reasons. On one hand they’re nothing more than overgrown point & shoots, on the other they are just slightly-shrunken, noisy, low-resolution DSLRs with no mirrors. If weight is really an issue you’ll just get a point & shoot, if IQ is your main concern you’ll sling a fullframe DSLR & put up with the size & weight, or at least get an APS-C sized mirrorless camera.

4/3rds is a domestic-made electric car in a world full of mopeds, buses, subways and quality gas-powered imports. Losing the mirror is one thing but the sensor is both too small and not small enough. Just as electric cars use cheap power but cost way too much and take too long to recharge. 4/3rdss cameras are not small enough to fit in a normal pocket with a good lens and they are not large enough to have IQ that’s much better than a good p&s. You might as well just buy a good p&s.

Blair

I have had a GF1 since October. It is a fantastic little camera. The shutter isn’t noiseless though, there is still a mechanical element to it, so you will get the clicking sound.

The 20mm is a great lens for street and low light photography, while the lumix 14-45mm is the best kit zoom I have ever used!

Good article and it is nice to see these great little cameras getting some props!

http://www.ryanlibre.com ryan libre

Yes your right Blair, i said noiseless cause im comparing to a DSLR with a loud clunky mirror that flips up every time i take a photo. There is no mirror, but still a shutter.

my 1700$ Nikon Body has a new “quite mode” yet it is still many times louder then any micro 4/3rds body.

Thanks for reading and your good feedback

http://matadortravel.com/traveler/justruss Justruss

I agree with Blair. I just got my GF1 and played with it for a few days in Prague. It’s perfect for travel with the 14-45 lens.

Thanks for the article Ryan.
http://www.traveldroppings.com/photos.php traveling_mike

I am a bit saddened that these came out when they did as I also just bought my DSLR. I love the size of these cameras.

But here’s the deal. I am sure these are good for what you say, but you dont list any negative points. Surely there must be somethings that dont jive. In other words, are there any cons to these cameras? The people need to know.

hahahoho

sure there’s a downside to them
They are noisy compared to DSLRs with larger sensors at the same ISO, they have the same problem in that they need to be stopped-down significantly for sharp shots across the frame (vs the average p&s which is just fine to shoot wide-open and will still give sharp shots across the frame) and they still are not really all that small, or cheap.

They are the worst part of point & shoots combined with the worst part of DSLRs.

and it doesn’t really matter if the lens format is “open” if you only need to buy one lens. If you’re talking multiple lenses then you’re carrying more lens than camera. If 4/3rds camera mfgs are going to make the same lenses anyway what difference doe it make. 15 companies make SD cards, does that mean that you would happily buy any of them and put them in your camera? No. Same with USB, there are only a few mfgs that I would trust for computer peripherals.

With size I really don’t see the issue, even a big old SLR will sling around your neck or shoulders, and regardless of how small the camera is you’re still carrying a camera. Vs “not carrying a camera”. If it weighs 2kg with a lens that’s one thing, but a 500-600g DSLR and lens isn’t goin to slow anyone down.

A Nikon D3100 or Sony A200 is not going to slow anyone down.
So the only real benefit here is the pancake wide-angle. Once you put a barrel on the front, they are pretty-much all the same.

Cellphones will beat micro 4/3rds in terms of convenience any day of the week.

Rune

As a previous owner of Nikon conventional film cameras, I chose the Olympus Four Thirds system and the Olympus E-1 when I finally entered the digital camera world in 2003, followed up with the Olympus E-3. Although the Olympus system is a little bit smaller than “conventional” digital systems from Nikon and Canon, I soon began to realize that the difference wasn’t that big at all, especially if you use professional lenses like the Zuiko 12- 60mm or the Zuiko 7-14mm. My photo bag had more or less the same weight as when my old Nikon’s where put in! When Panasonic released their Micro Four Thirds system, I soon bought the Panasonic DMC G1 summer 2009, followed up by the GH1 later on. The main reason for this purchase was reduced weight and size. I very much have liked to appreciate these wonderful cameras! Although I also possess a Pentax K-7 for demanding (wet/ cold) situations, it is still the Panasonic’s which is used most of the time. Why is this? Well, here is my point of view:
- If you don’t regularly need to use high ISO beyond 1250, the picture quality is as good as any digital camera on the marked.
- Fast and very reliable focus and AE-system
- Reduced size and weight!! Cannot be valued enough. My photo bag is now a joy to carry around.
- Intuitive handling and possibilities! I don’t miss anything from my other cameras which I cannot do with the Panasonic’s, except demanding sports/ actions scenes where you need speed beyond 3,5 frames a second.
- A system for the future! As this is an open standard, the system will continue to grow, offering several new lenses and other equipment.

hahahoho

tis true

it either fits in your pocket or it doesn’t

http://www.rebeccaweeks.net/ Rebecca Weeks

I +love+ my Nikon DSLR and could never give it up. It is however too big and heavy to keep in my bag all the time, and there’s countless photos that I’ve missed for not having a camera on me (I recently moved to a new country, and am still in the ‘everything’s new and interesting’ phase). I find small point and shoot cameras frustrating due to the lack of control and inability to alter the depth of field in particular. A little Leica, or one of these (if they’re really a more budget-friendly option?) is definitely going on my (very long) wishlist.
hahahoho

“Even the best built-in zoom lenses on compact cameras can’t shoot wider than 28mm and do not have apertures wider than F/ 2.8. ”

Wrong.

even ignoring 0.7x adapters the LX3, LX5, S90 and S95 are 24-70mm effective F2.0 wide-angle with IS.

Plus Olympus has the XZ-1 which is F1.8 28-120mm effective.

just wrong.
Every size & weight related benefit of mirrorless 4/3rds also applies to point & shoots And likewise it’s just a matter of time before someone makes a mirrorless fullframe. They are all going to have to deal with the fact that the smaller the sensor, the smaller and lighter the glass can be to get the same optical performance.

9 Facts About Micro Four Thirds Cameras

It has an interchangeable lens system.

It is an open format.

There is no shutter sound

It has a 2X crop factor.

The 4/3rds sensor size means more effective use of your lens and more photo size options.

Community Connection

Trying to find new markets or become a successful travel photographer?

Related Posts

Ryan Libre

More By This Author

Subscribe to Matador

The best travel articles each week. No spam.

Breaking stories, announcements, events, and more.

In partnership with Matador

Quick-Read

Feature

Feature

Feature

Quick-Read

Feature

Feature

Feature

Feature

Feature

Feature

Matador Network © 2006-2011

About Matador

Sections

Become a Contributor

New Media School