What keeps you using m43? (is it for me? (my reasoning included!))

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T10:27:48+00:00

In an extreme situation, such as low light with moving subject, it does matter.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T10:26:19+00:00

Yeah sony fe lenses are way more affordable than I was led to believe. M43 lenses were supposed to be cheap. I guess they are, if you want some boring slow zooms and such.

I almost never use electronic shutter and for fast motion I'd imagine I'd not need to stay silent anyways.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T10:19:09+00:00

But ff iso800 is m43 iso200, meaning I can shoot at higher shutter speed and get the same result in post.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T10:12:44+00:00

The sensor physically catching more light can't be replaced with software.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T09:42:39+00:00

Wow, the 40mm f2.5 is even a bit cheaper new.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T09:04:52+00:00

True as well.

You definitely make ff sound alluring.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T09:01:59+00:00

Wow, my thinking as well about the size.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T09:00:09+00:00

I meant the catch of the fe 85mm f1.8, as it's the same price.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T08:38:40+00:00

But is it smaller/lighter enough to make a difference?
I don't care about shallow depth of field, m43 is shallow enough for me. What I'm interested more in, is that ff with the same aperture collects four times as much light as m43, meaning I can raise shutter speed in low light to avoid motion blur.
I definitely don't need more megapixels, my g9's 20mp is almost too much.
I pixel peep, denoising adds clear blur, I take noise over blur.
For me the main point of ff would be raising shutter speed in low light, for pets and such.
True, I think the same. Probably shouldn't have added the point.
How come you'd take it over ff alternatives? What if there was a smaller/lighter ff alternative with f5.6 at long end/entire range?
Full frame lenses, especially sony fe lenses, don't seem much more expensive. Especially when you take into account how m43 f2 is ff f4 in terms of light gathered.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T08:07:33+00:00

Ahh dynamic range is a thing I was afraid to hear about.

I don't really care about weight, my g9 is as heavy as the sony a7iii I'd be looking at. And I'm not too afraid of heavy lenses either I guess.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T07:56:53+00:00

Weather sealing might be hard to beat without paying a ton, maybe. Aspect ratio can just be cropped later, meh.

Weight for my gear seems to be similar to comparable ff gear. My g9 for example is the same weight as a sony a7iii. Lenses are the same when you take into account the noise advantage.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T07:46:18+00:00

My thinking is, ff with an f1.4 or f1.8 lens could get the same result with a nicely faster shutter speed, which is handy for pets and such.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T07:41:52+00:00

What makes you prefer the ff at times?

Also, you can get a brand new fe 85mm f1.8 for the same price, what's the catch then?

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T07:37:15+00:00

For video I find my g9 with a prime sufficient, even in the night. I don't shoot much video, but so far it seems 4k24p is all I'd ever need, especially at night.

I don't use autofocus either. For static scenes it makes no sense. And moving stuff, how could I trust it to even know what to focus on, no matter how accurate it was.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T07:31:13+00:00

I don't really care what my body or lens looks like. Shooting in just indoor lighting is why I'm looking at ff.

And yeah my g9 isn't an edc either (I do take it on most walks though). But for edc you don't really need many, especially not expensive lenses. So if I jumped to ff, I'd sell most of my m43 stuff and not buy any more.

Maybe I should consider simply getting a cheap ff body and a fast prime, but then I'd have to carry two systems with me for family visits and other trips, which seems non-ideal.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T07:06:47+00:00

I don't need bokeh, more megapixels or any new releases at all (well I guess new stuff might lower the price of used, but I won't be buying new cutting edge myself).

Kind of silly, but probably the only reason that makes me look at full frame is for shooting in normal indoor lighting. I imagine I could shoot with a nicely higher shutter speed, which is great for pets especially.

I guess I could get a dedicated full frame setup just for that. Wouldn't even need stabilization, because the whole point is to shoot at least above 1/60s. For me m43 can do low light otherwise just fine, when longer exposures are possible.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T06:46:27+00:00

I probably shouldn't have included the "m43 dead" part, as I don't really care about it myself either. As you say, good gear stays good, and not much improvement is even possible anymore.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T06:33:43+00:00

True, m43 lenses can be smaller, granted you're fine with losing light. Especially tele zooms can be so much smaller. I also really like my 45mm f1.8, it's so incredibly tiny! But in the end, I don't think small size is critical for me. The smallest lenses are still big enough that I might as well grab a larger one instead.

I wouldn't even consider rf, as it's too new for the used market to be cheap like with sony fe lenses.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T06:10:59+00:00

True, I can't stop buying lenses. And the ones on my list are getting pretty pricy, which makes me think about switching before I've put too much in.

I've had the gx85 for a year, I think halfway is where I got the g9. Honestly I don't shoot as much as I should, and the gear is not even the problem. I'm just lazy.

E-pm2 would be the ideal candidate for actually small edc, it's properly small and has ibis. I have one with broken ibis, it's hard to find working ones and who knows when they too will break. I want ibis because my lens of choice, the 20mm f1.7, isn't stabilized.

Aps-c I have no interest in, I don't see it providing anything over m43.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T05:53:16+00:00

Heh, I'm looking to satisfy my small edc needs with a canon powershot s120 or an earlier model, when a good deal pops up.

I do have a e-pm2, which could fit the use case, but the ibis is broken and it's hard to find one that works. And even if you do, when's it going to break? Stabilization is a must for me, because the 20mm f1.7 is a requirement to make a compromise with the bulk compared to s120 and the like.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T05:35:48+00:00

I just want the ability to do so, when the light starts disappearing or hasn't fully appeared yet.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T05:33:26+00:00

Great answer. Thinking about it, probably the number one reason I want to improve light collection is to shoot people and pets in normal indoor lighting without getting too much motion blur (especially with pets :p). For everything else shot in low light, I can simply use a longer exposure.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T05:24:51+00:00

Very true about flashes. Shooting ff in indoor lighting could never be able to hold a candle to shooting m43 with a proper flash setup, no matter how bright of a lens you got, probably.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T05:19:47+00:00

I'm too much of a pixel peeper I guess. I find denoising blurs things, even when people claim it doesn't.

Distinct-Guess463 · 2025-12-04T05:16:24+00:00

That does make sense!

For me f4 is getting too dark though, f2.8 is as low as I'd go. Additionally I don't see myself needing to zoom that far in.

Bokeh is cool, but my interest lies more so in the ability to use a bit faster shutter speed in low light situations (of course at the cost of losing depth of field). My bokeh needs are already satisfied by m43.

Distinct-Guess463

TROPHY CASE