[y0chang]

Yosemite Falls, Yosemite National Park

GX-85 and 12-32mm Lens

https://www.flickr.com/photos/y0chang/49160649008/in/dateposted-public/

[yorik]

Older micro 4/3 cameras are becoming absurdly cheap and I have to keep telling myself that I don't need another mount and there's little if anything I could do with it that isn't covered by my existing gear (Pentax and Fujifilm).

But some of it is very pretty...

I have a similar problem in reverse - I have to keep reminding myself that I have more than enough camera gear for my needs (and skill level), and I don't
need that very attractively priced x-t30+18-55 combo (with 35 f/2, for good measure).

[cartesio]

Detail of a painting by Ben Quilty The textures and physical quality of the paint seen close-up are almost more interesting than the entire painting.

Great picture!

[cartesio]

MFT meets 21/4 square. A duplicate of the modified Hassy Superwide that was left on the Moon after doing its work.

Can you compare G9 performance in low light to KP one?

[WPRESTO]

Can you compare G9 performance in low light to KP one?

I don't have a KP, but I do have a K3 and a K1. The K1 has the best IQ in any circumstances, as expected. I have not made any test that would directly compare any of my MFT bodies to the K3 = take the same scene, same ISO same exposure with each camera then compare down to pixel-peeping. My impression - the MFT sensor is noisier at the same high ISO and in the same low-light situation. On the other hand. Images I've taken with MFT bodies have been 99% satisfactory. Only pixel-peeping generates concern about IQ. FOR ME, the benefits of MFT vastly outweigh the minor loss in IQ

[WPRESTO]

Here's light about as low as practical for photography, a full Moon over the sea. Noisy in this light with ISO high enough to hand-hold, yes. Would the image be better with had I used a K3, perhaps. Had I used a K1, probably. I'm a sorry I did not bring the K1? Not at all.

[cartesio]

I have a Panasonic G3 and a G80 with several olympus and panasonic lenses. My only concern with 4/3 is low light photography. Now it is the time when I do not get satisfactory results at home or in closed spaces. I am thinking to buy a KP, but I would like to be sure I am going to get something significantly better than what I already have.

[y0chang]

I have a K1 K3 and K5 and now I have a GX85. Does K1 have better dynamic range and less noise, yes. But unless I'm taking something that has giant dynamic range like a backlit landscape, most of the time it doesn't matter. Even then you can bracket and combine exposures. I do like the full frame depth of field for portraits. You can't get something like an FA limited for micro four thirds.

[northcoastgreg]

but I would like to be sure I am going to get something significantly better than what I already have.

"Significant' is a rather subjective concept. I do happen to find the KP "significantly" better than my E-M5ii, not just for dynamic range, but for the ISO and Pentax image processing. In fact, since acquiring the KP a two and a half years ago, I haven't used my m43 stuff all that often. Prior to the KP, I used m43 quite a bit, mostly for the vastly superior image stabilization of the E-M5 (vastly superior to my K-5iis). But the five axis stabilization of the KP makes it, for me, useable as a low ISO hand-held camera. And the images from the KP strike me as being just better. Not necessarily sharper, but better color, more life-like rendering, greater sense of depth.

But all this, of course, is "subjective." When I look at images on Flickr, most of what I see could easily have taken with m43 gear. The main advantage of larger sensor cameras (other than ease of attaining narrow depth of field) is that images from those cameras are more resilient when it comes to post processing. But a vast number of photographers out there seem allergic to PP, and if you're not going to PP your images, m43 may be all you'll ever need. Even in terms of so-called "low-light" photography (which I translate as photography in low light sans tripod or flash), with a fast 1.8 prime and an m43 camera with state of the art stabilization, m43 may be just as good as an APS-C camera like the KP. And that's particularly true if you're not going to bother to post process the images. With low light images, I like to have five or six stops of dynamic range to work with in post. But if you're not post-processing dynamic range considerations are often irrelevant.

[WPRESTO]

I would never tell someone they should switch to MFT, and were I younger and stronger, I would always use my K1 and would not have parted with my 150~450mm But I just cannot manage the weight of such equipment.
Below is an uncropped image and a crop from it, which hopefully demonstrates why I find MFT IQ sufficient for my uses, and why I am very pleased with my Oly 12~100mm

[Marcus Rowland]

Just bought my second M4/3 camera in less than a month! Since I find it easier to work with a bridge camera or SLR than I do with the rear screen of the GF2, I went looking for the add-on viewfinder (which turns out to be VERY expensive), but found Cash Converters web site selling a DMC-G1, which has it built in, for considerably less. With a bit of luck selling on the GF2 will pay for most of it. Fingers crossed anyway!

Arrived today and it is VERY nice, much better than the DMC-GF2 - basically, it feels like I'm using a proper SLR, not a mobile phone with a lens on the back. Really bulky compared to the GF2, but that's largely because the GF2 doesn't have the big rotating screen on the back. The main thing is that the viewfinder seems to work really well when focusing a manual lens, so lens test photos etc. should be a lot easier. Certainly improves my impression of mirrorless bodies. I'm probably going to sell the GF2 on in the new year, unless someone knows of a REALLY cheap infra-red conversion service for it?

Also got an Olympus 40-150mm for 4/3 (not Micro 4/3) last week, which works perfectly on this with the Olympus adapter I've got. They are crazily cheap at the moment, £20 used from the CEX chain in the UK.

[WPRESTO]

Pany G9 + SIgma 150mm f2.8 macro via "ultra" adapter (FF equivalent FL = 212mm).

[DamienW]

"Significant' is a rather subjective concept. I do happen to find the KP "significantly" better than my E-M5ii, not just for dynamic range, but for the ISO and Pentax image processing...

I am in this same boat, having both an E-M5ii and a KP. My subjective impression is that the KP produces better quality shots on average. However, the 12-40mm pro I have semi-permanently attached to the E-M5ii is outstanding, and I do not have any zooms like this in my Pentax collection - usually I have a prime attached to the KP.

The E-M5ii is most often my daily carry, though for many planned situations I take the KP.

---------- Post added 12-09-19 at 09:34 PM ----------

Arrived today and it is VERY nice, much better than the DMC-GF2...

Haha...as bad as me. I picked up a GM1 initially, then a second GM1 for my kid, quickly followed by an E-M5. I loved the E-M5 so much that I soon upgraded to the E-M5ii. Didn't enjoy the GM1 as much, but it had the advantage of being soooo tiny and easy to carry.

Yes...the secondhand MFT/FT stuff can be crazy cheap. Good bang for buck. A secondhand 12-40mm Oly pro on a cheap used 16mp MFT body can do some amazing things for the price.

[WPRESTO]

Eastern reef egret, dark/grey phase

[colfin]

Some over-edited cheese. F35 cockpit, GX85 + Sigma 16mm 1.4