Micro Four Thirds is BETTER than Full Frame | Change MY MIND! 

I switched from FF to micro 4/3 back in 2017 with the GH5 and never looked back. It and my G9 are my landscape cameras too. With the type of hiking I do my back is very pleased. No need for huge backpacks anymore too. Even smaller tripods. Now my fully loaded pack weighs in around 25 lbs vs 55-60 lbs. That's camera gear, clothing, food, etc... My 35mm equivalent range is 18mm - 800mm.

Well done man! I’ve been planning on making a video like this forever and you said everything I was going to say more or less. Reframing what people consider a negative of micro 4/3 as a positive is very important and you did a great job!

Interesting perspective and explanation. As a hobbyist photographer that does some professional work such as family portraits, engagement pics, pet photography and music videos, I wanted to upgrade back in 2015 and chose Olympus MFT. I now have a great selection of lenses and one system that I use for both photography and videos! You can not beat the value of a micro4/3 system.

In 2019, I switched from Sony to Lumix cameras for video. The best decision ever. This year, 2022, I made the switch from Nikon to Olympus/Lumix for photography, and, so far, the best decision, too.

Fanstastic analysis. Since most of the hybrid camera reviews are all about video your review is extremely relevant. I love my MFT G9 for photos. So my main interest here was in the MFT video capapbilities because all the reviews are focusing on video it seems with the new S5 series and G9ii. I am now convinced to get the G9ii when it comes down a bit in price and avoid the lens stable for FF breaking the bank and back.

New Subscriber here. Wow! I'm glad you put so much work into this video. After weeks ( months really... ) of reading, comparing, watching reviews, etc... it's THIS video that finally gives me the confidence to go with the 4/3 system. The GH6 is being released in a couple weeks and I'll probably pull the trigger on one. Thanks for doing this video!

This is an extremely well-done comparison. One of the few genuinely valuable comparisons between the two formats. Subbed

Great video and totally agree with you 100 percent! Thanks for making these videos! You keep me inspired!

Very nice review, concise and to the point with awesome examples. Keep up the great work.

Started with MFT and then went to the full frame side. I like having both of them, my G9 with several leica lenses and my Sony full frame with several excellent lenses. I take a lot of pictures of military jets flying over the house & I can crop in farther with my Sony & not lose as much resolution. I just enjoy switching out the different systems and have fun with each one.

Nice points and agree but some inconsistency... 1. Why just for video? Your arguments apply to still imagery as well. 2. The two stops f2.8 to f1.4 apply to ISO as well so 3200 to 800 not 3200 to 1000 as stated. 3. Stabilization. The physics term you are looking for is inertia...the tendency to continue moving in the same direction. Using a vehicle analogy...which vehicle would be easier to stop and change direction (which is what stabilization has to do with a sensor). A train, a bus or a car? Think you know which is the FF and which is the m4/3. For sake of argument we'll say the bus is aps-c. 🙂Cheers.

Thanks great video to clarify the myth of FF is always better. I’m a 10+ years m43 user. This is the pattern I observe on my friend (casual photography): 1. Shoot with phone 2. Want to get a serious camera for kids or hobby 3. Want to buy the best one, the more expensive one. And as still young I don’t mind carrying heavy equipment around. 4. Get FF. Carry it every trip. 5. Getting old, tired,lose interest. The FF is too heavy. It’s used less frequently and collects dust. 6. Back to take photo with phone. Accept the fact that photography is not for him. During the whole process the lightweight m43 camera is never considered as a solution. In this case what we can see that “photography needs FF” mindset is actually killing many people’s interest in photography.

I completely agree with all of it. Thats why when getting rid of my camera gear and saving up for the S5ii I decided to keep the Lumix G9 M43. I just love that camera. I know I have conflicting lens line ups but in reality its the Panny 12-35 on the G9 for 99% of what I do and the 20-60 kit and 50-1.8 on the S5ii. I find I can do just about anything with that...photos, glamour shots, video work on either camera...Lumix Rocks - Your next video should be "Lumix cameras are the best...change my mind" LOL. Thanks and nice video very complete.

While I never shoot video, I still like M4/3 for photo. If a camera and lenses are too large/heavy, I would be less likely to carry it with me. Also, for travel, M4/3 ticks all the boxes for me.

Well done!!! Thank you so much the very informative video... going to use this every time someone tells me to buy a full frame

A great explanation on why M4/3 will be relevant. I use the Olympus E-M1 Mk2 for landscapes and have no complaints. Also got the Panasonic G85. Another bang for buck camera. No urgency on my part as yet to jump onto the FF bandwagon.

Excellent video Rich! I've been contemplating switching from m 4/3 to full frame for video work. Which would mean buying a whole new set of lenses as well. I just don't want to invest so much into a hobby/freelance type of thing I'm doing. This definitely opened my eyes into an understanding that FF isn't all that when it comes to video. I'm looking forward to, and waiting for the release of the GH6. I really appreciate you putting this video together with all the sample footage. I'm also looking at the Laowa 7.5 lens now lol.

I don't shoot video all of my work is photography, I have used full frame, APSC and micro 4/3 cameras for many different types of photography, I have Panasonic and Olympus 4/3 Cameras and it was easier for me to use a 7-14 f2.8 and a Olympus OMD 1MKIII body for photos on the dance floor, the entire room or photographing establishing photos outside the venue than using a full frame equivalent setup for these photos, it was faster, lighter and easier to get in crowded rooms during an event, I also had a full frame and APSC camera to shoot every thing else during an event. The 4/3 system makes for a great travel camera setup as I often find myself in Resort pools, the surf along the beach and many other situations where having a large camera and lens would not be ideal, like the bow of a Catamaran sail boat full of people. I also like to carry a camera while we are walking around or going out to dinner while on vacation. It will be my choice for an upcoming trip to Aruba.

I've been shooting MFT for almost 10 years now, I've never seen it as a limitation

Nice video ! We need more fast zooms like the 10-25mm and 25-50mm 1.7 to make micro four third mount almost perfect ! That kind of flexibility is still missing, even if there are some great prime lenses on the market. Fingers crossed for the future 🤞

Thank you for going through this and explaining it in a way that is understandable. I have been hemming an hawing over my next set of gear. I have been a prosumer camcorder using most of my professional career and have been looking at M4/3 or Full Frame equipment, leaning to M4/3... this video has answered my questions and I will certainly be pursuing M4/3.

Thank you so much for doing this video! I LOVE the way you explain everything and I hate the constant argument against MFT about depth of field! I recently made a video titled "Full Frame is NOT Cinematic" and I talk about how older film formats like Super 16 and even iPhone 5 (Sean Baker's Tangerine) are ALL cinematic because Cinema isn't just the camera and lens. You're awesome, bud!

Wow! Great video sir! Well constructed and well explained! 💯

Very good video I've never had an issue shooting photos at night. I've tried many formats and keep coming back to M43. Must people who criticize it most likely have never tried it.

Excellent analysis. Very informative, thanks!

Cracking accurate review!! Well done!!

I use both, FF and M43, and I do not make Video. I usually prefer FF for portraits, but I prefer M43 for landscape where Depth of field is important. Shooting with very stopped down diaphragms can degrade your image due to diffraction, but on M43 you can shot at F5.6 what you need a F11 to shoot on FF and still get 4 times more light in the picture (2 stops difference). The real problem with M43 is lack of improvement on sensor technology compared to APSC (mostly Fuji today) and FF.

Great video! Lots of good points about the depth of field, ISO and light gathering equivalence etc. There's also the huge issue of the cost for the latest equivalent full-frame body & lenses. Full frame has now caught up with the GH5 /MFT for video specs. So if you already own a full-frame system Inc lenses & are only upgrading the body & offsetting the cost by selling the old body. Then upgrading to the latest body makes sense. Otherwise, you will be looking at a substantial full-frame premium compared to an equivalent MFT setup... and the premium will be even bigger if you buy used M43 gear. Almost all the RU-vid full-frame promoters fail to mention the cost of buying into a new FF system. Because the older, cheaper full-frame cameras don't have the video features that have made MFT so compelling. So you'd be looking at buying the latest model new or nearly new full-frame cameras. But then, those channels mostly exist to persuade viewers with deep pockets to keep buying expensive new equipment...

you explain the concepts, ideas and differences extremely well

Thanks! I learned a lot in this video. It will help me to decide wich camera i will buy in the future :)

I love the M43 system. I have an EM1 Mark III with Pro lenes. I sell my work on line and at galleries and have never had a buyer say "oh, I'm not buying your work because it wasn't shot with a FF camera".

This was a great explanation, thank you.

Good one and well done. Heavily dicussed topic, quite hot in times (ui, have a look at those M43 vs FF dicussions in the M43 dpreview forum. Threads get shut down regularly just because things are getting out of control there...). I love the fact you're using the sweetspots and gems of M43, like the Sigma 56/1.4. Great stuff. One other "gem" I found and enjoyed is the Tokina 11-16/2.8 (there is a 11-20/2.8 also, seems even nicer), in combination with a 0,71 reducer (again, even nicer with the 0,64x reducer, which I don't own and can comment about). This will end up as a 7,8 - 11,3/f2.0 zoom. Lots of light, lots of viewing angle, even ok autofocus (nothing to write home about, but it works). Regarding size I totally agree: the splendid Olympus 40-150/2.8 replaces both my old and trusty Canon EF L 70-200/2.8 and the Sigma 120-300/2.8 at about one fifth of the size and weight (and dare I say: one fifth of the costs also...). I wont even mention the sharpness comparison, the Oly resides in its own league. Btw, same applies to the Panasonic Leica 8-18/f2.8-4.0. Compared to the Canon 17-40 or the 16-35 (any version) its way better in center and corner sharpness, CA, LOCA or any other image distortion, wide open. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts!

This is such a great video and you have really made me re-think some things. I do a lot of live/music concerts in low light. I use a combo of MTF and FF. I had been thinking about going all FF, but your point about the lower ISO with a bit more DOF makes more sense for some of my camera shots ! I've been using an S1H with a 28-70 @ F2.8 for my wide shot. I'm going to switch that to my GH6 with a 1.4 apeture so I can decrease the ISO, yet keep the DOF of 2.8 on FF (heck maybe I'll even go 3.2) . I just tried a comparison at home with this new way of thinking.. my mind is kinda blown away with how I look at MTF's now! I stil see uses for both, but really shows a FF is not always better! Thank you!!

Best explanation of the MFT/FF comparison I've ever seen. Thanks for this!!

Brilliant! Thanks for the breakdown.

Excelent vídeo!!, well organized, good script, excelent editing and so on. Thanks!

dude your shots are mind blowing. amazing job bro

MFT is also superior for photography (my primary focus). The inherent deeper DoF is advantageous most of the time and if you want shallow--failing to be able to achieve that using aperture/FL/distance to subject marks you as a novice (plus it's easy to blur in post and BLUR IS OVERRATED!). I get great bokeh whenever I want it. I can also confidently shoot at ISO 6,400 (DxO DeepPRIME noise reduction is a game-changer). The main advantage of MFT (and its raison d'être) is portability without compromise. Not only is there no compromise, but I prefer the shooting experience in every way over larger-sensor cameras. I could carry any camera gear I want and my "go-to" kit is a Lumix G9 with lenses ranging from a "FF" range of 16-800mm (also, there's nothing "full" about "full frame"--we called those "small format" back when film was king). My longest lens is a Leica 100-400 (200-800) and it's under 172mm (7") long by 83mm (3.2") wide and weighs under a kilo (2.2 lb.). That's much smaller/lighter than a Nikkor Z 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S (and my 70-200 f/2.8 eq lens is a fraction of that size/weight). As a bonus, it has a minimum focusing distance of 1.3m (4.3'). Imagine shooting at 800mm from that distance (.5x)! The point is, I can go anywhere with a tiny pack that weighs less than 5 kg (11 lb) and get images I couldn't get with a larger rig. IQ has never been an issue--I print large and they look great! To pay (and it'll be a lot more) for anything larger is to succumb to marketing hype, but hey, it's your money (and back)...

The MFT system is the smartest stuff I've ever seen and I love it! You bring the right reasons against Who tell the MFT is dead. W MFT!

is full frame or mirco four thirds better when taking portraits and videos. I am looking for one that will do both. I am getting back into photography and want to get something that will last me at about 5 years. any suggestions would be appreciated

With the same picture at the same distance cannot get away from all the extra sensor area compared to a smaller sensor. I always see the difference myself in less detail.🙃

Nice and interesting video: we use an MFT Zcam E2 with Sirui Anamorphic lens, and the videos are great

Many thanks for this video. It was very helpful.

Thank you so much for making this video. 🔥🔥

Really liked your explanation…love that size&weight is the Last Point at your Argumentation everybody else put this out first. Aperture bokeh and depth of Field Never thought about this like you told thank you! I Love my Gh5 🥰

Thanks for making this video but in my opinion, this video would be valid 2 years ago. Not so much now. 1. With you point on low light, you should compare a GH5S to a similar tier video camera from Sony like a7SII. Why making your point on videography but compared a video camera with a photo camera from Nikon announced back in 2012? 2. Your point on Bokeh is absolutely correct, but remember if you open the lens wide open to get more light on MFT, it would negative affect your sharpness and chromatic aberration, which are usually solved when lenses are stopped down. 3. Your point on stabilisation is still valid for small sensor but Lumix is no way near the best, Olympus/OM System is. And clearly you comparing a GH5S for low light then switch to GH5 for stabilisation to make your point sound better and more valid but really, two cameras against one? I think for professional it makes sense to use two or more systems or bodies but for us hobbyists, it wouldn't make sense. Please compare one camera to one camera. 4. Using AF doesn't make a veteran videographers newbie suddenly. Just the matter of having more options for your choice of art. Absolutely agree with you on bigger production not using AF, but a one man band or independent film makers who can't afford a crew would need that AF. 5. On size and weight, A Sony a7C with Sigma 28-70 f2.8 DG DN weight less than 1kg now. 980g to be precised, just 90g more when compared with GH5 + 12-35 f2.8. Full Frame and APS-C mirrorless cameras are so much lighter now that MFT strength's of compact size and weight back then is no more valid to use against them. P/S: I am not a fanboy of any systems or brands but clearly you are bias towards MFT, which somehow turned this video to be partially inaccurate and misleading.

What a great video, I'm not as knowledgeable as you or most of your audience, and this helped me understand the benefits of my Micro 4/3's cameras. I have a G9 and an Olympus and have always enjoyed the quality of the images. Tempted by both the new OM-1 and the GH6, for photography and video shooting.

Great comparaison and easy to understand for beginners and experts! Thanks !!!

I have the Pen E-P1, OM-D EM5, both with the original kit-lenses, a E-PL5, the 17 and 45mm 1.8 lenses, the weather-sealed 12-50mm zoom, as well as the 4/3 50mm 2.0 Macro that came with the original Olympus adaptor. All purchased used, in "near-mint", with low shutter counts, for a bit over US$300. Learning photography on a OM-1, I also have a bunch of manual-focus OM-lenses. I will never sell any of them, in fact I'll be buying more M43 cameras as the price goes down. I would like a FF Nikon Df, but that's mostly because I have some of the classic Nikkors, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8 and 105mm 2.5 back from the film-days, and would like to use them without bothering about the crop-factor. But otherwise, they perform very well on M43, and on my trusty old CCD Nikon D200.. For those on a budget, or people wanting something better than a phone-camera without breaking the bank, M43 is highly recommended, you can get some really good deals if you have a bit of patience.

planning to buy the lumix g7 for film makin. my budget can't go higher than this, i hope it will do the job well and last for a while?

EXCELLENT! Just love your clear and precise arguments. I am going to stick with Panasonic MFD G9 and add a GH6 when it arrives any day now.

WOW, That was a great education. I've never heard anybody else talk about this like this. Thanks. Makes sense to me. I'm with the GH5 and I pre ordered the GH6 but I was inspired by you talk about focus. I'm good with Focusing but when something is moving I get in trouble. I was shooting a fashion Runway show in New York City is Sept. My first one. The models were booking down the runway at me at the end and I was loosing focus on many shots. I'm going to have to search how to shoot moving objects manually. I swore I would not get the GH6 if they did not fix the focus. All my many lenes are M43 so I have to stay with Panasonic for all the lens and stabilization perks. I'm going to search your channel. Did you get the gh6? Thank you.

Excellent - very grounded, logical backed up with experience

I'm a happy G9 user, kept it stuck on an old 1.2 firmware to use the unlimited recording hack. As I understand, my G9 has better IBIS, better colors and slightly better AF than the GH5, that is why I chose G9 for video. And people can find a G9 at $700 on second hand markets, why isn't it obvious for everybody that it's still the best choice? Having to hack G9 for unlimited 4K60 recording is a major downer though. I hope GH6 isn't overpriced so I can consider it for an upgrade. One thing I really need as I'm a vlogger, is for PDAF I use AF constantly, I nearly never use MF and it's the only downside of all Panasonic cameras thus far. I wish the Sony FF had better IBIS and uncropped stabilized 4K60, and available for cheaper. Sony failed in all these areas with A7IV/A7Siii, so I am looking at GH6 as my only possible upgrade 😁 Please please Panasonic, don't dissapoint again with your crappy AF system and the GH6 will be the perfect camera!! Can they bring in the Dual ISO from GH5s in a fully stabilized GH6 and with a ton of new amazing feature upgrades somehow??

Great vid - well explained!

Very nicely done, thank you. Maybe it's nit-picking but the 4/3 sensor is no more a 'crop sensor' than 36x24 mm is a crop sensor compared to medium format! I think that this is important because I suspect it is how the myth arose that a 4/3 sensor gathers less light than a 36x24 mm one, which is not true. APS-C is a crop sensor because a lens designed for a 36x24 mm frame throws much of the light gathered by the lens outside the area of the APS-C sensor, but 4/3 and MFT lenses are designed to fill the sensor with a circular image in the same way that a 'FF' lens fills the 36x24mm frame with a circular image; some light is lost around the edges in each case of course, but not much and proportionately less for the 4x3 sensor than for the 24x36 one.

Great info. You changed my mind.

What a fantastic pedagogical video ! Thank you mate ! ( I'm going to have to watch it again to catch all the details ! ) Regards, Patrick AKA : Al...zheimer ;-)

Agreed! Glad I went with the decision to use the GH5 for video.

Legendary comparison. Kudos!

I shoot a lot of gigs an venturing into video. Would the still quality be okay in low light, dynamic situations? I often find myself wanting to shoot at smaller aperture to get wider depth if field but can't without raising ISO too much so M43 could solve his perhaps? I guess issue comes down to dynamic range if i want to lift the shadows a lot?

Came for the camera talk stayed for the ladies. That spinning shoe in the background is hypnotic. Subbed bro g7 owner

Nicely explained!

I shoot almost exclusively stills, and I switched back to 4/3 recently, selling my Canon RF mount kit and getting a used G9.

Excellent discussion. fantastic information truly about physics.

I’ve been having this argument for the last few years, coming from a GH5s I now have a full frame S5 but only because (A)the deal was so good I almost got the purchase price back on the trade in nearly 3 years later and (B)because I bought a set of vintage contax lenses and therefore I wasn’t really saving on the lens weight and couldn’t get a super wide to match. I had the laowa 7.5 as well, it was smaller than a lens cap for one of my contax lenses😂now I carry around a huge sigma 14-24 2.8 that takes up most of my camera bag. It was almost like I made this video as all your views were like mine:) subbed

I think the general idea of crop factor is a bit misinformed. Yes, it changes field of view, but that’s it. If you’re using a 50 f/1.8 on either MFT or 35mm, you’ll have a “cropped” image from the MFT camera, but at the same distance from the subject with the same settings, both will have the same level of bokeh. Obviously, you’d need to move farther away from the subject or use a different focal length lens to get the same shot as on FF, but getting shorter lenses with fast apertures on MFT is cheaper and easier. So we shouldn’t try to compare the look of one lens on one system to a similar lens on another because the way you use that lens is dependent on the sensor size. Tl;dr any lens will look the same on MFT or FF under the same conditions, but you would want to use a different lens to get a comparable shot on either system.

100% agree with everything you said about m43 for video. I hope the m43 system will survive.

GREAT INSIGHT. Well said too. Thanks.

The a7c and some compatible lenses are actually lighter than the GH5. Full frame isn't always heavier, but it will always have more bokeh at the same aperture and better low light at the same iso. I don't think it's always better, but I think some of the points you make here don't really make sense. For example, you say that in order to match the DOF, you can simply use a faster lens. But then you go onto equate the 12-35 f2.8 to the 24-70 f2.8, even though the ff lens would have way bigger bokeh. The equivalent would be a 12-35 f1.4, and that doesn't exist. If it did, I am sure it would be as big and heavy as the full frame lens.

I couldn't agree more! I think tons of camera youtubers are doing a disservice to beginner filmmakers by hyping up auto-focus. Filmmaking is not exclusively about talking head RU-vid videos so not every camera needs incredible auto-focus. It's crippled tons of wannabe filmmakers and they never end up developing real skills. Then during event videography or pretty much anything, all the footage we get back from the full-frame A7siii's the camera is always hunting for focus when people walk in front of it. It's aggravating how over-reliant beginner filmmakers are on auto-focus, especially when for a lot less money, they can get a killer Micro-4/3rds camera with a wireless follow focus.

Yeah better frame rates on MFT but full frame is catching up in 2024. Not going to sell my GH5s yet BUT the S5ii on the used market is pretty attractive now.

I just got a Panasonic gh5ii coming from a Gx8. What an upgrade geez. I tried a cannon full frame. It’s great, autofocus is a tad better but it isn’t godlike either. Especially since in video I use only manual, I can’t trust it any autofocus period. I’m team m/43 for video! For photography yeah full frame has a slight advantage and certain times when it’s a must but it isn’t often.

hey bro i have a Gh4 please what is the best settings for photos i can use because everybody just talk about videos thanks in advance.

Such a nice comparison!

The only thing i need in FF is their AF, for my works in some corporate event, AF is really important to me, we dont want our cam suddenly hunting focus when doing live interview when in F2. But, 95% of my needs is already fulfilled in MFT. If only Lumix makes better AF in video :( currently using G9 and manual lens (because of my fear of AF in MFT)

Does anyone know if a 4/3 Lumix G7 would be okay for beginner astrophotography? I really want to get into the hobby. Thanks.

8:09 So in a way, being able to film with MFT at wider aperture f numbers is likely to crush any noise problem with the smaller sensor.

Thanks for the video.... very clear and finally some where someone explained it to me and actually calmed me down. I have a micro 4/3 Panasonic G9II and I kept wondering if I should switch to FF because of the bokeh and bad light. But I didn't want to lose compactness and uncropped 4K/50.

A good video and many good points. I wish you had placed the words, "for video" in the title. All the best.

i am converted. in fact i am always a 4/3 and m4/3 shooter never find a reason why should i get a bigger sensor. those lovely tiny cameras and lenses are very friendly to my pocket and shoulder 😜

@Rich Photography - can you please do a quick tut on how you do your indoor videos? Camera, light/temp, color grade and export. Your colors are really good.

Top video and well explained

Question: the sharpness (or width of focus) of a mirco four thirds f/ 1.4 is equivalent to a full frame f/ 2.8 when doing video?

Excellent comparison. So one main question is up to which point more bokeh is beneficial. I mostly agree with you there, specially when talking about video. Except wide-angle. If you want a lot of bokeh at 12(24)mm a FF 1.4 lens comes in handy. But then again I feel that the shallow DOF hype is coming to an end.

It’s a bit older, but would you recommend a Lumix gx85 in 2023?

hi Rich, what color profile was used to record this video ?

Outstanding video // G9 & GH5s here. Like music gear, our only limitation is our own minds.

Notice how the equivalent focal lengths across the two sensor sizes don't line up precisely. This is because equivalence is only applied to the horizontal plane, not the vertical (unless you talk about anamorphic lenses, but that is a whole other ballgame). The M43 sensor is taller due to it's aspect ratio, hence more space above and below the subject. Or it just might be that M43 uses less or no crop when shooting video, which most FF cameras still do (even the new ones).

The equation for f-stop is: 1/f = focal length (mm)/diameter of the aperture (mm). The size of the sensor is not in the equation. The only impact is the smaller field of view. Crop factor is based on effective field of view and has nothing to do with f-stop. A 25mm lens at 1/f = 1.7 has the same aperture diameter on a M43, APS-C, or full frame. The depth of field is the same too. So a 25mm, f/1.7, cannot look like a 50 mm full frame at 1.7 if the image is taken at the same distance from the subject, because the focal length and depths of field are not the same. I must change the distance to the subject to get similar bokeh. Sensor size does not change optics.

I often carry a M43 as a backup on photoshoots and in the field as a Plan B in case I have a glitch or a battery dies on my FF Canon, but now that AI imaging tools pretty much levels the playing field in terms of bokeh and low light performance, I find myself using my old Olympus as my primary camera.

How did he shoot that 11:01 scene in club? Everything is sharp, it's bright. I have gh5 and I don't get it at all.

Hello Sir, thanks for the very informative video. I own a Lumix GX80/GX85 but was thinking of stepping up. I know this may sound cheap but I'm not a professional photographer but a passionate hobbyist, and therefore, I'm wanting some sort of jack of all trades. I primarily do still photos but it's live action and street photography. Primarily I do horse jump competitions and behind the scenes of such events as my wife and friends are doing it. Sometimes I record a video in flash memory fashion that summarize the event in like 10 minutes or so. I prefer to keep it all at one system as having both frames is expensive, especially not for a prophecional photographer where gear does not make a return from investment. M43 lenses are cheap and I have to use a 400mm full frame equivalent for horse jumps as I can't get close. However, Panasonic focus for stills are often ruining my shots during those horse jumps as I have to move between the area fast to capture multiple jumps within a minute. Also, I need to rely on natural light and quite often it's a very bright sunny day but horses can be dark toned while riders wear white suits or shots are taken inside dark staples with bright windows or doorways in the background - all of which is harsh on crop sensor. Lately I've been getting into prints in A3+ format. For that I own an Epson SC P700 which I consider to put me into some serious job. So, I've noticed that I'm restricted a lot in cropping and post editing with a 16mpxl on GX80. What would you recommend me consider? Should I move to a full frame with something like a Sony a73 and swallow the cost? Could I upgrade to something in m43 that could work better in low light and auto focus in photography? I own Leica 15mm 1.4, Panasonic 42.5 1.7, and Panasonic HD Power IOS 35-100mm lenses - which for me is quite an investment as a hobbyist so I hope i could still find a way to use it but with better results for my application.

wow.. you are amazing. thank you for sharing.. i just love small cameras..

Wonderful dissenting view, thank you.

Hi i like your videos, thank you for producing them, just 3 things. 1.- The S5 is lighter than the gh5 and about the same size, so the difference in weight would just be in the lenses, but since you are using manual focus, you can adapt lightweight manual lenses like the leica m mount ones for example. 2.- Dynamic range. 3.- I wish the micro four thirds system would go back to the micro part of their philosophy, we should be able to have a choice between the bulkier, heavier, amazing gh5 and gh6 and something smaller, more portable and more recent (i own a gm5). Thank you again sir.

Lots of compelling arguments here. Just wondering what you think the future of mft and 8k will look like?

Great video!

Dude you're in my head 😂 I love m43 for video + having fast lenses on me in situations where giant full frame cameras aren't welcome. I have a Nikon D810 + several lenses when I want full frame for portraits etc. Best of both worlds.