Micro Four Thirds: The Impossible is Possible 

The obsession with bokeh blur is for people who can't compose in 3 dimensions properly and cover up their poor technique by just smudging everything else out of focus. As a action/sports photographer mostly I prefer to have more DOF to get moving subjects in focus.

It has its place, particularly for portraiture, but for landscapes being able to open up the lens to let more light in without sacrificing depth of field is a minor benefit (on top of the benefit that the camera and lens you've just carried 3000 feet up hill is relatively light). Of course, if you do want to take a quick portrait at the top on your mountain, you're screwed... But what's this? An Olympus 45mm f1.8! At barely larger than a 35mm film carton, why wouldn't you have it with you? At f1.8 it's less than a stop slower than a 50mm f1.4 nifty fifty on full frame, and has a better focal length for portraits. Of course, it's not quite as good for portraits as a 90mm f1.4 full frame lens, but who's carrying one of those around half-forgotten in a pocket?

I love my tonyha! Unless of course I have a worth background to just soften it up a little.

@@markhoffman9655 It does feel like a trend. Bob Capa and Ansel Adams never really did the blur thing. It does feel like something particular to portraits too. I mostly do landscape, nature, and travel, which I think is more about the whole picture instead of bokeh. I dunno. My photography is more of an auxilary function to travel journalism anyway.

Hello to be honest you will not go wrong with OM D 5 Mark 1 .My carry around in NYC is the Olympus D10 Mark 1. Yes ....I have FF Nikon Z models love them,but the OM D 5 , 10 even Mark 1 are a great little power houses. Remember the best camera you have is the one with you !!

If you have a Zuiko 40-150 f2.8 Pro then you focus down to .5m and that really throws the background out of focus!

Ah there was something new: “mosquitos love MFT shooters”😂

You should! They’re great fun and packed full of features.

Yes, - DO. It's same but different. And you get many fun functions and possibilities you don't get in other brands yet. It's a photographer's friend, even though the old menu system could be easier. You have the new menu system in the OM-1 only so far.

Your back and your wallet will thank you

75mm 1.8 for portraits, chefs kiss!

@@WhoIsSerafin also the Sigma 56 1.4!

Yeah I actually agree with that.

Too many are obsessed with the amount of blur rather than quality. The Olympus f1.2 trio have a quality and smooth transition that can’t be beat

I agree, who cares? Most people understand the differences between various formats. There are plenty of restrictions using FF and certainly larger formats that have to be considered, so surely it is ‘horses for courses’ isn’t it. Why some people feel they have to knock other formats is beyond me. I have cameras that use 4 different formats and my only interest when I use them is getting a good photograph!

Haha that’s a good point. It’s just a SFX file I’ve had since forever. I’ll record my EM-1 and use it next time out. Never thought to do that.

It’s worse now they have all come out. They got everywhere and I mean, everywhere.

​@ChrisBaitson Same here in Sweden. At least an hour north from here. I loved your video about background blur by the way, as I love most of your videos. I have learnt a lot from them about using filters and so on. Keep on your path.

We don't have Mossies just midges

@@colintraveller Gotcha. We don't get midges where I am, so I'm less familiar with them.

@@ryejack Wee flies common as muck up here in Scotland mainly found in the Countryside

Have to get myself sharp head to toe don’t I!!!

Nobody has ever said that to me before ☺️

Glad you enjoyed it

No, if you want to get a blurry background for portraits with a m4/3 camera, you use a 45mm f1.8 (Olympus, less than £150 second hand on MPB). That's less than a stop slower than a 50mm 1.4, and has a better focal length for portraits, and is faster than whatever zoom you might use to get a bit closer. Of course, it isn't as good as a Sony 85mm 1.4, but that's more like £800 second-hand, and for other reasons too is not a lens you'd just tuck into your bag in case you need it. In fact, wide aperture portraiture really isn't an issue for m4/3 at all. There are any number of f1.4 standard lenses in the 50-60mm range from classic SLRs that can cheaply bought and adapted, so a 100mm or 110mm f2.8 equivalent can be had for about £50. Of course, some of these older lenses were a bit soft at the edges... but we aren't using the edges, just the sharp centre.

Glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for watching Darren.

No problem love watching yours and Dave’s videos. Straight talking no nonsense but with heaps of helpful information.

Completely by accident 🙄

I really enjoy my 70-300mm. In good light, it works very well. When I go to the coast, I always take it and enjoy photographing the shore birds, and the many raptors near my home in the foothills of the mountains. I understand it’s capabilities, and I know it does not perform quite up to the level of the pro zooms, but I’ve been extremely happy with the results. The key things I remember is I need good light, and I don’t want to over-crop the image.

Great to hear!

North Cliffe Woods nature reserve

@@ChrisBaitson now it well, didnt recognise the walk. thanks for the help

Challenge accepted.

Thank you Roy and welcome to the channel.

Well of course, but equally, why if you primarily shoot portraits are you using 35mm "full frame" rather than a medium format camera? And now we're back to the 1980s with the camera club bores with their Hasselblads and Mamiyas looking down on the 35mm folk. Sure, if you want to shoot mostly portraits, use a 35mm sensor and a 90mm portrait lens. But if you mostly shoot landscapes and nature, there are huge advantages to having a smaller camera, and you can still pick up a tiny second-hand 45mm portrait lens for about £150, or use an adaptor to mount a manual-focus 50mm 1.4 with a bit of character for even less.

You saw nothing! 🤫

😂

Rubbish