The theme of ‘Micro Four Thirds is Dead’ keep coming up a lot recently. Exploring this concept more closely shows that this is not really the case. A number of vloggers and camera reviewers that tend to go through spec sheets and cameras very regularly, whom do not speak for the majority of the users and photographers out there, have been making such statements about micro four thirds.
This appears to quite a spoken about subject. Something that usually has spec heads and pixel peppers poking their heads out from behind their computer screens and making comments about resolution, dynamic range, depth of field, etc. Strangely, as someone that has used a lot of gear, I have found that these things have not detracted from the performance nor the images when using certain micro four thirds cameras. Before actually shooting a micro four thirds camera, I shared these concerns, but in hindsight I feel that this is down to opinions of other people, some of which are respectable vloggers and reviewers in the industry.
In regard to the argument that smart phones are taking place of smaller sensor cameras, this feels rather far fetched in regard to M43. I can appreciate this may be effecting the tiny point and shoot sensor cameras, as these are more a bridge to larger sensor cameras. However, A mobile phone itself is not dedicated to photography, and this will always be a more of a secondary feature compared to calls, texting, and being an internet/ smart device. The latest smartphones cannot rival or produce better results than say an EM1 MKII. Smartphones are convenient for the everyday person that isn’t into photography, but most people into photography require or will eventually want to move over to a dedicated piece of equipment that produces better results.Smartphone technology will not over take latest larger sensor camera technology, as both technologies are constantly evolving, and cameras are always in demand.
Getting back to my main point: If I took a bunch of photographers, and a bunch of top range cameras with one lens from all of the big brands, and someone spent most of the time complaining about the specs of the equipment, then there is something wrong. As lovely and beautiful as cameras and lenses can be, they are merely a tool. A photographer should be able to be creative with the equipment in their hand, regardless of specs. Granted, there’s certain equipment for certain jobs, but a creative person should be able to use anything at hand to create and produce images.
The emphasis of most of these arguments is full frame. A lot of the big brands are now competing at full frame sensor level. I do not believe personally that full frame digital is the be all and end all in regards to cameras and photography. Fujifilm are a great example of a big company that are doing extremely well, and they are doing this by NOT entering the full frame market. Instead, they are doing extremely well focusing on the APSC and ‘medium format’ market. This goes to show that there are niches out side of the full frame war where you are able to thrive.
In terms of Olympus specifically, next year is their 100th year anniversary. Olympus have always innovated and provided the photography world with lots of important things over the years. Something tells me that they are quite capable of pulling something special from their botties. Eventually most systems evolve and are replaced by new ones, but for now M43 is still very much alive and kicking. My advice is do no click on such click bate, and try not to take the words of well known Internet personalities too seriously. At the end of the day, they are still human, and quite capable of bias and loyalty to those lining their pockets. - Sly.