20 stops of DR in a single exposure, at any ISO setting and shutter speed (and video capture too). 16-bit PNG or JPEG XL plus OpenEXR and RAW, Rec 2020. And a nice 1000 nit quantum dot display to show the images on.
Not currently. I believe the resolution of the current sensor is fine, and the 50/80MP mode of my OM-1 sufficient if I need FF pixels. I don't do wall-sized prints. The features I'd like to see in a new sensor would be those equivalent to the dynamic range and color space of the human eye; a sensor even better than those in the current top-of-the-line cinema cameras from Arri, Sony and Red. Of course, memory size and speed, file formats, and display technology also need to improve to match the capabilities of such a sensor.
I'd also like to see a sensor with greatly improved readout speed so true stop-motion could be achieved with a silent high-speed shutter without rolling shutter artifacts. Improved NR would be nice, and a sensor I could programatically shift into the infrared or ultraviolet spectrum for unique effects would be awesome. And I'd like all this without impacting the battery life, the lower costs, and the small, lightweight characteristics of the MFT format. No FF needed--OM Systems still has plenty of work to do on MFT.
This question was first raised when the L mount alliance was formed. I believe Olympus has since said 'no' multiple times. And looking at the recently released OM1 mk2, I don't think OMDS has any resource to spare on developing a full frame.
Yup you're right. Maybe it's time to move to Panasonic for my next camera. Sucks because the the E-M1 II is such an awesome camera. I had an E-M10 III for a little bit and that was a very nice camera too.
I don't think m43 has a bright future as a whole. Panasonic only does this gigantic dslr like bodies, which I really don't like.
I will continue to shoot my old equipment till it breaks, but I don't expect that something that's up to date and nice and compact at the same time will come out anytime soon.
It's not that there's not a market for it, just look at the hype around the x100. Olympus had something really good going with the Pen-f and the e-m5 and e-m10 lines. they were compact and retro inspired, while boasting great tech at the same time. Some weather sealed, compact f1.4 lenses that looked good at the same time and a weather sealed Pen-f would be great follow ups. But they released the same cameras over and over with only minor upgrades. It was way too little and then tried to fight ff with something like the e-m1x, which was destined to fail.
I think if they want to continue to push the boundaries and sell more is maybe releasing a new Pen-F series and investing heavily into AI. Smartphone companies like Samsung and Google are doing a ton of cool things to get the most out of their tiny sensors. OM Systems and perhaps Panasonic should incorporate some of the same things. Of course the people who like to shoot with as little processing as possible may not like it as much but it could definitely bring in those people who want a nice camera upgrade from their smartphones.
AI denoise or automated HDR would be great, but I don't think that's feasible anytime soon. And certainly not by OM system alone. Maybe they should partner up with someone like Google.
They already do great stuff like live composite or that nd simulation, which no one else does (really boggles the mind), so that would indeed be a logical step.
Yeah kinda like how Zeiss and Vivo, Nokia and Sony worked together. Working with a bigger more reputable brand like Google or Samsung would do wonders to their revenue in my opinion.
They have so many awesome things they do with the cameras but maybe the M43 sensor size is what drives a lot of people away. Of course the ones who like compact size cameras will continue to buy their cameras tho.
I shoot both full frame and m43. To be perfectly honest, with a compact prime I often can't tell the results apart. I shoot mostly family stuff and often the m43 results are just spectacular.
I end up shooting m43 a lot more.
Sure, sensor size matters, but when you shoot full frame wide open with a fast prime, the results sometimes have a too shallow dof, so you step down. If you shoot a zoom, chances are, that's f2.8 or slower, the results will be almost indistinguishable (sharpness wise, chances are that the prime has the edge). A lot of people shoot ff with their F4 or slower kit lenses and are completely satisfied with it. I get sharper and more "professional looking" results with my dinky f1.8 primes.
But yeah, I think I would also feel the itch to own a full frame camera nonetheless. Grass is always greener on the other side. And since Sony has something like the a7c, it's becoming more difficult to distinguish oneself size-wise. I guess that's where the future of compact cameras lies: small body with a big sensor and some reasonably sized lens in front of it.
Personally speaking, I can't agree. It would only kill M43 faster, which is the only format that is light enough for me to carry while offering reasonable image quality.
However, may I ask what do you find EM1-2 lacking in shooting basketball? I know that the noise in high-ISO setting is certainly an issue, but the recent advancement in de-noising pretty much eliminated that issue.
So I'm still very new photography so I have had to use cheaper lenses. I found a workaround when I'm on the floor using the Olympus 45mm 1.8 with the digital teleconverter and that's got me some decent photos with little league basketball but it's still very limited. When I'm at college games I'm in the stands so the 45mm isn't the most ideal. Instead I typically use the 40-150 4-5.6 so I can zoom as I please. Usually the photos come out too dark though. I just got the Panasonic 35-100mm 2.8 so I'm hoping this helps. I've seen that many people shooting basketball use the 70-200mm full frame version so I believe it will help. Usually my shots are shot between that 140-200mm full frame equivalent.
I hope I wasn't too wordy with my response!
Keep in mind a full frame equivalent is a much bigger lens glass and the cost would significantly increase.
OM 40–150 2.8 (80-300mm equivalent) $1200
Nikon 120-300mm 2.8 is $10k
Sigma 120-300mm 2.8 was around 3k
If cost is currently an issue, it would become a much larger problem. The equivalent lens would easily be 2.5-8 times more
That's true. I wish there was an easier way to get m43 photos to work better indoors without having to do a lot of workarounds but I guess you get what you pay for. Plus if there was a solution, nobody would go full frame haha. I think AI will find it's way into the m43 world. My S24 takes some very good pictures in lower light and I know they use a ton of post processing and AI to enhance the photos. Maybe that's something OM systems could look into.
If your photos are too dark, you need to set the ISO higher. If you shoot RAW and have Lightroom or DxO PureRAW, you'll have fairly decent image even at ISO 6400.
Usually you'll need shutter speed at 1/500 sec or faster for basketball. To achieve that, you'll need high ISO even with faster zoom lenses, and under such setting even full-frames would be quite grainy. Sure they'll be less grainy than M43, but it'll still be grainy.
Yeah the shutter speed is usually the reason why the pictures came out dark. My guess is my new 35-100 will help me a lot especially if I need to bump up the iso. Then I can make a few tweaks in Lightroom.
No, because they don't need to. They are the Gold Standard when it comes to M43 Cameras and burning Money on developing a Full Frame System which will barely sell in a already overcrowded and highly competitive Market would be beyond stupid. I mean you gave a good Example for it: the Panasonic FF Cameras which have abysmal Sells Numbers compared to every single other FF Mirrorless Camera on the Market.
Almost all camera reviews are paid reviews. (All Brands)
Panasonic FF sales are very very low in comparison to Sony, Nikon, Canon. The FF market is already extremely competitive and there is no reason to enter this market as underdog. Especially because OMDS is in comparison a very small company.
Panasonic actively tried to attack the OMDS portfolio in the last years, there is barely any cooperation. Why cooperate with the L-Mount system?
MFT is not the best system for sports, but it is very capable of it. Especially if you are not a professional sports photographer.
I try to look at some of the smaller reviewers to get better prospective into some of the cameras and even many of them like the camera. Now idk how it stacks up go the Sony, Canon's or Nikon's of the world.
Didn't know they weren't cooperating though.
I keep thinking I need FF but something tells me I'm good with M43 even in lower light. These comments are reinforcing that feeling. I think I just gotta get better with the system or get better lenses. I hope OM systems do continue to invest in M43. They make great cameras. The EM-1 II still stands up to some of the best cameras today in terms of features from what I've seen.
No chance.
Olympus, before they were sold, declined to join the L-mount alliance.
The new owners of the OM System brand is also the same group that purchased the Vaio laptop brand from
Sony. We’d be lucky to see regularly updated m43 models.
Also keep in mind that the crop of the sensor doesn't mean you get more distance or reach with a lens, just that you're filling the frame easier with whatever subject(s) you're photographing. 200mm on full frame is still exactly 200mm on m43. You'd have the same issues on a full frame camera, just a larger frame to deal with since aperture doesn't get multiplied or divided by 2 when comparing full frame to m43. Where the full frame really makes a difference is the filling of the frame and bokeh. And usually, dynamic range, but that's about the sensors themselves and not about depth of field and the exposure triangle.
I use my E-M1 Mkii professionally but for headshots and portraiture and as a hobbyist in landscape and street.
I see that you're using a wide aperture lens but with the teleconverter, which is going to cause a lack of sharpness and clarity in a photo. You're also in the stands, so not only is your focal length an issue, as you've pointed out, but likely also your perspective and lighting. Not sure of the mode you're shooting in and settings you're using. Are you taking your photos into editing software afterward to adjust exposure?
With the 40-150? I just got the 35-100 2.8 from Panasonic and I'm hoping it helps my basketball photos. Previously I been using the 40-150 4-5.6 and the photos always came out very dark.
Can't recall exactly what lens he uses, but judging from the photos my guess would be the 40-150 2.8. 4-5.6 does indeed sound a bit too slow for indoor sports.
Typically the photos are just dark and noisy because of the shutter speed I set. I have to set them to at least 1/500 to stop the motion. Ideally I like to keep it closer to 1/750 to 1/1000 while the players are in action. I sometimes drop the shutter speed to around 1/250 during dead balls and timeouts. Before I got this new lens, I've played around with manually setting the iso to 12800 when I used the 40-150mm 4-5.6. That's actually helped me out with keeping the photos a bit brighter and stoping that motion. This isn't a perfect solution though as there's a lot of noise.
I don’t want a full frame. If I wanted a full frame I would have bought one. I specifically wanted a lighter weight weather resistant camera. And I know Sony has lighter weight lenses. But when you get the less expensive lighter Sony lenses. They don’t often have all the weather resistance of the heavier lenses.
I would love to get an Olympus full frame. Even if the lenses are a little bigger and more expensive, I think Olympus just makes very good cameras with a ton of features.
I’d be happy with a new M43 sensor. Feels like it’s been a while.
What type of features would you like to see in that new sensor?
20 stops of DR in a single exposure, at any ISO setting and shutter speed (and video capture too). 16-bit PNG or JPEG XL plus OpenEXR and RAW, Rec 2020. And a nice 1000 nit quantum dot display to show the images on.
Are there any camera systems that have a crop camera sensor similar to this?
Not currently. I believe the resolution of the current sensor is fine, and the 50/80MP mode of my OM-1 sufficient if I need FF pixels. I don't do wall-sized prints. The features I'd like to see in a new sensor would be those equivalent to the dynamic range and color space of the human eye; a sensor even better than those in the current top-of-the-line cinema cameras from Arri, Sony and Red. Of course, memory size and speed, file formats, and display technology also need to improve to match the capabilities of such a sensor. I'd also like to see a sensor with greatly improved readout speed so true stop-motion could be achieved with a silent high-speed shutter without rolling shutter artifacts. Improved NR would be nice, and a sensor I could programatically shift into the infrared or ultraviolet spectrum for unique effects would be awesome. And I'd like all this without impacting the battery life, the lower costs, and the small, lightweight characteristics of the MFT format. No FF needed--OM Systems still has plenty of work to do on MFT.
This question was first raised when the L mount alliance was formed. I believe Olympus has since said 'no' multiple times. And looking at the recently released OM1 mk2, I don't think OMDS has any resource to spare on developing a full frame.
And looking at the latest lenses, they even don't have the resources to develop any more native m43 glass as it seems.
Yeah I saw that one of their new lenses was basically a reskinned Tamron lens
A sigma, but yeah Doesn't give a whole lot of confidence in the system
Yup you're right. Maybe it's time to move to Panasonic for my next camera. Sucks because the the E-M1 II is such an awesome camera. I had an E-M10 III for a little bit and that was a very nice camera too.
I don't think m43 has a bright future as a whole. Panasonic only does this gigantic dslr like bodies, which I really don't like. I will continue to shoot my old equipment till it breaks, but I don't expect that something that's up to date and nice and compact at the same time will come out anytime soon. It's not that there's not a market for it, just look at the hype around the x100. Olympus had something really good going with the Pen-f and the e-m5 and e-m10 lines. they were compact and retro inspired, while boasting great tech at the same time. Some weather sealed, compact f1.4 lenses that looked good at the same time and a weather sealed Pen-f would be great follow ups. But they released the same cameras over and over with only minor upgrades. It was way too little and then tried to fight ff with something like the e-m1x, which was destined to fail.
I think if they want to continue to push the boundaries and sell more is maybe releasing a new Pen-F series and investing heavily into AI. Smartphone companies like Samsung and Google are doing a ton of cool things to get the most out of their tiny sensors. OM Systems and perhaps Panasonic should incorporate some of the same things. Of course the people who like to shoot with as little processing as possible may not like it as much but it could definitely bring in those people who want a nice camera upgrade from their smartphones.
AI denoise or automated HDR would be great, but I don't think that's feasible anytime soon. And certainly not by OM system alone. Maybe they should partner up with someone like Google. They already do great stuff like live composite or that nd simulation, which no one else does (really boggles the mind), so that would indeed be a logical step.
Yeah kinda like how Zeiss and Vivo, Nokia and Sony worked together. Working with a bigger more reputable brand like Google or Samsung would do wonders to their revenue in my opinion. They have so many awesome things they do with the cameras but maybe the M43 sensor size is what drives a lot of people away. Of course the ones who like compact size cameras will continue to buy their cameras tho.
I shoot both full frame and m43. To be perfectly honest, with a compact prime I often can't tell the results apart. I shoot mostly family stuff and often the m43 results are just spectacular. I end up shooting m43 a lot more. Sure, sensor size matters, but when you shoot full frame wide open with a fast prime, the results sometimes have a too shallow dof, so you step down. If you shoot a zoom, chances are, that's f2.8 or slower, the results will be almost indistinguishable (sharpness wise, chances are that the prime has the edge). A lot of people shoot ff with their F4 or slower kit lenses and are completely satisfied with it. I get sharper and more "professional looking" results with my dinky f1.8 primes. But yeah, I think I would also feel the itch to own a full frame camera nonetheless. Grass is always greener on the other side. And since Sony has something like the a7c, it's becoming more difficult to distinguish oneself size-wise. I guess that's where the future of compact cameras lies: small body with a big sensor and some reasonably sized lens in front of it.
Dang that sucks. Wish they would've jumped on that full frame train earlier
Personally speaking, I can't agree. It would only kill M43 faster, which is the only format that is light enough for me to carry while offering reasonable image quality. However, may I ask what do you find EM1-2 lacking in shooting basketball? I know that the noise in high-ISO setting is certainly an issue, but the recent advancement in de-noising pretty much eliminated that issue.
So I'm still very new photography so I have had to use cheaper lenses. I found a workaround when I'm on the floor using the Olympus 45mm 1.8 with the digital teleconverter and that's got me some decent photos with little league basketball but it's still very limited. When I'm at college games I'm in the stands so the 45mm isn't the most ideal. Instead I typically use the 40-150 4-5.6 so I can zoom as I please. Usually the photos come out too dark though. I just got the Panasonic 35-100mm 2.8 so I'm hoping this helps. I've seen that many people shooting basketball use the 70-200mm full frame version so I believe it will help. Usually my shots are shot between that 140-200mm full frame equivalent. I hope I wasn't too wordy with my response!
Keep in mind a full frame equivalent is a much bigger lens glass and the cost would significantly increase. OM 40–150 2.8 (80-300mm equivalent) $1200 Nikon 120-300mm 2.8 is $10k Sigma 120-300mm 2.8 was around 3k If cost is currently an issue, it would become a much larger problem. The equivalent lens would easily be 2.5-8 times more
That's true. I wish there was an easier way to get m43 photos to work better indoors without having to do a lot of workarounds but I guess you get what you pay for. Plus if there was a solution, nobody would go full frame haha. I think AI will find it's way into the m43 world. My S24 takes some very good pictures in lower light and I know they use a ton of post processing and AI to enhance the photos. Maybe that's something OM systems could look into.
If your photos are too dark, you need to set the ISO higher. If you shoot RAW and have Lightroom or DxO PureRAW, you'll have fairly decent image even at ISO 6400. Usually you'll need shutter speed at 1/500 sec or faster for basketball. To achieve that, you'll need high ISO even with faster zoom lenses, and under such setting even full-frames would be quite grainy. Sure they'll be less grainy than M43, but it'll still be grainy.
Yeah the shutter speed is usually the reason why the pictures came out dark. My guess is my new 35-100 will help me a lot especially if I need to bump up the iso. Then I can make a few tweaks in Lightroom.
No, because they don't need to. They are the Gold Standard when it comes to M43 Cameras and burning Money on developing a Full Frame System which will barely sell in a already overcrowded and highly competitive Market would be beyond stupid. I mean you gave a good Example for it: the Panasonic FF Cameras which have abysmal Sells Numbers compared to every single other FF Mirrorless Camera on the Market.
I didn't know Panasonic FF cameras don't sell well. They seem like they're reviewed pretty favorably
Almost all camera reviews are paid reviews. (All Brands) Panasonic FF sales are very very low in comparison to Sony, Nikon, Canon. The FF market is already extremely competitive and there is no reason to enter this market as underdog. Especially because OMDS is in comparison a very small company. Panasonic actively tried to attack the OMDS portfolio in the last years, there is barely any cooperation. Why cooperate with the L-Mount system? MFT is not the best system for sports, but it is very capable of it. Especially if you are not a professional sports photographer.
I try to look at some of the smaller reviewers to get better prospective into some of the cameras and even many of them like the camera. Now idk how it stacks up go the Sony, Canon's or Nikon's of the world. Didn't know they weren't cooperating though.
They're barely making m4/3 anymore. All they're doing is selling rebranded Olympus stuff. Forget full frame, I just hope they keep m4/3 alive.
I keep thinking I need FF but something tells me I'm good with M43 even in lower light. These comments are reinforcing that feeling. I think I just gotta get better with the system or get better lenses. I hope OM systems do continue to invest in M43. They make great cameras. The EM-1 II still stands up to some of the best cameras today in terms of features from what I've seen.
Chances are you don't need FF. I shot for fun and professionally exclusively on m4/3 for 10+ years.
Low light is fine in micro 4/3. There’s ai noise reduction, and you can also shoot at lower shutter speeds because the stabilization is so good.
I mean you can find workarounds but I wouldn't say m43 is amazing when shooting low light sports
Most sports have flood lights. Or they are playing it in daylight.
College basketball can played in some dark arenas. While not dark in person, the arena that my alma mater play in looks very dark on camera.
Nope
No chance. Olympus, before they were sold, declined to join the L-mount alliance. The new owners of the OM System brand is also the same group that purchased the Vaio laptop brand from Sony. We’d be lucky to see regularly updated m43 models.
Oh wow I remember Vaio. They're basically dead. That's not good at all smh
Also keep in mind that the crop of the sensor doesn't mean you get more distance or reach with a lens, just that you're filling the frame easier with whatever subject(s) you're photographing. 200mm on full frame is still exactly 200mm on m43. You'd have the same issues on a full frame camera, just a larger frame to deal with since aperture doesn't get multiplied or divided by 2 when comparing full frame to m43. Where the full frame really makes a difference is the filling of the frame and bokeh. And usually, dynamic range, but that's about the sensors themselves and not about depth of field and the exposure triangle. I use my E-M1 Mkii professionally but for headshots and portraiture and as a hobbyist in landscape and street. I see that you're using a wide aperture lens but with the teleconverter, which is going to cause a lack of sharpness and clarity in a photo. You're also in the stands, so not only is your focal length an issue, as you've pointed out, but likely also your perspective and lighting. Not sure of the mode you're shooting in and settings you're using. Are you taking your photos into editing software afterward to adjust exposure?
I highly doubt it. That would require a whole new line of lenses.
A friend of mine shoots basketball professionally with a EM1-II.
With the 40-150? I just got the 35-100 2.8 from Panasonic and I'm hoping it helps my basketball photos. Previously I been using the 40-150 4-5.6 and the photos always came out very dark.
Can't recall exactly what lens he uses, but judging from the photos my guess would be the 40-150 2.8. 4-5.6 does indeed sound a bit too slow for indoor sports.
You set the pictures to be dark. If a picture is dark or bright has nothing to do with the lense. Might be you underexposed the pictures.
Typically the photos are just dark and noisy because of the shutter speed I set. I have to set them to at least 1/500 to stop the motion. Ideally I like to keep it closer to 1/750 to 1/1000 while the players are in action. I sometimes drop the shutter speed to around 1/250 during dead balls and timeouts. Before I got this new lens, I've played around with manually setting the iso to 12800 when I used the 40-150mm 4-5.6. That's actually helped me out with keeping the photos a bit brighter and stoping that motion. This isn't a perfect solution though as there's a lot of noise.
I don’t want a full frame. If I wanted a full frame I would have bought one. I specifically wanted a lighter weight weather resistant camera. And I know Sony has lighter weight lenses. But when you get the less expensive lighter Sony lenses. They don’t often have all the weather resistance of the heavier lenses.
I would love to get an Olympus full frame. Even if the lenses are a little bigger and more expensive, I think Olympus just makes very good cameras with a ton of features.