![]() "Camera companies are always leapfrogging each other," explained Ellis, a wedding photographer based in Dallas, Texas. It doesn't always make sense, too, for photographers to continuously sell and upgrade their equipment. If you have a budget of $2,000, for instance, you can snag a more "complete" kit with a midrange body, some memory cards and a few entry-level lenses. Canon, for instance, has announced a smaller version of its full-frame EOS R camera ( $2,299), the EOS RP ( $1,299).įor now, though, MFT hardware is generally cheaper than full-frame mirrorless cameras. "You can make a full-frame camera and it doesn't have to be super expensive," Northrup said in his YouTube video. The hardware can be expensive, they argue, but the price will fall to a point where it's attractive to people who currently have the budget for an MFT system. ![]() Doomsayers believe that a growing number of people are happy with their phone and will choose a full-frame system for enthusiast and pro-level photography. Panasonic, Olympus' longtime MFT partner, has just released its first full-frame mirrorless.Ĭompact-camera sales have been obliterated by the increasingly competent photo- and video-shooting capabilities of smartphones. Even Panasonic, a co-pioneer of the MFT system, has unveiled a Sony rival in the S1 and S1R. The camera industry's lumbering giants, Canon and Nikon, have just caught up and started releasing their own full-frame mirrorless cameras. Fast-forward roughly six years and Sony's latest models, the A7 III and A7R III, are incredibly popular with photographers, filmmakers and YouTube vloggers alike. They were expensive - at launch the A7R cost $2,300 for the body alone - but produced excellent images and proved definitively that a larger sensor could be squeezed into a smaller package. Leica launched a full-frame rangefinder in 2009 however, the onslaught of full-frame mirrorless cameras truly started in 2013 with the Sony A7 and A7R cameras. Most of these struggled to gain traction, though a few, such as Sony's NEX and Fujifilm's X Series - which both use APS-C sensors - built a loyal following on a similar blend of portability, image quality and nostalgic design. ![]() In the years that followed, a bevy of rival systems popped up, including the Samsung NX line, which used a slightly larger APS-C sensor, and the Nikon 1 series, which sported a smaller CX format. Before long, MFT was known as the perfect compromise for people who wanted to shoot beautiful images without the bulk and hassle of a full-frame DSLR kit. That enabled companies to build smaller, lighter camera bodies and a vast library of pocket-size lenses. The result was a system with a smaller sensor that didn't require a mirror box or pentaprism to operate. The pair wanted a compact alternative to full-frame DSLRs that still offered excellent image quality and the versatility of interchangeable lenses. MFT was co-developed by Olympus and Panasonic in 2008. Six months later, there's still no consensus. ![]() The upload, which attracted more than 200,000 views, triggered a wage of counterarguments from prominent MFT users like Peter Forsgård, Joseph Ellis and others. "Not suddenly, but slowly over the course of the next couple of years," photographer and author Tony Northrup said in a YouTube video last October. Many believe that the smaller sensor has been superseded by APS-C cameras and the ever-growing lineup of full-frame mirrorless shooters. For years, photographers and industry pundits have predicted the demise of the Micro Four Thirds (MFT) camera system. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |