06-18-2023, 06:45 AM
There have been a few comments about mFT being expensive. Why should they be cheaper than e.g. APS-C bodies? Most is very much the same. Just a few square millimetres of sensor size. I am not sure how much that matters cost wise, given that mFT sensors have a lower pixel pitch than the larger sensors. The weather sealing offered in the latest OM kit costs real money.
In the end, any systems camera needs to offer a decent real life advantage over an iPhone with lens array. This gap seems to be shrinking all the time. Expect things to get more niche and loose the cost advantages of mass production.
Coming back to the entry line, I am really not sure whether this is still going strong. If you are using a budget lens, 28-84 equivalent with 5.6 at the long end, indoors, you might find that you get better results from an iPhone. I read this: What is the point in selling someone a system camera that doesn’t do better than an iPhone? Have you tried using a 5.6 lens indoors to photograph children? Useless in my experience. A small OM-D with 45/1.8 works well, but few are telling this.
In the end, any systems camera needs to offer a decent real life advantage over an iPhone with lens array. This gap seems to be shrinking all the time. Expect things to get more niche and loose the cost advantages of mass production.
Coming back to the entry line, I am really not sure whether this is still going strong. If you are using a budget lens, 28-84 equivalent with 5.6 at the long end, indoors, you might find that you get better results from an iPhone. I read this: What is the point in selling someone a system camera that doesn’t do better than an iPhone? Have you tried using a 5.6 lens indoors to photograph children? Useless in my experience. A small OM-D with 45/1.8 works well, but few are telling this.
enjoy