Before it gets crowded(it was like 7pm).
This specific area of Osaka city is called Dotonburi and it is a very old town. There are literally thousands of bars, sex clubs , Karaoke shops, etc. Many many noodle shops, steak shops and everything here is extremely cheap.
So this area of Osaka is always extremely crowded all night, now there are many drunks and soccer boys jumping around the famous Ebisubashi bridge every night. It is kind of annoying to those of us who do not like or care about sports.
This specific image was made with a FE24-105mm f4G zoom.
Now we all know Panasonic was lying when they replied to DPR the m43 sensor would not be good enough for 8k when DPR asked why they decided to go FF so suddenly.
Obviously, Sharp does not agree and they've just announced an incredible 8k system with the tiny m43 sensor.
And more surprising fact is Panasonic themselves now telling the media that they would announce something remarkable 8k m43 soon...but we all know that price wise, the new Panasonic 8k body cannot compete with the cheap but quite good Sharp 8k body just announced at the CES 2019.
Why m43 is dying now 3(updated5):
Many m43 fanboys think Fuji X is more doomed than m43 with a smaller market share, but it is really true?
One big and quite often asked question in them43 world now is: is Micro Four Thirds still a viable choice? I have been trying to write about this very issue in my series called " why m43 is dying now". I think I was very rational and at least trying to be neutral as emotionless as I could be on this issue, but still many many people took it personally and attacked on me for that series here and at my other web site, which I am going to close soon and so I do not want to disclose the name of(I get too many hate mails there).
Any way, a couple of years ago,Reichmann tried to explore why m43 would soon be doomed in one of his popular videos and made some very convincing arguments that the format could be on its way out soon. He spoke a lot about size: particularly camera sizes and sensor sizes in relation to the potentially highest IQ of the system. And I think he was 90 percent right there, but not 100 percent.
When the first m43 camera Panasonic G1 was introduced , it was pretty much the only one decent mirrorless camera system out there with at least a set of few decent lenses to back the body up. And I think there were literally only two mirrorless camera manufactures at that time, namely Panasonic and Samsung. So before 2012, Mirrorless meant almost synonymous with m43.
Back then, m43 system made a lot of sense because you get near DSLR quality in a very small package. It influenced a lot on the future course of product planning of almost every camera company out there; all the other manufactures tried to make their DSLRs smaller or quickly copied the m43 concept with their new mirrorless system(but without lenses). Shortly after that, Sony came onto the scene with the NEX cameras, Nikon released the Nikon One series, which had even smaller sensor than the m43, and Fujifilm and Canon also followed the trend and produced their own version fo crop mirrorless system in 2012.
But at the time,none of these had extensive lens set of the m43 and thus considered to be quite irrelevant as a proper D-SLR replacing system. Also, m43 had most complete set of features and body selections (arguably they still lead the industry in this area) that none of other makers' mirrorless system had back then.
Before 2015, m43 was the only one mirrorless system to have the IBIS, (effective) self sensor cleaning system, decent video, decent lens set, etc. And , as Thom Hogan said in his 2015 OM-1 review, there were nothing really matching the lens selection of m43 system out side of Canon Nikon world back then, and probably still most of new features would be introduced in m43 system first, then their way up to FF, APS-C, MF, etc.
But in 2015, Sony introduced a couple of A7 series cameras with IS and quite usable video feature set. In 2016, Fuji follow the good big sensor video in a tiny body trend with their X-T2 and X-T20......they don't still have any sort of IBIS yet, but there are a couple of rumors telling us Fuji is preparing it for the next XT series.
Often times, many of serious self-proclaimed experts at many camera forums completely dismiss Canon EOS M line, but it is becoming bigger and bigger in terms of sheer market share and unit sells. And honestly, it has many interesting features that neither Sony nor Fuji cameras have, and the user interface of the Canon M is arguably the best in the business , and its lenses are really small, not much bigger than the m43 equivalent lenses and much smaller than the Fuji X equivalent lenses , without any known optical issue. So many of us (who are in this industry or seriously observing it for many years) think Canon EOS M has a lot of growth potential and will surely surpass the rest of the industry by 2020 or so(at least in terms of market share).
Most of the mirrorless systems out there, now, house an APS-C sensor–which are all larger than a Four Thirds sensor with their choice of either 1.6X or 1.5X crop factor and those cameras are quite small-if not as small as most of m43 cameras.
The Canon EOS M50 and especially the EOS M6 are very small albeit their obvious missing of IBIS and high-end 4k related video features.
The Fuji X-T20 is , to me, almost uncomfortably small..........and hard to operate, but it has a good sensor, great AF system, and compared to most m43 cameras, it is smaller and faster with 4k video(albeit the ten minute record time restriction).
The A6500 is a bit bigger than those due to the more substantial grip and better build quality than the Fuji or the Canon. And the A6500 has arguably the best 4k video in its class.
The AF system of it is very good, although, IMHO, it is a bit worse (especially in low light) than the Canon...the video AF of the A6500 is definitely better than all the other mirrorless cameras(except the Canon EOS M and R) and the IBIS actually works for video although not as effective as the IBIS of Olympus or Panasonic system.
So, now, many people claim the size advantage of m43 over APS-C is quickly disappearing, but is it really so?
Well compared to Sony E mount system though, there was and still is huge size advantage with m43 since the E mount requires FE lenses to truly shine.
Compared to EOS M, the m43 "system" is still a lot smaller since the Canon M , just like the Sony E, requires EF (FF) lenses to truly shine.....in case of Canon it's actually even worse than the Sony E since Canon M does not just require a big EF lens to really shine but also an EF -M adapter. So the EOS-M system is only small when used with the native EF-M lenses(and there are only 5 or 6 very consumer lenses for this system although all of these are optically superb for the genre).
So the size advantage of m43 over APS-C is still there, and actually the gap is increasing not decreasing or disappearing , at least compared to the Sony and the Canon APS-C systems.
However, compared to the Fuji X, it is actually not much smaller if any.
It is true the Fuji X "system" is significantly smaller than the Sony E or Canon M mostly due to its very respectable APS-C dedicated lens selection...and if you are wide angle shooter or wide to normal prime shooter, then you may not see much size reduction effect with the m43 compared to the Fuji. In fact, Fuji body is usually smaller than equivalent m43 body.
The XT-20 is cheaper and smaller than the EM5MK2 or the G85.
The X-T3 is much smaller than the GH5 or the G9.
The X-Pro 2 is a bit smaller than the GX9......
For DoF to DoF, Fuji X is smaller and cheaper than m43, it is glaring these days.
The Fuji XF18-55mm f2.8-4 zoom is smaller and much cheaper than the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8, and the Fuji is a stop faster at the wide end.
The Fuji XF55-200mm zoom is also cheaper and smaller than the m43 equivalent lens.
So basically, unless you really need a set of f2.8 or f1.2 primes , there is no more m43 size advantage over the Fuji.
Fuji has no XF lens like the Panasonic X35-100mm f2.8 or the Olympus 75mm f1.8 with good IS. Fuji has the excellent XF40-150 f2.8 OIS but it is a huge-much bigger lens than the Panasonic X35-100mmf2.8, in fact the Fuji is even bigger than the excellent Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 Pro ED lens, which reaches up to 35mm FF equivalent of 300mm view.
However, the Fuji zoom is about stop faster and thus it is much more useful for video and lowlight event work.
Also, the Olympus 25mm f1.2 Pro or the Panasonic PL25mm f1.4 ED 50mm f2.4 equivalent lenses are much more expensive than the 1/3rd stop faster Fuji XF35mm f1.4.
m43 fans claim it is not a match to either the Oly pro or Pana Leica 25mm f1.2 prime, but the fact is the Fuji lens on a 24 or higher resolution APS-C body is better than the expensive Olympus 25mm f1.2 Pro on a 20mp m43 body.
Now the Fuji XF35mm f1.4 is not stabilized on most of Fuji bodies, but I am sure all the future Fuji bodies will get the excellent IBIS of the X-H1, so it will be no issue.
The real issue of the m43 duo is maybe the lack of any really good fast wide zoom option.
Sure they have the Panasonic Leica PL8-18mm f2.8 ED, but it is overpriced compared to the Fuji XF8-16mm f2.8 WR, and the Fuji lens is quite a bit wider. In the UWA range the 4mm meter difference in the actual FOV is huge. So the Panasonic lens should be much cheaper than the Fuji but in fact they are priced identically. The Panasonic lens is designated Leica but it is less well corrected and less sharp than the Fuji also it is about a full stop slower.
But still, if UWA is your thing, you should consider going FF with the Sony A7 system since their FE12-24mm f4G is the best UWA zoom ever produced any one and they have the best selection of Zeiss , Voigtlander , Sigma and Sony high quality FF primes. No other manufactures have that luxurious option in UWA range.
So unless you really need some very m43 specific features , or having a huge set of m43 dedicated lenses, it is hard to justify choosing m43 over the Fuji or the Sony system.....
Well right now, m43 may still have a few more practical features that no one else has such as the real effective self-sensor cleaning feature of Oly and Pana(which I think is a huge plus in real life), the actually effective IBIS(Sony IBIS is not very effective maybe just a couple of stops gain at wide end and almost no gain at tele end), the real serious weather sealing that only the best Nikon and Pentax D-SLRs may match, the fastest single shot AF, handholdable pixel shifting high resolution mode, etc, etc.
But those are all something time will solve kind of issues , even the truly effective self sensor cleaning system, the other companies will be able to eventually incorporate into their system when the Olympus patent expires in 2025.
So those are not real powerful long term effective weapons any more.
Maybe the total size and the most well balanced system feature set,with the extra reach at any given focal length, will be the last bastion of the m43 system.......
Its sensor is simply too small to be competitive IQ wise with any FF or MF system in the high-end ILC market.
It is not much smaller than the Fuji X system unless you truly need over 300mm equivalent reach or longer.
It is not really small enough to be considered as a pocket camera system (unlike the One sensor system or the One compact camera like the RX100VI).
For me as a second camera system, the m43 makes real a lot of sense, and I will use it for at least a few more years, but I admit when I need a small almost real pocketable package, I always use my Sony RX100 something or Canon G7X2 although I really hate the One sensor output quality.
To me , lens interchangeability is quite important and I value the small size(much smaller than the APS-C equivalents)of Olympus and Panasonic telephoto lenses, and I think the set of the excellent but small tele zooms and primes the last bastion of the m43 system, and therefore they should focus on that area and should use it effectively against the Fuji and Canon M. In other words, they really need a set of a 300mm f2.8, a 400mm f4(better f2.8), a 500mm f4(it effectively acts like a 1000mm f8 fullframe lens), a 800mm f6.3(it effectively provides a 1600mm FF equivalent FOV). A fullframe system actually needs 1600mm lens to provide that reach, but m43 only needs a 800mm lens to mimic the FOV of 1600mm FF lens, so it will be much cheaper and much light, albeit a bit of loss of actual lens speed.
And to make the last bastion really effective, they need to keep upping the sensor resolution that actually even more effectively use the potential extra reach of the 2.0X crop system with the great set of long zooms and primes that they will have to make ASAP.
I also suggest that m43 should not try competing with Sony FE system or Canon RF system for the sheer IQ ,or the shallowest possible DoF they can get kind of market.
They will never be able to successfully compete with them in that shallow DoF market.
For shallow DoF stuffs , A FF is the right system, it's cheaper and may even lighter for speed to speed competition since a FF system only needs a set of cheap f2.8 primes to be able to provide quite shallow DoF that m43 cannot get, without a set of enormous f0.9 primes, it is possible to make them but the current fastest microlenses are slower than that and therefore they cannot use all the light projected onto the sensor by the super fast prime.
When we honestly look at the last few releases of m43 lenses, I think I have to conclude the m43 team is choosing the wrong field in where they have no chance competing with so-called FF.....I mean we should take a careful look at the last few lenses they announced or rumored to announce soon, you will see my point here:
1PL12mm f1.4 -a very expensive lens but still depends on internal camera software correction, and DoF wise, it is just like the Samyang 24mm f2.8 on a A7M3. And the Samyang on the Sony is theoretically much sharper and cheaper than this Pana Leica 12mm f1.4 on a G9.
2 PL 8-18mm f2.8, well it is a great zoom, but the price is too expensive and the anti-flare coating of the lens is much worse than the Sony NanoARM coating or Zeiss T* coating on any Batis or Sony GM. In this case, really the price is the main issue compared to the decently good Sony FE16-35mm f4 or even cheaper and better Canon EF16-35mm f4 L IS USM lens. The Canon or Sony lens on a cheap FF body like the A7M3 or the EOS R is much sharper than the Pana Leica on the best m43.
And the Sony or Canon combo costs much less.
3 Olympus Pro 17mm f1.2, is a huge lens for the sensor coverage, really long for the equivalent FL it covers.
It will definitely perform quite similarly to the cheap Canon RF35mm f1.8 Macro if they are tested on an optical bench, but in real life, lenses must be mounted on a camera to take shots. The Canon 35mm f1.8 macro on a EOS R will blow the expensive Olympus Pro 17mm f1.2 on any m43 body. This is why I think lens alone testing is often useless or does not tell you the whole story.......
The Olympus 17mm f1.2 Pro lens costs 1400 US, this means this lens on any high-end m43 body is much more expensive than the Canon RF35mm f1.8 macro with the EOS R, or the Nikon Z35mm f1.8S with the Nikon Z6.
4 Olympus 12mm f1.2 Pro lens , which costs about 1400 US, is actually more expensive than the much faster Sony FE24mm f1.4 GM lens. And actually the size and weight of these two excellent lenses are quite similar. The Olympus 12mm f1.2 is just as heavy as the Sony FF 24mm f1.4GM.
At this point , it has no point regardless of its amazing(must be) optical quality or character. The equivalent FF lens from Sony, Zeiss and Nikon are all cheaper.
Nikon AF-S24mm f1.8G ED, which is actually an excellent lens , is much cheaper than the Olympus 12mm prime. The Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 is about 300 US cheaper than the Olympus 12mm.
These comparison cases show you clearly Olympus and Panasonic should not try f1.2 series.
They are relatively fast lenses, but compared to much cheaper f1.8 primes in FF land, these are still much slower and cost much more.
So these f1.2 m43 primes cannot satisfy the"shallow DOF is every thing"crowd, this group will never like m43 regardless of its system performance or any extra feature set Oly and Pana will be adding to the system.
In stead, they should try to please the " love the perceptive extra reach comes at any given FL with the smaller sensor system" crowd and "the moderately fast sharp compact street prime" crowd. It is really important for them to keep these two markets satisfied with their system since these 2 groups the only two kinds of people will always consider m43, especially the highend m43 bodies.
Pana and Oly should(must) work together for the best system efficiency and compatibility they can provide, other wise, they can never beat the Fuji X and now the rapidly growing EOS-M system since they are a much bigger company than Olympus and Panasonic.
Oly and Pana should focus on the " street crowd with a set of few moderately fast primes" and the "reach over anything " kind of long lens crow. And in order to do that, they should increase the sensor pixel density; now the Canon EOS M100 has 24.3mp sensor with the 1.6X crop factor, and next EOS M5MK2 roumored to house 32mp APS-C sensor with the same 1.6X crop factor, this will allow the Canon to surpass the current high pixel density of the 20mp m43 cameras effectively.
M43 will have to keep up with Canon, Sony and Fuji in megapixel race, or they will lose the " reach over anything " kind of day time wildlife crowd to Fuji or Canon.
I think if they can keep increasing the pixel density of the sensor without loosing too much of pixel level sensitivity, they will do well, especially with the handholdable sensor-shift high-resolution mode.
There are many FF users like me who also use m43 for different needs and many of us love this system. So Oly and Pana will not need to compete against Sony or Canon FF system, but they must focus on the inherent strengths of their smaller sensor system.
I do not think the FF guys are any serious treat to the m43 duo, but Fuji is.
The Fuji system is growing rapidly and they understand any serious photog go at least APS-C for their main camera system. Fuji also seems to know the difference between their APS-C and the FF (at least 24 and 30mp ones) in any realistic sized print is not glaring.
And those really need the ultimate resolving power will always look into the MF camera territory. Now Panasonic is entering into the FF market ,with a couple of really overpriced new bodies, I think this will really hurt the m43 and Panasonic.
It will definitely fail, it is just too expensive at 4.5k US. The Fuji GFX50R costs only 4300 USD, so the Panasonic S1 and S1R should be cheaper than that, but they seem to be more expensive. And if 24mp is fine, the Sony A7MK3 costs only 1800 US or less now.
In Japan, many shops sell it for less than 1500 USD with tax, the Fuji X-T3 is about 1200 or less, sow how can Panasonic get away with the 4500 US price of the S1?
The new S1 should cost a bit (maybe 100 US more) than the Sony A7MK3 or the Canon EOS R, but they are trying to sell it for 4500 USD. Panasonic should realize their cameras are just worse value bodies than most of the rival bodies(especially considering their resell value and after sells support). Nikon Z6 is a bit overpriced body compared to the Sony A7MK3, but even that body is still much cheaper than the new Pana.
In their recent interview with DPR, Panasonic said , “'the new L mount alliance is like marriage. The previous arrangement [with Olympus] was more like we were just living together"
If company says something like that about their old camera system, how do many committed long term Panasonic users feel about them? I think they are shooting themselves in the foot by saying something like that in a several or more occasions (since the original 43 era) , now both the old hardcore Panasonic m43 users (who are seriously disillusioned) and the potential new Panasonic L mount buyers feel like being betrayed and might not trust Panasonic ever again.
Many pro Panasonic people online try hard to justify their 'moving up to super high end FF ' strategy, but those who consider 4500 USd FF also consider the Fuji GFX and Hassy X1D as well, since they are all priced similarly. So it is not easy for a brand like Panasonic ( a lesser name) to go really high end premium market, they have tried this a sveral times in the past with video minded m43 high end products and these products failed miserably.
And the internet forums love FF and try to exaggerate its appeals , or some even think it is already the dominant format in ILC, but the truth is far from it, It is a niche market, the APS-C is still the dominant format with 80 plus market share.
So the 35mm FF market is too small to feed all the 7 or 8 current players.
While Olympus and Panasonic both still have some chance to rectify their failing camera mount system, with a new set of f1.8 primes and a set of super teles, for street and more reach-constrained wildlife and day time sports market, they seem to pass that opportunity, maybe they are just too proud of their so-called hybrid tech? or brand? I don't know but they cannot seem to evaluate their market position honestly. And just try hard to compete with FF guys in their field of game(albeit they each chose a different path to compete with them- Olympus with a line of stupidly oversized f1.2 pro primes, Panasonic with a overpriced so called premium FF bodies).
Panasonic seems to think the main reason why their m43 system is failing, is the small sensor choice, but the real reason why it has failed is that they have worked against inherent strengths of the system, not the sensor choice. The m43 sensor choice was perfectly fine if they designed system for it. The problem is they (both Oly and Pana ) have got too insecure about it and tried to make it a FF competitor with a needlessly oversized fast primes and oversized bodies. They should respect the coherent appeals of the format rather than trying hard to defy the weakness of it.
If they do not get it at this point, they will never get it right and the new Panasonic will porobably fail too.....
Finally, from a business perspective it is good or more logical to compete in a market that is not over crowded with huge names.
So I think Fuji is the wiser one here, they decided not go FF , I also think Olympus' recent decision to go against FF is a very smart honest decision that is quite respectful to their core users. Panasonic , on the other hand , will lose many of the long time hardcore m43 users since they look like betraying their long time fans by suddenly favoring FF(simply defying to what they have been preaching) and calling the old m43 system as just a temporal flirt for them, rather than a serious marriage like their new system............
In summery , I think there will be only 4 companies in the current FF market and total 5 in the high-end over 3k ILC camera market: These will be :
Leica -- as they are a premium boutique brand , they can survive no matter what, there are many rich young artists out there and will always be to sustain the brand and their system easily.
Canon-- as the biggest brand in camera with the biggest user base, and now they have been trying to shift those D-SLR users to their new R system and it seems very successful according to IDC, Amazon, BCN , Yodobashi sells data, and CIPA and IDC market share data worldwide.
Also, Canon has patented a new type of computational camera system with 8 lenses plus 8 sensors set up , it seems like Canon version of the Light L 16. So unlike other traditional camera brands, Canon is serious about computational ILC system as well as interchangeable lens camera system. Also, ironically enough though, due to the commercial success of the A7MK3 and EOS R, the Canon EF mount sells is sky rocketing. This means many of new Sony users and even Nikon Z and Canon R users are buying a new set of the EF lenses. This means huge to Canon since those Sony and Nikon users without their native brand lenses may easily move to Canon if or when Canon decides to release a serious A7R competitor. So there is no weakness in the current Canon business strategy in ILC.
Fuji--they are the only one seriously affordable MF format camera brand, as such they will easily survive-if not thriving up to the current Nikon position. I kind of guess at some point in near future I will seriously consider the GFX system and I kinda feel I may get that to replace my Sony R series cameras while keeping my A7MK3 and its successor line in tact.
I think Fuji is a much more reliable and trustworthy company than Nikon or Panasonic and in the longer term, they may even be a big threat to Canon and Sony.
Sony-- I think they will also be a safe bet, they will survive, with their current huge user base and lens market share.
Also, unlike the other big three (Canon Nikon and Leica) , the E mount is open to any lens maker, as such their lens catalog is growing faster than anyone's. And I think it will continue to grow at the current pace. And they are also well supported by the software companies like Adobe, Phase One and DxO.
Nikon--I think they will also survive, but not 100 percent sure since their Z system is really really struggling in sells.
The Z6 is doing fine, but its incredible AF and video, has just made the Z7 look like a bad value camera.
In other words, there is no Z7 advantage over the Z6 except the higher resolution sensor.
So, they may struggle a bit , but in the longer term the bigger and more efficient bigger mount of the Z will pay back to them the R&D money and the lost initial sells.
Their new lens line is incredibly good especially considering the amazingly modest size and cost. Many people think the advantage of the big mount is the ability to make a super fast lens line like their new Z58mm f0.95, but the real advantage is more modestly priced f1.8-f1.4 lenses without compromising anything. So in the long run, I think Nikon will be fine.
The rest of those so called FF players including Panasonic will die.
UPDATE:After processing many underexposed images, I realized that there is really almost no noise advantage of Sony sensors over the same gen Canon ones in real world use. Sure there is a bit of color noise difference in the deep shadow area, it is there but the difference is really insignificant - an academic interest level, not really a glaring difference in real world images at all. After pushing the shadow 4 stops or more , both are extremely noisy and need many ways of software taming to make it at least usable. So sensor wise, the EOS R is not a bad choice, it is worse than the expensive Z7 or the A7R3 in some apps that require a lot of shadow pushing, but not any worse than the Z6 or the A7MK3. On top of that for astro or night time long exposure, the Canon R is actually better than all Sony with the infamous star eating RAW compression.
In fact, if I have to get one of these 3 EOS R, A7MK3 or Z6, I would definitely get the R for the higher resolution sensor.
For me anything less than 30mp is not interesting.
So the EOS R might not be a bad choice for many of us who already own a lot of Canon EF glass. Sony plus Metabones work too but the Metabones is not a really trusted brand, their adapters damage cameras and when you get any issue, neither Sony nor Metabones will fix it for you.
I had a serious communication and harmed mount issue on my A7R2 after using it with a Metabones 4 a several times.
I sent a few emails but they completely ignored it, never ever responded. After that, I decided never get anything from Metabones. I also sent emails asking how to fix the above issue, Sony asked me to send my camera in or visit nearest Sony service station in Fukuoka city and I visited their service center in central Fukuoka city, then the engineer I personally knew for a couple of years or so told me the damage was definitely caused by use of inappropriate not supported adapter, thus the warranty would not cover this repair case.
I was furious , but well it was the Metabones crap that broke my camera, so I had to accept the price they asked(almost 240 dollars or 29800yen).
After that, I have never used electronics adapter besides the Sigma MC11 ,which is officially supported by both Sony and Sigma. Now for those who want to use their EF mount glass on a mirrorless body, the EOS R may be a better choice since the EOS R system has a great 100 percent compatible Canon official adapter for their EF lenses and it is much cheaper than the Metabones(without any support).
And unlike the Nikon Z6, the Canon R has a normal SD card slot, it is great, I can share the cards I already own with my Sony, so I might get the R with the 35mm f1.8 Macro lens.
UPDATE2: Now we really realize that the used camera market is rapidly growing , I assume it is about 2 times bigger now than the new ILC market.
As I already said sensor level IQ has not been improving really much since about 2013, so most of people no longer need to chase the latest and greatest gear that is actually a tiny bit better in every aspect of usability /functionality, but with practically the same level of IQ.
Now the A7R2 is the best selling FF camera in most parts of the world market because it is now priced right, just right brand new. And if you look for a lightly used one, then it would be even cheaper at around 1500 US or less.
At this point , unless you need a super fast shooting camera ,or super long reach, or super sophisticated video , then why do you need more than that body? Sheer IQ wise nothing in the latest and greatest category beats it any way.
Every Japanese camera company seems to think just keep upping the average price of their cameras endlessly will eventually make up for the lost sells volume and that will eventually rectify their dying camera business.......
Well but people are not so obedient to their pricing rules, they are not stupid , they research what they need.
So basically, going FF will not help all of these 6 or 7 players, not everybody is interested in FF, many people do not buy a 4k USD camera, with a set of 8 grands primes.
Most of us now know the generation old body has the same IQ as the latest one, so why do we have to buy the Z7 or the A7R3 if we are only after the best possible IQ in FF?
One thing, as a camera shop director , I have to agree with Hogan is that the FF boom is a bubble, and it will not last long.
And this endlessly upping price to compensate for the lost volume strategy will eventually hurt the market since it will lead most of people move away from the new camera market.
It will be just like the high end HiFi audio market in the late 90's. They must understand those extreme gearheads buying every single lens to test and sell , or chasing every single A7RX , Fuji GFX, etc, are extreme minority.... they will not sustain the market but the rich young artists and art school students market will.
UPDATE3: I think I must be honest with myself about my gear and choice of my stuffs.
Well, I thought the E mount system would be safer choice for most of us, but I realized that it and its favorable reputation now were all built on a fragile sand beach like the Miami beach, not on a solid stone based strong ground like that of the NYC or Shanghai.
It was really shocking to me or any one like me having spent more than 15k on Sony system, it has suddenly changed since the first Nikon and Canon FF mirrorless released.
And I believe the Z7 and the Z6 were not even their best efforts, they could have made it better, I mean the Z7 could have shared the Z6 AF(which seems much better than the Z7 AF). Canon also could have made the R better than it is now, but they have deliberately decided to make these as they are.
Still, many people are now moving to Nikon or Canon from Sony E mount, it is shocking to me, but true.
I never realized Sony's lead in this game is this susceptible to the trend changes.
To me what was most shocking was Jim Kasson, who seemed to really liked his Sony kits and tested many of his E mount lenses for free, moved back to Nikon as Nikon debuted the Z7.
Now he clearly says he prefers the Nikon over the Sony in every respect. How shocking is it?
It is really shocking since he is not a silly paid," easy to buy" kind of a lens tester, but he is a serious scientist who tests lenses for free at his site. So it was not a bit of money or free gear he got changed his mind , that kind of things cannot change his mind. He changed his mind because he tried the Z7 and Z6 and they worked better than his Sony for his needs.
Also, some of notable people who hang around at a various fora also moved to Nikon.
I never pay attention to any of those commercial reviewers , but Jim and some serious forum contributors and I really respect their opinions.
Anyway, I am also re-debating to sell two of my three A7R2 and one A7R3 to get a Z7 plus the 50mmf1.8S and the 35mm f1.8S. It may sound silly, but it is not really silly since the long term cost of the Nikon system seems much cheaper than that of the Sony system.
I mean my Sony system does not have anything like that cheap but super sharp 35mm and 50mm primes that Nikon offers, the Sigma Art is there too, but it is a overrated lens, and I dislike it very much(objectively a good lens , but I dislike the rendering of it). There is the FE35mm f1.4ZA for the Sony and a good copy of it is quite good........
But I am really scared to try another copy of Sony FE35mm f1.4ZA. I already tried 5 copies of it in 2016 and gave up on that lens.
My FE50mm f1.4ZA is a great lens, but it is a bit too big for a 50, especially as I do not need the speed of the f1.4 , the f1.8 Nikon S is fast enough for me.
I also heard that their new Z14-30mm f4S is a fantastic lens, much better than any Sony zoom in that range and it may be cheaper than the FE12-24mm f4G, which I owned and quite liked but hated the bulbous front lens design of it.
So I cannot help but my gut feeling tells me that the Nikon will be a bit cheaper and more practical system in the long run like Jim said in his 50mmS review.
I find the ergonomics of the Nikon better , at least for my hands. I've always thought as though the Sony engineers designed their A7 series specifically for tiny Asian girls, it is just too small for any adult person (IMHO). I always have to put an external grip or L plate or an grip Extender on my A7RX cameras.
The Z7 , on the other hand, feels perfect in my right hand without any silly L plate or Extender.
It's really comfortable to hold, easy to navigate , very fast in operation.
The AF is a bit worse than that of my A7MK3, but definitely better than the AF of my A7R2, and as good as my A7R3 AF, so it is no issue for me..........I am perfectly fine with the terrible AF of my R2 and original R.
Also , to my surprise, the Nikon is a bit better in video department with the amazing 10bit 4k recording capability(externally).
For me the biggest pluses of the Nikon over my Sony system are :
1 much better body with a much better Manual Focus friendly EVF.
2 the video quality seems to be much better than that of my A7R3 and even the A7M3.
3 the LCD is much better , I can actually review my images on a bright sunny day outside, I cannot do it on my A7R3 LCD(I have to use the EVF to review the images I just shot with it).
4 Any of the Nikon S series lenses seem to be an incredible value , the 50mm S, the 24-70mm f4S , the 35mm f1.8S are all super sharp for their respective price class, and I think their lens lineup will grow very fast to become a much better one than that of the Sony FE system. I hope not but it seems to be the case.......
If there was a SD card version of the Z7, I would immediately add it and gradually move over to Nikon land.
But Nikon's choice of the card system is a big problem for me, I hate to buy XqD cards and the card reader for it.
I mean it's not a future proof card system. It will be replaced soon, I think Nikon should have gone with CF express plus SD for the Z system. If I buy many XQD cards and their next camera does not support it, then where will I be able to sell the junks?
I do not mind spending a big chunk of money on a lens but I do not like to spend more than 500 US on a set of memory cards which I can never sell here.
Hey, I have collected many many CF cards that I used use on my A900, D800E, D810 and 5DMK2, I think the sad fate of the XqD cards would be like the current CF's , It would be the next abandoned card format just like the CF, it would soon become a junk.
I think that's the real reason why I rejected the Nikon. Other wise, I would have already bought the Z7 and the Z6, those are, IMHO, better bodies than the respective Sony rivals.
I like Sony lenses but never like their E mount bodies(except the old NEX7). I kinda liked the A99 type of bodies but their mount was simply the wrong future-less one.
Personally, I might like the A99MK2 with the E mount , their A mount lenses are just terribly old.
That said , the A7MK3 is a bit better than anything before it in terms of body quality, over all speed and usability, so we can hope the next R series will be a bit better than the awkward R3 and R2...
But my gut feeling kind of tells me the E mount system may eventually be ending up like their Vaio series PC or the Nokia phones........and the Z and the R the iPhone and Galaxy of the dedicated camera world.
I mean just a few months after the sensational launch of the Canon R and the NikonZ , many notable Sony users like Jim Kasson have already moved back to their old home, as I already wrote it some where above.
And I am sure many will follow him(he is an influential person),
I saw many ex-Nikon haters already selling their Sony gear altogether at LL fora and some other local fora.
Even those raving about the Sony R3 now do not seem to be very happy about it and they now honestly voice it out as they have other choices.
Now I think it is too risky to buy any money- losing, low-resale- value E mount products like the Loxia line or some of the Batis line lenses like the 18 and the 25.
I also canceled my order on the 85mm GM(I thought get it back and replace my Batis 85 with it). I decided to buy my Batis 85mm f1.8 back from the person I sold it to.
And I am already selling two A7R2 and one A7R3 , just trying to get rid of all risky Sony products now.
I will keep two A7R2(I use them for my personal stuffs) and two A7MK3 and sell(I use it for video and event works)l the rest.
So it is a real shame the Z7 has XqD card slot.....
I may wait to see how good or bad (usability wise) the R4 will be and finally decide keep my Sony lenses intact or just get rid of all of these.
I know many of those notable forum people keep both Sony and Nikon or Canon gear, but I found it silly since I know I will not use both but just only one of these.
I had many brand kits over the last few years, but I found I rarely use my D-SLRs and m43 and got rid of them.
UPDATE4: Now I bought a EOS R and Nikon Z6 and comparing these and I will test these against my Sony A7MK3 soon. So I will be very busy testing lenses and cameras.
Also, the first week of the next week, Panasonic will announce the final specs and prices for the S1 and R.
We already know the price part, but we do not know the detailed specs just yet. So I will wait to see it.
But the saddest part of the Panasonic system is that it will not be available till next summer or so.
UPDATE5: now we all know Panasonic was lying when they said to DPR that the m43 sensor is not good enough for a decent 8k system.
Sharp has just announced a nice tiny serious video minded m43 camera at the last CES and I am very impressed with that, I think it is the right direction both Oly and Pana should consider heading to.
And the Sharp 8k camera seems to be priced really right, it is about 3000 USD or a bit more and for the bit over 3K USD price it is a bargain body. I think it will sell like pancakes.
UPDATE5: Now we've got a new Sony E to Nikon Z mount adapter from Techart and it seems to change this game dramatically.
We will be able to adapt our Sony E mount glass to the Z, this makes the switch from the E to Z much easier.
But at really ironic part of this news is the new mount adapter will actually increase the value of the Sony E mount system especially their lenses: If we can adapt the Sony lenses to the Nikon, that would mean the Sony lenses are much safer to buy than those from Nikon for the Z since this new German adapter ironically proves that the Nikon lenses are useless on any other platform system. The Z lenses are not adaptable to any other system, but now we can actually adapt the Sony lenses to something else, this means buying into the E mount system is much less riskier than buying into the Z.
UPDATE6:The camera industry is shooting themselves in the foot with the all moving up to FF or upscale market strategy.
This really forcing people to move a way from the new camera market and look one they actually afford or can justify the price of in the used camera market.
These companies do not understand what is the real enemy of the ILC market, it is not cellphone but the market saturation and lack of any serious innovation.
I think the loss of Samsung as a major mirrorless player was the biggest loss in this industry. Samsung at least tried to innovate a true smart camera system,with really 21st century minded UI and clever one button Facebook upload feature.
All the current major camera systems are in stagnation and not fast evolving. So no one outside of the camera forums and fanatics buying every new iteration. Most of wiser people just buy a mint conditioned a generation old camera or used camera as the IQ is basically the same or identical.
I mean if you do not need super fast AF, fullframe 4k ,etc, then the A7R2 and the A7R3 are basically the same cameras with the same sensor with crude 90's style menu system.
Both have terrible Jpeg quality, both require a lot of Photoshopping to make the file publishable or acceptable.
Many artistic students actually want a real camera but they cannot buy it since no camera has decent modern UI and one button Facebook uploading feature.
No one outside of the fanatic community really cares about a tiny bit of improvement in RAW DR. In fact, most of people do not want to shoot RAW. To them best JPeg camera is the best IQ camera, thus Fuji , Canon, Sony have surpassed Nikon in sales every recent round.
No one with a decent job has time for Photoshop.
Also, the 2k lens price is a big problem for the major FF camera makers to sell their respective entry level FF system. Those who are looking for an entry level camera would never pay almost 2k or over 2k for a lens.
When they realize the real cost of a FF system, they will just move away from it.
Not many people outside of forums know what FF is ,or why it is more expensive than an APS-C...and most of them do not even want it. But the Sony and Nikon try to force them to go FF by deliberately making only crappy flawed lenses for their respective APS-C system-if they want to stay within SN camera eco system. If you want to use Sony APS-C E or Nikon DX, then you almost have to use their FF glass to get most out of it. Many Sony APS-C people must buy something like FE90mm f2.8G , FE70-200mm f2.8GM and FE16-35mm f2.8GM if they need most of basic focal range covered with a set of decent lenses. At this point their A6400 or A6500 is no longer small or affordable.....
This is why Sony and Nikon APS-C are really struggling, their APS-C bodies are good but their APS-C lenses are really bad.
Sony at least has a big chunk in FF market....but Nikon does not.
So now Nikon seems really doomed, I wonder how many more years they have before calling it quits.
Many Nikon fans tell us' in the LONG RUN', the Z seems to be the best with the biggest most versatile FF mount ever designed, sure if they could survive 5 more years or so, but the chances are they will give it up before it really matured just like they did to the Nikon One system.
Now most of people do not even know who or what Nikon is and most of those who know what it is never trust Nikon any more. We all remember how Nikon One died, how Nikon handled the D600 and the D800 issues.
So most of us who are actually in this industry or camera business bet that the Z will fail before the R and the E(despite of the raving reviews on the Z from DPR,etc).
I think I am not very sure about the L mount but I think it will survive and at least it will have more potential to grow-especially if the S1 is priced right. Panasonic seems to get it all right this time and their cameras(unlike Nikons) have an excellent touch LCD. Many camera companies do not realize how important to have a good LCD with smartphone like touch UI, but it is very important and that is a big part of why Canon has sold so many EOS M 50 and M5 that were really trashed by so called reviewers and crazy internet pundits like Hogan.
Hogan loves Nikon as his website shows it(all the Z advertisements there) and he seems to think Nikon makes the best camera in every camera category. But the reality is none of recent Nikon cameras have been commercially successful.
