GH3 MFT full frame

P

Polaroid22

Well-known member
Hello,

I was wondering is it physically possible to build a full frame camera with a MFT mount? As I find the MFT mount great to mount lenses too, but the crop factor of 2x or 3x is kinda a bummer. As sony just released the Sony AR7 which is a full frame e-mount. So was wondering if the same thing could happen to the MFT format.

Cheers
 
The crop factor of the GH3 is 2x, not 3x.

If you can't live with the 2x crop factor you can get the metabones speedbooster (get the Nikon mount one) and that will reduce the crop factor to 1.4x. If you can't make quality images with a 1.4x (or even a 2x to be honest) crop factor then your doing something wrong.
 
yes I know, but the bmpc is 3x. I know about the metabones speedbooster. And its not about the quality. Just wondering if it is possible. For example my voightlander 17,5mm 0.95 will have a superspeed when mft turns full frame, if it doesnt vignette then.
 
Full-frame sensors only just fit into the Sony E-mount. The MFT mount is narrower, so no chance there.

I speculate that a half-frame (APS or S35) sensor could be fitted into MFT. If no electronics, maybe something a little larger. But lenses made for MFT aren't designed to cover more than the reference diagonal of 21.63mm.
Voigtlander MFT Noktons show black corners on APS-C and Super 35 sensors. Put one on an A7R and it'll be a circle on black. So much cropping needed that it may negate any real advantage.
 
Bruce Foreman said:
It's not "bad" news. Someone who knows what they are doing can get excellent image quality out of FF, APS-C, or MFT.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Was hoping MFT would become a more succesfull format, as it easy to use nikon, canon, or other mounts on them. But the fact it will never get full frame will probably make this format never as popular as the EF format for example is my guess. The big problem with MFT I find is that you do find much lenses on the second hand market as you do with other formats. For example canon lenses i will find 100 lenses as for MFT i will find 1 lens.

Maybe I am wrong and the format will grow and become more popular. If full frame was possible, I am sure more people would come over to MFT. Once again I am not complaining about the image quality, the image quality with my gh3 is far better then a unhacked 5D mark III. But full frame has its advantages, and just in general FF will be more popular. Even only for photography. But then it affects the videography side too for me as I do not find many MFT lenses available over here.

I already own a 12-35mm 2.8 and a nokton 17,5 mm 0.95 and a canon 50mm 1.8. But when I decide to sell my mft lenses there will not be as much buyers as for say I would be selling a canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS. Its just a fact. Maybe not a concern for you, but for a hobbyist who is not making any money with this it sure is a big deal, whenever I am in cash need.
Or say I need a telephoto lens with AF by next week as I have a gig.
So my 2 options are:
- hire the lens and lose money
- buy a new lens(if not available on secondhand market) and sell afterwards and lose money.

And if I needed to buy this lens for a full frame. I could get it second hand the same day if I wanted and sell it afterwards the same money I bought it for.
 
Last edited:
Polaroid22 said:
But the fact it will never get full frame will probably make this format never as popular as the EF format for example is my guess. The big problem with MFT I find is that you do find much lenses on the second hand market as you do with other formats.
Click to expand...

...But m43 cameras can use almost any lens ever made, so you have more than 10x as many compatible used lenses for them than almost any other camera format. Full frame cameras make sense for professional still photography work, but are really an odd-ball format for video work. ( most dedicated video lenses won't cover Full Frame sensors, and getting a workable DOF means stopping down to f/5.6 - f/8.0 with a Full Frame camera, where a m43 camera has the same DOF at f/2.8 - f/4.0 )

Published today in Ming Thein's popular photo-blog: Sony A7R Full Frame Camera vs Olympus E-M1 Micro 4/3 Camera

Sony A7R Vs Olympus E-M1: Same size, same weight, very different image quality. Quite a big difference in price, though; less so to the regular A7. The E-M1 has three aces: firstly, its stabilizer is so good that you claw back most, if not all, of the high ISO advantage of the A7 and A7R for handheld shooting in low light. It also means that you don’t have stability issues – my ‘technical’ hit rate with the E-M1 is close to 100% because of this. You can shoot at pretty much any shutter speed with impunity. Ace number two is weather sealing: I’m sure you’ve all seen [what I did to the E-M1 in the shower]. The final, largest ace is the lens system: not only is the M4/3 lens system arguably the most mature mirrorless system with the greatest diversity of options – the lenses were all designed specifically for digital from the ground up. Even the kit lenses are pretty good, and the excellent glass – like the 60mm/2.8 and 75mm/1.8 is really special by any standards.
Click to expand...

...And it seems like Panasonic has a new GH4 m43 camera in the works that shoots 4K video.

Polaroid22 said:
But full frame has its advantages, and just in general FF will be more popular
Click to expand...

This is changing, as more professional level m43 gear is released to the market. The new Olympus E-M1 m43 camera has made a big impact in the professional photo world, and tops many of the "Best Camera for 2013" lists. I expect to see more pros using m43 cameras as the sensor technology keeps getting better.

Panasonic has a new 42.5mm f/1.2 OIS lens that was designed by Leica that has no Full Frame equivalent. Sharp wide open with optical image stabilization. It should prove to be a killer lens for professional level work.

Polaroid22 said:
Or say I need a telephoto lens with AF by next week as I have a gig.

So my 2 options are:

- hire the lens and lose money
- buy a new lens(if not available on secondhand market) and sell afterwards and lose money.
Click to expand...

How is this any different with Full Frame gear ? ...This happens with any job no matter what you are shooting it with.

Polaroid22 said:
And if I needed to buy this lens for a full frame. I could get it second hand the same day if I wanted and sell it afterwards the same money I bought it for.
Click to expand...

Easier said than done. I see lots of Full Frame gear that sits on eBay or Craig's List for months, because there are so many people selling the same gear that it becomes very hard to sell any Full Frame gear unless you price it very low.

Micro 43 gear is actually easier to sell because it's hard to find, so when it shows up second hand it sells right away.
 
Last edited:
Sellability (if that's a word?) depends on the ratio of buyers to lenses being offered for sale. While there aren't as many MFT buyers, there definitely won't be as many MFT lenses for sale either.

My experience to date on EBay has been that used MFT lenses get snapped up, provided you price them just below grey-market imports.
 
Again, if your main aim is to future proof your glass, the Speedbooster and Nikon mount glass is your best option for video. Less so for stills if you use Autofocus.

the Speedbooster lets you buy lots if great 'full frame' glass which helps with future proofing if you ever decide to go up to APS-C or a full frame body in future. Plus, you get the great side effects the Speedbooster gives you such as faster lenses, increase in sharpness and clickless iris with the Nikon mount version that is invaluable for video use.
 
Last edited:
People are crying out for a decent wide or ultra wide M4/3 lens yet no bugger is making them! We need like a 4mm non fisheye f1.4 just like what C Mount lenses can do. Not hard!
 
Worzel Gummidge said:
People are crying out for a decent wide or ultra wide M4/3 lens yet no bugger is making them! We need like a 4mm non fisheye f1.4 just like what C Mount lenses can do. Not hard!
Click to expand...

How many 8mm non fish eyes (any speed) are there for FF? How many 6mm non fish eyes for APS-C (any speed)? That would be the equivelant of a 4mm on M4/3.
The reason you see 4mm C mount lenses is because they are made for a much smaller sensor.
It is very hard and or very expensive to make an f1.4 4mm lens for M4/3.
 
I only own 1 native M4/3 lens, which is the 14-140mm zoom which came bundled with one of the cameras I purchased. I have never really wanted to put any money into native M4/3 lenses as they will not cover any larger sensor camera. I rather invested in manual lenses which cover a full frame sensor, and a few zooms which mainly cover a S-35 size sensor to maximize my investment in glass. I'll also say that using the MetaBones Speed Booster on a M4/3 camera really helps, and also gives you S-35mm size field of view.
 
David W. Jones said:
I'll also say that using the MetaBones Speed Booster on a M4/3 camera really helps, and also gives you S-35mm size field of view.
Click to expand...

I just bought the Nik>M43 speed booster and it is fantastic. Has given a new life to my GH3 and my older slower lenses. I get all the advantages of M4/3 without the drawback of crop factor.
 
Worzel Gummidge said:
People are crying out for a decent wide or ultra wide M4/3 lens yet no bugger is making them! We need like a 4mm non fisheye f1.4 just like what C Mount lenses can do. Not hard!
Click to expand...

The cries were heard, there are some out there.

The Olympus 12mm f2.0 is a very decent wide almost bordering on ultra wide (24mm equiv) and the f2.0 max aperture is more than workable in low light.

The Panasonic Lumix 7-14 f4.0 is widely appreciated by those using it. Excellent ultra wide but rectilinear performance, quite sharp too.

The Olympus 9-18 f4.0 to f5.6 is said to be even sharper, lighter, more compact and costs a bit less than the two above (this is likely the one I'll be "saving up" for).

F1.4 for now with lenses like these may be "pie-in-the-sky", the Oly 12mm comes close enough at f2.0, I've seen some excellent night shots done with this lens.

There are choices, they're not cheap...For myself I've chosen to stay in the m4/3 line for my optics and I'm pleased with what I've been able to acquire.

14mm f2.5, 20mm f1.7, 25mm f1.4, 45mm f1.8, 75mm f1.8, 14-45mm f3.5 to f5.6, 40 - 150mm f4.0 to f5.6, 45-200mm f4.0 to f5.6, and the 12 - 50mm f3.5 to f6.3. The last one gives me the 12mm (24mm equiv) and is workable for wide until I can go for one of the alternatives above.
 
I don't WANT a full-frame Micro 4/3 camera. For me, the point of m4/3 cameras is that really good & fast lenses can be designed much smaller and less expensive than their full-frame equivalents. I don't understand why anyone wants a full frame m4/3 camera. There are already tons of great full frame cameras and lenses out there. Just buy one of those.

By keeping m4/3 at a 2x crop (as in the GH3) they're able to make f/0.95 lenses, which are AMAZING in low light! Plus, I can carry two GH3 bodies + 3 primes + 2 zooms + audio recorder + shotgun mic + LED light + lav mics all in one small-ish backpack walking all day and it doesn't kill my shoulders. Try doing that with full frame lenses.

If someone isn't getting good photos or video with a Micro 4/3 camera, the problem is the shooter, not the sensor size.
 
Jaime Valles said:
I don't WANT a full-frame Micro 4/3 camera. For me, the point of m4/3 cameras is that really good & fast lenses can be designed much smaller and less expensive than their full-frame equivalents. I don't understand why anyone wants a full frame m4/3 camera. There are already tons of great full frame cameras and lenses out there. Just buy one of those.

By keeping m4/3 at a 2x crop (as in the GH3) they're able to make f/0.95 lenses, which are AMAZING in low light! Plus, I can carry two GH3 bodies + 3 primes + 2 zooms + audio recorder + shotgun mic + LED light + lav mics all in one small-ish backpack walking all day and it doesn't kill my shoulders. Try doing that with full frame lenses.

If someone isn't getting good photos or video with a Micro 4/3 camera, the problem is the shooter, not the sensor size.
Click to expand...

word!
 
Jaime Valles said:
I don't WANT a full-frame Micro 4/3 camera. For me, the point of m4/3 cameras is that really good & fast lenses can be designed much smaller and less expensive than their full-frame equivalents. I don't understand why anyone wants a full frame m4/3 camera. There are already tons of great full frame cameras and lenses out there. Just buy one of those.

By keeping m4/3 at a 2x crop (as in the GH3) they're able to make f/0.95 lenses, which are AMAZING in low light! Plus, I can carry two GH3 bodies + 3 primes + 2 zooms + audio recorder + shotgun mic + LED light + lav mics all in one small-ish backpack walking all day and it doesn't kill my shoulders. Try doing that with full frame lenses.

If someone isn't getting good photos or video with a Micro 4/3 camera, the problem is the shooter, not the sensor size.
Click to expand...
+1
 
nobbystylus said:
For stills, i understand the urge for full frame. For Video... i really don't, especially with a speed booster.
Click to expand...

Unless you have a client who digs the full frame look. We purchased a 5D mkIII to keep an $80K a year account happy.

Choose the right tool for the job at hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top