FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

relative size difference m43/APS/FE

Page  123 7>
Author
dCap View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 August 2005
Country: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 6154
Post Options Post Options   Quote dCap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: relative size difference m43/APS/FE
    Posted: 19 January 2021 at 21:58
Snapshot to show one example of the relative size differences between three mirrorless cameras:
- m43 = Panasonic GX9 with 14/2.5 (28mm) with 46mm metal screw-in hood
- APS = Fujifilm X-E3 and the 16/2.8 (24mm)
- FF = Sony A7 II and the 28/2



Note that Panasonic make a couple of similar size cameras, the GX80 (aka GX85) is tiny bit smaller with a more flush/fixed EVF - the LCD still tilts. And they have a much smaller GX800/850/880 range but these only go to 1/500s shutter mechanical shutter and are made from plastic. The Pan GX9 & GX85 are solid build though.

The X-E3 is Fujifilm's smallest proper camera.

And here the Fujifilm 16/2.8 (24mm) and Sony 28/2.
The fujifilm 18/2 (not shown, never owned it) is smaller but not weather sealed, the f2 lenses in the new range of lenses "the crons" (16/2.8, 23/2, 35/2, and 50/2) are all about the same size/shape as the Sony 28/2


Also show here (on the Fujifilm 16/2.8) is the un-branded metal screw-in hoods that I use instead of the bayonet/clip-on plastic ones. This is the 'wide' version in 49mm which will move over to the Sony 28/2. The Sony petal shape one is shown for size/reference (I tend to leave these wrapped in their plastic and stored in the box.

Sony did an amazing thing keeping the A7 and some of the lenses so small. One negative of the GX9 and X-E3 is the almost complete lack of 3-finger grip (which Sony have included).
I can still remember how that music used to make me smile
- Don McLean
 



Back to Top
Snegren View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 November 2011
Country: Netherlands
Location: Zuid Holland
Status: Offline
Posts: 5651
Post Options Post Options   Quote Snegren Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 January 2021 at 09:04
I use all my A7 series cameras with an L-bracket that adds a pinky to the height of the grip. It makes all the difference IMO. But it is amazing how Sony managed to keep size and weight so limited for these powerful machines.

Edited by Snegren - 20 January 2021 at 09:10
“People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.” Søren Kierkegaard
My Flickr
Back to Top
dCap View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 August 2005
Country: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 6154
Post Options Post Options   Quote dCap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 January 2021 at 12:53
I've grown used to using my pinkie finger under the camera.

Although I did just check the used price of the official Sony two-battery grip - I could pretend it is a Nikon D3
I can still remember how that music used to make me smile
- Don McLean
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 12955
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 January 2021 at 15:14
I also don't mind my pinkie under the camera. One of those things that differ between people.

That X-E3 is bigger then the Sony A6400. Looking around, the A6000/6100/6300/6400/6500 cameras seem to be the smallest around with EVF.
That GX9 is bigger then the X-E3, the Olympus OM-D cameras are not really smaller. I would've expected some size difference.

Lens sizes are a bit tricky. I tend to compare the size of the 10-18/4 with the 16-35/4 as they have the same purpose, but it is not a fair comparison as they're not quite equivalent and the range of the 10-18 is smaller.
35/1.8 vs 55/1.8 - not equivalent.
50/1.8 vs 85/1.8 - not equivalent.
20/2.8 vs 28/2 - not equivalent.
70-350G vs 100-400GM - not equivalent (but the APS-C has more reach).
24-70/4Z vs 16-50/2.8G - equivalent.

Though you can get much smaller with APS-C for similar roles, it usually is not equivalent. But in the only equivalent example the crop version is not smaller, at least, not much.
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
Jonas A-R View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 29 December 2007
Country: Denmark
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Posts: 1645
Post Options Post Options   Quote Jonas A-R Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 January 2021 at 15:50
Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Though you can get much smaller with APS-C for similar roles, it usually is not equivalent. But in the only equivalent example the crop version is not smaller, at least, not much.


True, lenses with the same angle of view and aperture will tend to be the same size across formats.
Do note that I wrote aperture. This was on purpose and it is not synonymous with f-number or ratio
a9 a6300
21/2.8 Loxia 35/1.4Z 50/1.4Z 85/1.4GM 90/2.8G Laowa 100mm F2.8 Ultra Macro 100/2.8GM 135/1.8GM
12-24/4G 24-105/4G 100-400/4-5.6GM 2x TC
Back to Top
dCap View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 August 2005
Country: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 6154
Post Options Post Options   Quote dCap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 January 2021 at 17:06
Good point @addy. And the Pan GX880 goes too far into too small for something with swappable lenses in my mind.

One important note about the Pan GX9 vs the Oly E-M10 line (I had the Oly E-M10 I and II but not the III) - and I say this as someone who enjoyed the E-M10 models. The E-M10 are very plastic. Feels cheap. The GX9, which is bigger/heavier, is wonderfully made and really solid. The Fujifilm X-E3 (337g) feels light and tinny/hollow next to the solid GX9 (450g). Same true of the Pan GX85 (which is built to a similar standard as the GX9).

Having had cameras that fit my hand like a glove I put a LOT of bias on the handling. Some projects I shoot I have the camera in hand every day (e.g. RX100 IV was in hand and used every day for 6 months). Any minor annoyance gets amplified. But when the camera fits you just ignore it and get on with photography.
I can still remember how that music used to make me smile
- Don McLean
 



Back to Top
jml79 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: 23 April 2021
Country: Canada
Location: Belleville, Ont
Status: Offline
Posts: 9
Post Options Post Options   Quote jml79 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 December 2021 at 06:07
I recently had a disagreement with a guy about the whole M4/3 and FF debate. He insisted you couldn't compare the Sony 40mm f/2.5G lens to the Olympus 20mm f/1.2 Pro lens. Of course your can. I did a quick comparison of M4/3, APS-C and FF systems using Olympus, Fujifilm, Sony APS-C and Sony FF. I was surprised to find out that Sony APS-C was always the cheapest system (due to amazing lens selection) and that Sony FF could be cheaper than Fujifilm and Olympus depending on your lens choices. I think M4/3 might be done for as Fujifilm and Sony APS-C can match it for cost and often size and FF isn't a huge jump while all three offer better performance and flexibility.
Back to Top
LAbernethy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 November 2015
Country: Canada
Location: Ajax, Ontario
Status: Offline
Posts: 2792
Post Options Post Options   Quote LAbernethy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 December 2021 at 15:08
Originally posted by jml79 jml79 wrote:

I recently had a disagreement with a guy about the whole M4/3 and FF debate. He insisted you couldn't compare the Sony 40mm f/2.5G lens to the Olympus 20mm f/1.2 Pro lens. Of course your can.

I'll take the bait, and agree "of course you can"; Yesterday I was comparing the FF Sony a850 + SAL2470Z vs M4/3 Olympus OM-D EM-1 + Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro in the field. I didn't think the Olympus 20mm f/1.2 Pro shipped yet.
Back to Top
Harm vb View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 19 May 2019
Country: Netherlands
Location: Gorinchem
Status: Offline
Posts: 1008
Post Options Post Options   Quote Harm vb Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 December 2021 at 15:28
It is just a comparison between big pears and smaller pears.
Harm, with A7iv+A7iii plus 6-400mm glass.
My Flickr
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Online
Posts: 33745
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 December 2021 at 15:57
I think the real advantage of m43 or APS-C is for nature/wildlife/birding where you need long lenses, those are much smaller/shorter for the same angle of view as their FF counterparts.

However if you have a 24-70/2.8 on FF and use it to separate subjects from the background wide open with low DOF there really isn't a APS-C or M43 equivalent, but if you use the FF lens at f5.6 or 8 the Oly Pro 12-40/2.8 is indeed a nice and much smaller alternative on M43 weighing 500 grams less

Bottom line, it's all horses for courses.
You can see the April Foolishness 2021 exhibition here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum
Back to Top
LAbernethy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 November 2015
Country: Canada
Location: Ajax, Ontario
Status: Offline
Posts: 2792
Post Options Post Options   Quote LAbernethy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 December 2021 at 17:29
Originally posted by Harm vb Harm vb wrote:

It is just a comparison between big pears and smaller pears.

I'm inclined to agree.

Originally posted by pegelli pegelli wrote:

I think the real advantage of m43 or APS-C is for nature/wildlife/birding where you need long lenses, those are much smaller/shorter for the same angle of view as their FF counterparts.

However if you have a 24-70/2.8 on FF and use it to separate subjects from the background wide open with low DOF there really isn't a APS-C or M43 equivalent, but if you use the FF lens at f5.6 or 8 the Oly Pro 12-40/2.8 is indeed a nice and much smaller alternative on M43 weighing 500 grams less

Bottom line, it's all horses for courses.

I'm inclined to disagree. I used them wide open and stopped down to pretty much the same output. The M4/3 did much better in the low light interior shots (a beautiful Christmas tree display at the Capitol Theater in Port Hope, Ontario) due to it's superior IBIS. We will not bother mentioning the size/weight difference, which is laughable.
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Online
Posts: 33745
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 December 2021 at 18:47
Originally posted by LAbernethy LAbernethy wrote:


I'm inclined to disagree.
Which part, the dof, the long lenses for nature/wildlife, the weight difference (which I think we agree on) or something else?
You can see the April Foolishness 2021 exhibition here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum
Back to Top
LAbernethy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 November 2015
Country: Canada
Location: Ajax, Ontario
Status: Offline
Posts: 2792
Post Options Post Options   Quote LAbernethy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 December 2021 at 19:10
Originally posted by pegelli pegelli wrote:

Originally posted by LAbernethy LAbernethy wrote:


I'm inclined to disagree.
Which part, the dof, the long lenses for nature/wildlife, the weight difference (which I think we agree on) or something else?

On DOF. For practical use, not theoretical argument they're the same. On long lenses, I agree on the size/weight M4/3 advantage my EM-1 Mk2 w/75-300mm attached fits in the Sony 200-600mm lens hood. On short lenses it depends, old European adapted vs Sigma Art? For APS-C? I see no real advantage in size weight.
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Online
Posts: 33745
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 December 2021 at 19:21
OK, I think especially at shorter distances (portrait or head shot distance, not talking about macro) the dof difference can be significant in practical use but "to each their own" if you want to disagree with that or don't need the separation from the background. No doubt the 12-40 Pro is a very good lens and indeed the Olympus IBIS is world class and a few stops better than anything that the FF cameras of any brand deliver. Small sensor size mixed with superior technology seems to be an advantage there.

And on APS-C the E70-350 on an A6600 is smaller/lighter than the FE100-400 on a A1/7/9 type body with more reach so also on APS-C I think you can have a size advantage, allthough not as big as with M43

You can see the April Foolishness 2021 exhibition here Another great show of the talent we have on Dyxum
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > Other camera systems Page  123 7>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.