OM-1

I think there is a perception problem with m43 that is unfortunately fueled in part by the m43 maker marketing. I say this as a mft user for the past four years that is now looking for alternatives elsewhere. There are many reasons why users come to or look at m43. My reasons were size, affordabilit

Honestly, if you're getting into M43 for the weight, the OM-1 ii and 2.8 zooms is not a weight-saving plan. You'd be saving like 4 to 8 ounces total, compared to a FF mirrorless + f/4 zooms. Especially if your subjects are all low-light where you really want wider apertures and close subjects with n

In light "bound" photography, where shutter speeds are required to freeze motion and ISO "gain" is required to expose, it doesn't matter if you're shooting with a large or small sensor, both sensors require the same physical size aperture to achieve a similar performance for a given FOV. Smaller sen

I have an EM1.2 and honestly you've chosen one of the biggest of the m43 cameras. That and the OM1 are actually pretty big considering theyre mirrorless. If you're prioritizing portability I'd go for em10 or om5, or the most portable camera I've ever had is an epm2 so you could look at the epl serie

I don't have hardly any experience with M43, apart from trying to teach a friend the basics of how to use a camera. I found the autofocus to be lacking on her OM-1, compared to what I'm used to with Canon (70D, upgraded to R5 and R5 mk 2 last year). I will note, the light weight was very nice. I thi

You will hear some FF advocates saying you can get just as light a kit. You can't. Maybe if you stick to one camera and 3 slow lenses. Otherwise when you start to add bags, tripods, 5-6 lenses etc. OM-1 w/ OM 100-400 is same weight/size as a modern FF mirrorless body with the sigma 100-400, and both