Three good reasons to use micro Four-Thirds

 

I've been using micro Four-Thirds seriously since 2014 and I was dabbling from 2012.

I've been hearing "Full Frame" chants since 2004, even when there weren't any such bodies available.

I have three good reasons to use micro Four-Thirds.

• Weight
• Telephoto reach
• Variety of available lenses
• Video on Panasonic bodies
  

Weight is not difficult to understand.  if you have a light system, you can photograph more effectively and travel further with more equipment.  You can find select equipment that is smaller than typical for various sensor sizes, but overall, micro Four-Thirds has the smallest combinations.  Even with the GH7 and G9 MkII, the equipment is fairly light in contrast to APS-C or 135 Format.

Telephoto reach is not difficult, either.  Having a multiplication factor of 1.94x over 135 Format, a telephoto lens with the same reach is smaller.  400mm is effectively 800mm and yes, the Depth of Field is deeper, which is actually preferable when shooting from a distance.

micro Four-Thirds started around 2008, so it has a lot of lenses available over 16 years.  The original lenses were just sufficient.  Since then, some unique lenses such as the Panasonic 10-25mm f/1.7 lens and the Olympus 8mm f/1.8 fisheye lens.

Best photography with micro Four-Thirds

You can do anything with any camera, if you have the determination, the money, and the skill and sometimes, the luck.  However,  If you're in micro Four-Thirds for wide landscape photography, you're in the wrong format.  If you're photographing weddings or doing portraits, there are better sensor sizes.  However, if you're doing video for weddings or practically anything else, micro Four-Thirds, especially Panasonic, has you covered.

Since the GH4, Panasonic put a lot of its professional knowledge into a camera body that was easy to handle.  Up through the GH7, they have added stabilization, waveforms, and more to make it easier to get video recorded consistently.  The 135 Format Panasonic S5 Mk IIx is equivalent to the GH7, but the GH7 has fewer downsides.  I have the regular S5 Mk II, but I'm not doing much video these days.  Even then, I suspect that Panasonic has a few more firmware updates for the series.

Doing video with the GH4 was better than okay but the auto focus wasn't reliable and the body didn't have IBIS (in-body image stabilization).  For someone with a gimbal stabilizer, it would be less of a problem.  Most film makers don't use auto focus, so there isn't a problem for them, either.  The GH7 and G9 Mk II both have hybrid (PDAF + CDAF) auto focus and amazing Dual I.S. when using Panasonic lenses with O.I.S.

Update 2026.01.12: micro Four-Thirds seems to be gaining some interest again.  I've seen a few videos on YouTube pushing that lately, as well.

I'd been on a very narrow set of lenses and a tiny camera body, the GM5.  I picked up the Panasonic/Leica 9mm f/1.7 lens and the G97 body.   Along with the Panasonic/Leica 15mm f/1.7, Olympus 25mm f/1.8, Panasonic 42.5mm f/1.7, it covers a lot.  What I haven't had for a long time is a decent constant maximum aperture zoom lens.  I just ordered a Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 Mk II lens.  I had the first version and it was a HUGE disappointment.  I bought this one used since it's been discontinued also, for about US$500.  The current Panasonic/Leica version is going for double that used.

I was thinking about the 70-200mm f/2.8 for Panasonic's 135 Format series, but it's over US$2000 new and not much less for a used lens.  Sigma's lens is less expensive, but I don't believe that the Optical Stabilization is compatible with Dual I.S.   The micro Four-Thirds lens may not be as pure an optical formula but it is quite a match, especially for the price.  The original Lumix X 35-100mm f/2.8 I bought was US$1400, not that much less than my Olympus ZD SHG 35-100mm f/2.0, which was practically perfect.  Having a 58mm filter size vs 77mm tells a lot than the 2.8 vs 2.0 doesn't.