 |
| On the left, Lumix G5 with 14-45 and 45-150mm lenses. On the right, Lumix GH3 with 12-35 and 35-100mm constant f2.8 lenses. You can see the G5 kit is smaller than the GH3 kit but not dramatically so. The cost difference is substantial though. |
The Micro Four Thirds System Is the longest established mirrorless interchangeable lens system with the greatest choice of manufacturers, bodies and lenses. There is something in the M43 system for everyone from beginner/snapshooter to expert/professional. You can have a camera with or without viewfinder, ranging in size from diminutive to substantial. You can choose from a wide range of zoom, prime and specialty lenses. You can select a low cost budget kit or something much more expensive.
Two twin lens zoom kits A popular choice for an interchangeable lens kit is the twin zoom lens option. Zooms are rightly popular because of their versatility. Many budget kit zooms also offer very good quality and excellent value for money.
Just the details The table below lists details for a medium budget, midrange M43 kit and a top of the range pro level M43 kit. Just for fun I included data for a budget full frame body plus top level lenses from Nikon.
Camera/Lens | Mass with batt (grams) | Dimensions (mm) Body WxHxD Lens LxDiaxDia | Box Volume (cc) | Price AUD Retail | Filter (mm) |
Lumix G5 | 400 | 123x85x71 | 742 | 629 | N/A |
Lumix 14-45mm OIS | 195 | 60x60 | 216 | 580 | 52 |
Lumix 45-150mm OIS | 200 | 73x62 | 280 | 300 | 52 |
Totals | 795 | 1238 | 1630 | ||
Lumix GH3 | 550 | 133x93x82 | 1014 | 1249 | N/A |
Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 OIS | 305 | 74x68 | 342 | 1319 | 58 |
Lumix 35-100mm f2.8 OIS | 360 | 100x67 | 449 | 1459 | 58 |
Totals | 1215 | 1805 | 4027 | ||
Nikon D600 | 760 | 141x113x82 | 1306 | 2075 | N/A |
24-70mm f2.8 | 900 | 133x83 | 916 | 2090 | 77 |
70-200mm f2.8 | 1540 | 209x87 | 1582 | 2674 | 77 |
Totals | 3200 | 3804 | 6839 | ||
Notes:
Standard M43 lens For this comparison I have used the Lumix 14-45mm lens. This was the original Lumix M43 kit lens and is still available separately. On my testing (which does not include the latest 14-42mm Mk2 kit lens) the 14-45mm is worth the extra money over a standard kit zoom. It delivers better optical quality, a longer zoom range and no problems with shutter shock.
Box Volumeindicates the space in a camera bag wich would be required to carry the item(s).
Prices Of photographic equipment are notoriously difficult to pin down as they vary between countries, with time and with the product cycle. Prices quoted are those posted by a well known Australian retailer, over the counter, GST paid, at the time of writing.
Size/price Compared with the G5 kit, the GH3 kit has 1.5x the mass, 1.5x the box volume and 2.5x the cost.
What are the benefits of the much more expensive GH3 kit ?
* Image Quality. The GH3 has a better sensor with more dynamic range and less high ISO noise. The files have better ability to tolerate manipulation in Adobe Camera Raw (or Lightroom) without artefacts. The lenses are constant f2.8 which means that in many situations particularly indoors the lens is passing 1-2 stops more light. This in turn allows the use of a lower ISO setting with further gains in image quality.
* Lens quality. The premium constant f2.8 lenses deliver better sharpness and contrast across their whole focal length and aperture range than the less expensive models. The wide aperture lenses are more readily able to separate foreground from background by selective focussing if that is required.
* Ergonomics. The GH3 provides better holding and and operating qualities for the experienced user than the G5.
* Performance. The GH3 performs at a higher level than the G5 on almost all measures.
Is the more expensive kit worth the money ?
Each individual camera buyer has to decide this one based on personal preferences, expectations and budget. In good light outdoors there is not much difference between the two kits in potential image quality. Indoors or elsewhere in low light levels, the benefits of the more expensive kit become more apparent.
What about full frame ? I included data for the Nikon D600, a "budget" full frame DSLR just for comparison. When fitted with Nikon's top tier 24-70 and 70-200mm f2.8 lenses, the D600 kit is, compared to the GH3 kit: 2.6x heavier, has 2.1x more box volume and costs 1.7x as much. You get a much larger, heavier, more expensive kit which should be capable of delivering better image quality in many situations. I raise just two issues about image quality in the full frame-vs-M43 debate.
1. In many cases, picture/print quality provided by the GH3/f2.8 premium lens kit is entirely good enough for the photographic purpose. Any extra quality delivered by the larger format is difficult to see in a print. I have read many reports on user forums by photographers moving back and forth from premium M43 kits to full frame, usually Canon EOS 5D Mk 1 or 2, and finding it difficult to see a quality difference between the output files.
2. There are many photographic situations such as landscape, groups of people, etc, when substantial depth of field is required. To achieve equal depth of field a full frame lens needs to be set two stops smaller than a M43 lens. To maintain shutter speed this requires an ISO setting two stops higher, thereby negating some of the image quality superiority of the full frame sensor.
You pays your money and makes your choice.