M43 PROJEKT: the small mirrorless system in 2024?

Finally I am here to write some thoughts about my decision to back to the Micro Four Thirds system

My intention is to promote the use of micro four thirds as an interchangeable lens system because it has virtues that both APS-C and full frame cannot have. When mirrorless cameras were proposed, the micro four thirds system shone as the solution to obtain more compact and lighter cameras, including lenses. The idea was to provide a good image quality system that was easier to carry when traveling and of course also for the wanderings of a street photographer. However, when Samsung's NX system and Sony's system came out, which imposed APS-C, we began to see smaller camera bodies compared to reflex cameras on which huge lenses were mounted, making everything appear very unattractive from an aesthetic point of view. but even if not above all of portability and convenience. In fact, on an ergonomic level they are a horror. I was ambassador for the NX system: they released a fantastic 85mm lens but the camera body…it appeared so small and so I should carry the camera grabbing it by the lens. And I am pretty sure many photographers do the same today with their APS-C or FF frame mirrorless system. I believe that the true advantage of a mirrorless system has been lost sight of. If I have to give up (compromise) an optical viewfinder of the reflex system at least I must have the advantage of not having bulky cameras and lenses. Am I wrong?

There is certainly an emotional element in my choice to return to photography with this system. With the first Olympus Pen I made my first professional contracts, I went to Los Angeles exhibiting photos taken with that camera, including the one that remains my most famous photo. The gallery in the homepage of the people in a Starbucks showcase was completely made with the Olympus E-P1 with its 17mm pancake lens.

The philosophy behind the Micro Four Thirds is another reason. Through a small and compact interchangeable lens system I have:

Image Quality

It is different but it is. Image quality in a small system. Many attribute to the megapixel the image quality, but image quality is the final result of the image. And I shoot only JPG. And I print my photos. I know what I am talking about.

Character

The Micro Four Thirds has character. Indeed it declares the same from the photographer deciding to work with this system that of course is not perfect…a f1.7 lens in a micro four thirds system is not the same of an APS-C system. It has cons and pros: more depth of field because of the sensor, not that light as in FF and APS-C. The important is to know that.

Price

OK, this may be questionable, but consider that to have the most of Micro four Thirds today is through the second hand market. And we can find very good deals.

Build Quality

Magnesium bodies that you dream of with other systems is sufficient for you? The much vaunted Fujifilm has plastic everywhere even in the camera bodies considered pro.

Going against is my prerogative. But I always do it thinking.

In this stance of mine in favor of the micro four thirds there is the same spirit as when I defend DSLRs from the desire to make them disappear on the part of camera manufacturers (apart from Pentax) and even more so for a system that fully embraces the philosophy of why mirrorless cameras were born.

As a street photographer I have always thought that taking the example of Voigtlander and Contax could be the key to mirrorless cameras and therefore I am truly horrified by all this fever in favor of full frame. Either you do things well like Leica or else forget it.

In the first releases made, as already expressed in my hands on review, I was able to verify the pleasant sensations of shooting with a camera like the Olympus Pen E-PL2, with a shutter button noise that is pleasantly mechanical: it feels like a film camera, silent but still noticeable when shooting. And it's a camera that falls well in my hand, that I like to hang around my neck, that is seductive despite being less retro than the E-P series.

The LCD screen certainly states its age: indeed it is a crappy LCD, and the photos look like shit. But maybe also this is part of charm: when I back at home and I observe the photos at the monitor of my computer the wow effect is at least duplicated. And usually I don’t even look at the photos on the LCD of the cameras.

However, each system involves a different way of working.

Being an older camera this does not count with focus peak. This makes it more complicated when using a manual lens.

Furthermore, when in manual it does not leave the possibility of auto ISO. And therefore in manual exposure it forces you to have to work completely manually. And ironically, when you go semi-automatic, it's best to leave the ISO auto so that you only govern one of the three parameters of the exposure triangle. Clearly this leads to a compromise. For many situations on the street you find yourself having to close the aperture enough and work at, say, 1600 ISO. In shutter priority the camera opens the aperture a lot and therefore the focus becomes even more selective, but considering that the sensor is smaller than an APS-C and that the lens used is 28mm there is still greater depth of field, avoiding you to obtain too much bokeh.

In Aperture priority the chances of disaster are even greater, especially if like me you are a photographer who raises the camera at the last possible moment. In photography it is always a question of decisions and compromises. You just have to decide what you think works best.

While I am sure that my choice is not for everyone I invite you to consider a thing: why you make photos? I am pretty sure that most of you think to the pleasure to do it. Even before any profit calculation or mere technical aspect.

Today we are seen as weirdos for the simple fact of still using cameras compared to a smartphone. If the chase is for you the megapixel there are smartphones that already have 100 mpx, go ahead with that. But if you like taking photographs then these things, the market hypes, don't take root. Today I am shooting with a camera that has half the megapixel than my Canon EOS M200. Am I crazy? Maybe. But I am also a photographer who still enjoys taking photographs. And who still learns from having to reinvent the way of photographing with a certain camera. Because this is the way that still allows me to improve myself as a photographer. It is not the camera, it is me, it is you, it is us.

And if you agree with me, we need to start to ask again for the micro four thirds. I said that I don't want to be an ambassador for camera brands anymore, but for the micro four thirds I could do it because it's a good fight.