panasonic-lumix-g1

Shopping for a digital camera? We define and explain why micro four-thirds cameras should be on your radar.

We’ve now covered most of the basics in our series of guides to digital and DSLR cameras, some new and some not so new, in the world of digital photography. But there is another player out there in the camera marketplace worth noting as well. It’s a relatively new concept that’s already seen its fair share of success and in many ways has become the bridge camera that all the purported “bridge” cameras before it were not.

It’s called the Micro Four-Thirds System, and besides a needlessly complex/mysterious name, it has a lot to offer. Developed by Olympus and Panasonic to be an original, purely digital standard, it in essence delivers an SLR-like experience in a smaller, more compact format.

micro-four-thirds-diagramFor starters, Micro Four-Thirds cameras have interchangeable lenses – a big deal in the world of advanced photography. They also have a plethora of SLR-like manual controls. But, because of the differences in the inner workings, they deliver pictures with a 4:3 aspect ratio as opposed to the 3:2 aspect ratio of true SLRs. Hence the Four-Thirds name.

There are other distinctions to be sure, but most notable to many of us is their size. Micro Four-Third camera bodies are substantially smaller than that of SLRs, and, once again because of their design, so too are their lenses. They are therefore far easier to carry, though they certainly aren’t nearly as “pocketable” as a true compact camera. Indeed, they aren’t pocketable at all.

There are some real pluses to this brave new format, and early models have achieved some rather favorable reviews. But (you knew there had to be a ‘but,’ didn’t you…), Micro Four-Thirds cameras aren’t perfect. Being smaller cameras, they also house smaller sensors. These aren’t as tiny as the sensors found in compact cameras, but nonetheless are small enough that photos, particularly in low light situations, are marginally noisier than photos taken by their SLR brethren.

Ultimately, with the Micro Four-Thirds format being so darned new, the jury, as they say, is still out. Some are claiming a camera revolution. Others say that because Micro Four-Thirds cameras aren’t pocketable or particularly inexpensive, and because they don’t offer all the advantages of an SLR, they’ll be nothing but a flash in the proverbial pan. Yet the system has big names and big bucks behind it, and already we’re seeing the appearance of a number of models and lenses. In the end, unless you’re absolutely one hundred percent sold on the idea, we suggest you take a hands-off approach for now and see how this plays out.

Showing 2 comments

  1. Jordan Sonnenblick at 2:54pm 20th January 2010 I'm about to buy my first DSLR: a Nikon D90. I've done lots and lots of homework, but have agonized over whether to wait and see if the second-generation four-thirds cameras are going to make the SLRs obsolete. I've decided to go forward with the D90, purely for the optical viewfinder and super-quick focus of the D90 for sports and action. I have a son who plays several travel sports, and have found it impossible to shoot action shots of him with anything except a D90 I rented.

    But if sports weren't my main shooting goal, I think I'd be all over whatever the next Panasonic 4/3 model will be.
  2. shep at 7:51pm 13th January 2010 A good brief summary. I am in the "revolution" camp: as electronic viewfinders (EVF) continue to improve (the one in the Olympus E-P2 is excellent already), the need for a mirror-box will disappear for all but some pros. Yes, the m4/3 sensor is a bit smaller than the one in most CaNikons, but it's not really that big a difference except for techie 'pixel peepers'.
    I find my E-P2 is really outstanding. When you want light weight and compactness, and even if you don't, it's the way to go!!
Close Suggestion Digital Cameras: Digital Zoom vs. Optical Zoom
View Article