Canon’s RF 600mm f/4 L IS USM weighs twice as much at 3.1kg, is more than double the length at 47.2m and its price is $12,999 / £14,179. The OM System 300mm f/4 IS PRO lens sells for $2800 / £2399, weighs 1.47kg and measures 22.7cm long. Let’s look at some actual products to illustrate possible weight savings.
Both brands offer cheaper and mid-priced models plus smaller options, see our guide to the Best Small Mirrorless cameras. In MFT, the highest resolution is found in the $2198 /£1799 body only Panasonic Lumix GH6 which has 25.2MP under its bonnet, while the top OM-System model is the $2000 / £1979 Olympus OM-1 with 20.4MP.
In full-frame format, the list is longer so there’s more choice: Canon, Leica, Nikon, Pentax, Sony and, interestingly, Panasonic. Micro Four Thirds is supported by two camera brands: OM Digital (formerly Olympus) and Panasonic. We’ve broken down the discussion into bite-size chunks. So here we’ll be looking at the pros and cons of the Micro Four Thirds (MFT) and full-frame format for wildlife and nature stills photography of course, many of the discussion points will apply to other subject genres too, so if you only shoot landscapes or portraits, it’ll still be worth sticking with us. Whenever the question of which format to use arises, there’s never a definitive answer and that’s simply because we are all different, be that physically, financially or in terms of expectations and what we want from our photography. Here, Will Cheung takes a long look at whether Micro Four Thirds or the full-frame format is best for nature and wildlife photography.
The question ‘ Which format should I use?’ has been asked since the earliest days of photography, and it’s just as relevant now in the digital world as it was back in the days of sheet film.
0 kommentar(er)
