A pair of Panasonic executives have made some provocative statements, suggesting that it takes a higher degree of knowledge and camera literacy to understand Micro Four Thirds compared to full-frame sensors.
Toshiyuki Tsumura, general manager of Panasonic's Imaging Solutions Division, and Shiomi Noriaki, section manager of the Product Marketing Division, were talking about some of the decisions made regarding the Panasonic Lumix S9.
Japanese website BCN Retail highlighted a number of idiosyncracies with the S9, such as the fact that it has a full-frame image sensor but possesses a cold shoe (which lacks electronic contacts, so can only be used by "dumb" accessories), and that it champions small size and weight when the company makes smaller, lighter Micro Four Thirds (MFT) cameras.
"It is people who are knowledgeable about cameras who will be able to understand the advantages of Micro Four Thirds," said Tsumura.
"Obviously, full-size sensor cameras are easier to understand because they are easier to blur and have less noise. I would like you to first experience a full-size sensor that you can't get with a smartphone."
Tsumara's inference is that, for those who aren't educated about cameras, the old 'blurry background' factor of a full-frame sensor is much easier to understand than the intricacies of MFT.
"For people with low camera literacy, Micro Four Thirds is difficult to use," concurred Noriaki. "If it's a full-size sensor that blurs and has less noise, even those people can get on board."
I completely understand what Tsumura and Noriaki are getting at. When someone's ceiling of understanding is limited to what their smartphone can do, they probably won't be savvy enough to appreciate the nuances of MFT.
However, show them something obvious like a picture with a blurry background, and they can immediately see what a full-frame camera can do – even if it doesn't have something as basic as a hot shoe.
I've certainly seen this "low camera literacy" regarding sensor sizes demonstrated by some photographers' attitudes over the years. I've heard people insist that Micro Four Thirds is crap "because it's too small" or "because it's not full frame", as if that has any meaning – or as if 35mm can even claim to be full frame in the first place.
Because when it comes to film, full frame is actually 4x5, it's 8x10, it's large format. We may call 35mm "full frame" today but, in years past, large and medium format photographers similarly decried 35mm as crap "because it's too small".
Anyway, it's all just food for thought. As someone who shoots both MFT and 35mm, I'm glad that Panasonic gave voice to the fact that you need to know about cameras to understand MFT's benefits (and, inversely, if you don't understand MFT's benefits then you need to know more about cameras).
(Sidenote: Shout out to all the Devin Townsend fans out there!)
Are you upgrading from a camera phone to a mirrorless camera? Make sure to check out the best full frame cameras and the best Micro Four Thirds cameras.
