Yes, OM has a similar scheme and I am aware of it, but since I am 99% sure I would not buy a new camera at the moment it would feel dishonest to use this just to try one out.
I don’t need a new camera. I just think about it. 
1 Like
Also, a lot of their lenses are very good. Pricey, for sure, but excellent; making the right kind of compromises. I think this is a factor why Fuji bodies hold their value well, the value of a camera ecosystem also comes from lenses.
They are the only APS-C mount not crippled by trying to avoid competing with a full-frame line from the same brand (Sony is pretty decent too, but nowhere close to Fuji).
3 Likes
I think it’s just that market share has surged quite a bit for Fuji in the last few years. Thus there aren’t nearly enough used models to satisfy current demand. But that’s not an indication of insufficient production, but merely the natural result of rapid growth. There simply weren’t all that many Fujistas ten years ago.
The opposite dynamic is probably currently depressing m43 used prices.
3 Likes
but not depressing them enough, from my perspective
1 Like
I’d have to look again at the noise thing with more modern cameras. You’ve certainly shown a clear example, with the ones you chose. I would expect the noise to scale with sensor size to balance out the scaling in equivalent aperture. Both are opposite sides of the same coin.
I borrowed an x100v then decided to buy an x-t30 and a bunch of lenses, it worked out ok for fuji
1 Like
FWIW, here’s two shots in dim light that I tried to quickly process to look similar. One with the compact full frame Lumix S9 with the 18-40mm at 30mm, the other with the compact MFT GX9 with the 15mm prime. Both are at ISO 200 and roughly equivalent apertures. I was just trying to see how easily I could quickly replicate what was shot on the full frame rather than any scientific comparison as there’s all kinds of variables that would make that useless. The f/1.7 MFT lens was at f/2.8 to roughly match the f/5.5 aperture on the full frame. The S9 is cropped to 3:2 because its original narrower aspect ratio in this case with the lake naturally looked more pleasing. The GX9 is substantially smaller and lighter than the S9 and can fit in a coat pocket, while the S9, not so much.
4 Likes
You’ll definitely see variance between different camera models. If I’d chosen the OM-5 (my camera) instead of the OM-3, the FF cameras would definitely show that 2-stop better performance above ISO1600.
But I guess that sort of illustrates the point that I was trying to make - that it’s not just about the math and what we should see on paper. In the real world, it’s a lot more than just sensor size that affects image quality. So when lens shopping, it’s worth thinking about the actual camera bodies rather than just FF equivalence.
I’ve read lots of comments online from people saying they should just get a cheaper FF body instead of the flagship M4/3 body because they are similar prices and there is no benefit to M4/3 after equivalence. But that’s simply not true. There won’t be a 2-stop noise advantage between a Canon RP and an OM-1, for example. It’s more like 1 stop. And it’s also not linear in the real-world. The differences can be indistinguishable at certain ISOs and much more noticeable at others. Besides noise, there are lots of other reasons to go with one system over another, and I’d argue that ergonomics trumps almost everything else.
1 Like
@TonyBarrett Thanks for that! Well I would have to really pixel peep to notice any real difference between those images. I imagine differences start to show up at the high ISOs, but certainly if you can keep your ISO down, there’s really very little difference, at least to my eyes.
Yes. The S9 is a bit better when viewing on a 27" screen but it’s not dramatic.
And of course the lens will also be responsible for some of the differences. Although in this case, you might expect the prime lens stopped down to be a bit better than the zoom at its widest aperture.
Yep, it’s definitely not a fair comparison. I don’t have an L-mount prime.
A Sony A7c with one of its 40mm or 50mm f/2.5 primes would be a bit closer in size to the GX9 with definitely better performance in low light/high iso.
But then GX9 with the 20mm f/1.7 pancake would be smaller still.
If only Panasonic would release a GX10.
1 Like
Based on your photos and comments, I thought I’d take a look at the GX9 to supplement my G9. I’d love to have something more compact, and I already have three MFT lenses.
Then I looked at current pricing. Geez, I think the market prefers more compact bodies. More than my G9 by good measure.
I thought that smaller = cheaper, but obviously not!
Sigh
1 Like
Yep. Price signals are not working. The GX7 is cheaper though I think Emily from Micro Four Nerds just did a YouTube video about it so probably not anymore.
2 Likes
I think she and Tom Calton are together shaping the used compact camera market, and whenever the latest “gem” is unearthed, the price skyrockets!
1 Like
Possibly, but on MPB I see a 10 euro difference between the G9 and GX9 (for the same condition).
In any case, while I like my GX9, if I was buying a camera now I would go for the Olympus E-M5ii. Yes, about 1cm taller, but otherwise quite compact, 100EUR cheaper, and weather sealed. And it looks very nice.
I don’t think there is an effect in the medium run though. Frankly, I don’t even see one in the short run. Maybe 3-4k people see these videos, and I guess most of them have more cameras than they need already. If they buy something, many of them sell something.
There are two narratives about older micro 4/3 cameras: one that the format is dying, so everyone is trying to get rid of them, the other is that they are the last Truly Compact MILCs so they go for astronomical prices. I don’t think either of these is true; other than rare collector’s items they are traded more or less at the value they are worth, given the technology (including the outdated AF), their remaining life expectation, and various benefits that balance that.
It’s just that camera prices soared, so used cameras are more expensive too. Micro 4/3 prices more or less fit in with the general trends.
I did actually look on MPB after writing this:
And, the GX7 was going for roughly about the same price that she mentions.
1 Like
Yeah, I have no idea whether prices are being influenced by these influencers, so my comment was not really serious. Although I wouldn’t be surprised if there is an effect. those 3-4K people that watch those videos might be the 3-4k most likely to buy one of these cameras. Don’t underestimate the collectors out there! There may also be a snowball effect, when the extra exposure for a particular camera gets the algorithms in gear, and then suddenly you start seeing more examples on social media, maybe even a celebrity using one, and then suddenly that camera is a viral trend.
Still, as you say, I doubt there is a lasting effect from one particular video, even if there is a sudden, short-term uptick. My hunch is that the compact camera trend in general has raised prices on all compact cameras, even the ones that should probably have been resigned to the history books. Due to the scarcity and popularity of the X100 series, people started looking for alternatives, and gradually every similar camera was “remembered” as an alternative. Then when those ones also became scarce and overpriced, even more were unearthed as hidden gems… and so on.
Frankly, I don’t think that anything like that is required to explain what happened to used camera prices. It’s just that new camera prices increased, so the price of used cameras, which are imperfect substitutes, did too.
Cameras (and lenses) are very durable goods so they hold their value quite well. In addition, image quality only improved marginally in the last 10–15 years, most new features are for convenience or significant only in niche applications.
Finally, literally every camera under the sun has been “discovered” by some youtuber. Search for “[brand] hidden gem”, and you will find tons of hits. Every micro 4/3 camera is someone’s hidden gem, so are the Fujifilm A series (which have Bayer sensors, but X mount), etc. Search for Pentax, and you will find that the 645 is someone’s hidden gem, with 10k views.
It’s a harmless form of entertainment.
1 Like
So, if I understand what you’re saying, you don’t necessarily think the compact camera revival is because they’re compact. It’s more to do with the used market becoming more popular because of new camera prices?
If you do think there’s increased interest in compact cameras for their compact nature, then I think it stands to reason that prices will increase on the used market, especially because there aren’t that many new compact cameras being made right now.