You may be able to keep the ISO relatively low (due to the F1.8) but the noise at that ISO will be relatively high. A G16 has a crop factor compared with 35mm of 4.55. Hence, the size of those sensor sites is roughly equivalent to that of a ~250 megapixel full frame sensor. The benefit you get is in terms of compactness.
Regards, Freddie.
@fdw I have actually compared night shots taken with my crop sensor Nikon D7100 at 1600 ISO to the images taken with the lower ISO needed for 1.8 on the G16. The results are very similar. The main benefit of the G16 is Dof but the compactness is also great for street photography because the camera is less intimidating for the subjects being photographed. Noise is well controlled on the G16 sensor, but of course full frames have the noise advantage which is their big plus point. Thanks for your feedback and helpful information.
I like your optimism, and I hope you’re right. Personally, I want all the main sensor sizes to continue thriving. As a consumer, I always want as much choice as possible, and I generally don’t like consolidation in a market.
But I’m wondering if the “compact” aspect of their niche is a bit risky, with the rise of very capable smartphones, and the fact that APS-C cameras are about the same size with the benefits of the larger sensor. I know larger sensors are not superior in every way, but there are probably a lot of consumers who just think bigger is better, or are at least constantly told so.
Apparently OM System drop their prices quite quickly after launch. It will be interesting to see if this happens with the new OM-3.
For years, I subscribed to the “bigger is better” philosophy, lugging around hefty gear on every city trip. But instead of feeling like a vacation, each outing felt like an expedition.
Five years ago, I decided that photography should be fun again. To complement my 35mm kit, I picked up a Pen-F—and was immediately impressed. The image quality exceeded my expectations, and the lenses were superb. When comparing high-ISO performance, the gap between the Pen-F and larger sensors was so small it hardly mattered. In fact, for static subjects in low light, the Pen-F had the edge thanks to IBIS—I could shoot at ISO 200 while my 35mm camera needed a much higher setting.
The Pen-F also opened up a new style of photography for me. Strangers often approach me, curious about the camera, and before long, they’re asking me to take their portraits. It’s the only camera I’ve ever owned that sparks this kind of interaction. Before the Pen-F, I would never have considered photographing complete strangers—but now, it feels natural.
Eventually, I sold all my 35mm cameras and lenses, reinvesting in MFT gear. I haven’t looked back since.
I rarely print larger than 60×90 cm (24×36"), and even my 12MP-era prints still hold up beautifully. At 20MP, I have more than enough resolution for my needs.
The idea that MFT can’t achieve shallow depth of field? Pure myth. Most MFT lenses deliver excellent results wide open. Like with any sensor format, playing with aperture, subject-to-camera distance, and subject-to-background distance allows you to control depth of field.
I think OM System made the right decision with the OM-3. It packs the excellent technology from the OM-1 Mark II into a street photography-friendly body. I haven’t had the chance to try it out in the city yet, but I have a feeling it will be a fantastic tool.
The biggest lesson I’ve learned? Don’t believe everything you read online. The only way to know if something works for you is to try it yourself. No influencer or blogger gets to decide what camera I should buy.
I think that at this point, the only people using an actual camera are those who want a camera for some specific feature a phone cannot provide (such as interchangeable lenses, EVF, controls and handling, everyone has their own reasons).
Sure, it depends on who you listen to, but that kind of advice mostly affects people buying their first real camera. Once they gain some experience, they will understand the various technical and ergonomic trade-offs better regardless of what system they started with. Micro 4/3 users will pine for low light super bokeh, people carrying full frame kits on their holidays start to wonder if they could leave it at the hotel for a day, etc. If they decide to stick to photography, their second camera system will be a more conscious choice.
Olympus has always been in the habit of offering heavy cashbacks and OM System continued this tradition. Eg at the moment the OM1ii body or 12-40 kit offers a 400 eur cashback until the end of March; OM3 buyers get a 5 year warranty instead. They have even larger promotions around Black Friday and similar.
What I like about OM System is that they maintain a reasonably dense network of authorized dealers, so I can find one close. Eg in Budapest they have about 4 dealers which are serious photography shops. You just walk in and try out pretty much anything, they have unboxed lenses and bodies for that purpose. And these shops also offer lens rental and hold events. (Unfortunately, Panasonic does not offer anything comparable in my experience.)
I’ve owned a Pen-F since they first came out, and it’s by far my favorite of the Oly’s I own. I too have had people come up and ask me about it, many thinking it was a film camera.
I always hoped that an updated version would be created, but it looks like the new OM-3 will be as close as it gets for now. I’ll probably pick one up this summer. I can’t wait forever for a new Pen-F!
I’d also mention that the stabilization these camera bodies have, coupled with a fast prime (f/1.8) make a fantastic combination for street photography under lower light conditions.
If bokeh is your goal, the 75mm f/1.8 is fantastic. Razor sharp at f/2.2, and beautiful, soft backgrounds. A bargain at around $1000.
Well said. I spent several years trying various camera styles. There was little to no correlation between what influencers and reviewers liked, and what worked for me.
I have read this thread with interest ever since it started. It really has me thinking.
At this point, I think that if I were to buy another camera, I would stay with APS-C. The one that I really have my eye on is the Fujifilm X-M5. It is small and lightweight. The only big negative for me is that it has no viewfinder, and that could be a deal breaker.
Anyway, I am becoming quite old (mid-70s), so I doubt that I need to spend a lot of money for a new camera, but I can dream. I have my Nikon D-3300 and I can borrow my son’s D-750. I should probably just find a new lens or two.
PS - Oh, wait. There is an X-T30 that has a viewfinder and it weighs only a tiny bit more. Hmmm
It also lacks IBIS and that articulating screen is just not as convenient as the flip-out screen on the X-T models. Not that I regret buying mine, but I don’t enjoy it as much as the X-Ts.
Based on the YouTube channels I watch, if everyone ended up buying what the influencers liked, everyone would have a Hasselblad, Leica or Sony. The entry level models and smaller sensors would all die out. It really seems like influencers can’t help converging on the same cameras, probably because they keep being gifted them or know that they’ll make their money back by buying one and making videos about them.
There are some YouTubers I enjoy and respect, but I rarely pay much attention to their gear anymore, because they live in a world where their gear really matters to their view counts, and that just isn’t my world.
Anyone should feel free to gift me a hasselblad
I will gladly do it for you when I reach 250k subscribers, ok?
Might take a while, and I might need to start a YT channel first…
That Leica rabbit hole is a particularly alluring one for me. Would I like a modern camera, but with a rangefinder? Would I appreciate the premium build quality and the caché of the brand? It’s one of those unanswerable what-ifs that only personal experience can shed light on, and which therefore, paradoxically, thrives in YouTube video essays.
So, last week, a photo club member offered to lend me a Leica M240 with a 35mm summicron. As luck would have it, we had a trip coming up over carnival weekend, so there was a perfect opportunity to test drive that camera.
To cut things short, it felt like a well built ten year old camera that lacks autofocus. I often had to rely on zone focusing, my framing was sloppy, and I missed shots because the camera wasn’t fast enough. The pictures turned out well for the most part, and it was a fun experience. But I’ll be glad to go back to a modern camera. The build quality did not make a difference to me, other than the annoyingly large weight.
Another what-if checked off my eternal GAS list. I respect anyone who loves this experience, but it’s not for me. And weirdly, that’s exactly what YouTube can’t tell you.
How lucky that you could both shoot such a camera and decide you don’t actually need it.
I mostly watch micro 4/3 content and a few other photographers whose style I like, so my YT suggestions are full of amazing micro 4/3 stuff 
That said, while everyone prefaces their videos with “[company X] has sent me this camera to review, but they don’t have a say in what I am going to show you”, I guess it is always implicit in their understanding with company X that consistently unfavorable reviews will result in no more gear.
I also watched a ton of comparison/review videos before buying my first MILC, but it was not a good use of my time. Now I understand that lenses matter much more than camera bodies, so one should start the selection process from that end. All mounts (except Nikon/Canon APS-C ) have a huge selection these days, but prices and availability of used gear are very different.
The reason Sigma won’t release their new M4/3 lenses is they are now making lenses for OM System as OEM.
Last year I bought a full frame camera again, wishing to have a quality modern 50mm/1.8 autofocus lens, and I also have an ancient screw-mount 50mm/2 that I like to use with it.
Even when I bought it (and it’s better than I had any right to hope), I did not consider it to be my main camera. I’m fortunate that I’m at a point in my career that I can buy into a second camera system, but even if money were no issue at all, micro four thirds would remain my main one.
It really comes down to your individual interests and what you want out of a camera, and as many here have said, freelance peer-pressure marketers don’t do the same things with a camera that we do.
So, what’s the advantage of a smaller sensor if the camera isn’t any smaller?
How about speed? Both Olympus/OMD and Panasonic have frame rates in raw with continuous autofocus around triple what a Nikon Z9 can do. If your subject allows locking the focus (like waiting for a bird to take flight, or land on a perch you’ve already focused on), an OM-1 will out-do a Z9 by a factor of six. It’s rare that someone needs that kind of frame rate, but if you need it, you need it. It’s how I got photos like the ones here: Go around! Landing pad not clear! and those were with a camera I got for less than $800 and a lens I got for around $500 (and only 50fps).
I don’t prefer comparing ISO number, because I think it obscures an important point. If you aim for the same Depth of Field, you take the same amount of light, focus it into a quarter of the area, and quadruple the brightness. Half the focal length, two stops faster focal ratio, two stops lower ISO to get the same photo. At that point you have the same choice anyone else has: smaller lens or less noise. I own the full frame camera because I love fast standard primes. It’s all individual desires.
But, for example, I will never buy a macro lens for the full frame, and I love macro. If I’m stopping down to f/6.3 for usable DOF anyway, what advantage is there using full frame if now I have to go to f/13?
On the subject of high frame rates and macro, what matter if I can’t focus on honey bees in flight if I can simply let them fly through my plane of focus with the shutter button held down? Every nice micro four thirds camera lets you buffer photos without writing them to a card, and as soon as you see the shot you wanted, you press the shutter release the rest of the way down and the camera writes the last half second or so to the card. When focus peaking flashes the outline of the bee in my viewfinder, I’ve got her!
Huh, this came out quite long-winded…
I recently was able to buy both of my dream cameras, a mid-range full frame last year, and a flagship (but no more expensive) micro four thirds camera last week, and I could not be happier. The new camera isn’t even any smaller than the full frame, but with some of the sharp tiny lenses I own, it still travels with me to work when the other stays at home.
Edit to clarify: career is not photography related
Fabulous shots!
Thank you! 
Can you recommend any? I have always been fairly brand agnostic, and the YT channels I have subscribed to were not because of any particular brand. When I first started watching certain YouTubers, these were what they were using (I may be wrong on some of these):
It looks like there isn’t a smaller sensor in any of the channels I’m subscribed to now (except for Omar).
I think maybe Henry Turner shoots Micro 4/3? But I haven’t watched him in ages.
It’s not that important really because I just watch these videos for entertainment, but it’s nice to see representation from some of the smaller players.