>>3275743>comparable to FF (just 2 stops in iso below)This is why m43 photographers are insufferable retards. You can compare all you like, but you are not getting the same capabilities of a larger sensor.
You're not getting anywhere close to the same depth of field control. Even an f/0.95 lens is only equivalent to a mere f/1.9 in terms of FF depth of field, and most high end m43 lenses are no faster than f/2.8.
Your ability to use telephoto lenses is extremely limited in this format. Without even touching on the obvious difference in resolving power, M43tards like to describe sensors in terms of ISO noise, but the claimed "two stops" - or whatever it's claimed to be - is very optimistically calculated, after noise reduction algorithms have been applied and using image stabilization to estimate shutter speed. Capturing fast action on telephoto lenses, image stabilization is not enough. You need a high enough shutter speed to freeze action, and for that, you need to be able to access high ISO's without the sensor noise making the image unusable. I have seen lots of m43 photos, and the low ISO's look fine, but they look really grainy above ISO 800. I would not want to use them for telephoto shooting.
>smol>cheap>cute The fact that 3 out of 4 of the attributes you selected to talk about have nothing to do with photography says a lot about what kind of people use m43 cameras.
