I will admit, when things do not go to plan, sometimes full frame is just better to have to get you out of trouble.
Good light, no real difference (all else being equal) and the benefits of M43 shine, sometimes enough to do better in poor light even (like stupidly fast/long lenses not possible in full frame).
In low light, there is a slight quality drop, but not one that prohibits M43 from being used professionally, again the lens thing makes a lot of difference.
In very bad light, meaning mixed colours, poor light levels and high contrast, the sort of light where things just go wrong without flash or other lighting, full frame is capable of holding about 2 more stops of “life” in your files, even with the trade-off of less flash power*.
You do need to use decent glass to see a real difference, but even with a crummy kit lens, it can still be there. Sometimes, I just push M43 too far and know that full frame may have saved me in a far from ideal situation.
I did a big school ball the other day, the arrivals alone took two hours, shot with flash in pre-winter darkness. I wanted Panasonic colours, but the G9’s are not as AF reliable as Oly M43’s (I have found) and the G9II is rigged for video. So, S5II it was.
I shot them with the S5II and 20-60 kit lens because I was cramped-up and the cars were inconsistently placed on arrival. I had to work fast and precisely while providing all the flexibility at my end. It is easy to stand flat footed and zoom in these situations, so I needed to keep an eye on going too wide (28mm was the widest).
The background could get quite messy at F5 with cars stacked up, stragglers wandering past and the support staff in some shots.
The S5II and kit lens did not miss a shot, which was amazing as the lighting ranged from direct headlight glare to basically nothing but flash!
The focus hit every time, flare was handled as well as I have seen and the shots were sharp and controlled, even the ones that were taken a little wider than I would have liked.
I was also shooting at ISO 4000 to save flash battery, something I need not have done, as it mattered little, both the battery and the ISO were well within their respective comfort envelopes**.
I am sold on the specific camera (S5II) for these types of jobs, the G9II also would have done it I guess, but that cam is doing duty as my movement video camera where it’s RAW out and slightly better AF/Stabe are at their best.
The problem on the night was, I was using manual flash with a variable aperture lens and the depth of field of the lens (usually about f4.5 at 35mm, f5.6 soon after), was deep enough to force me to create a background mask to add blur and reduce exposure for all 150 arrivals shots, something my old laptop struggled with. Processing went from tens of minutes up to about 3 hours.
I had fast primes, but not room or control of composition enough to trust my widest (35mm) to be wide enough, nor did I want to miss the opportunity to use the more natural rendering that comes from 50mm or longer.
I am looking at a future where full frame will be my night and event core cameras, M43 for daylight and action (both supporting the other).
The second issue is more practical.
I am struggling to fit a full frame and several lenses in a bag, especially if my backup is an M43 kit. Even the oversized F-7 bag struggles to take two S series lenses, two cams and some M43 glass. A single standard zoom would sort the full frame, the M43 for the long end.
So, if full frame is drifting towards stills, a workhorse zoom is a must, the size of the lenses forcing it, but the variable aperture kit lens, as stellar as it is, is not that lens. I guess I should also point out that if this was an M43 lens (in depth of field terms) even the kit lens would be equivalent to an f1.8~2.8 zoom, but light is the issue here as much as depth of field otherwise I may as well use M43.
A full frame lens with a fixed f2.8 aperture would have blurred the background enough to fix most shots with safe depth of field and saved me a half a working day of processing as I would only have needed a little brush work on distracting lights***.
So, decent quality, a fixed aperture, not too big or expensive and not at odds with what I have already.
Options?
First, the 62/67mm filter thread options (to fit most of my filters).
Tamron VXD G2 28-75 f2.8. No L-mount available, or this would be the one. Cheaper than the Panasonic 24 prime alone, it is an improvement on a lens that basically matches it’s competition already. Not yet or maybe ever?
Tamron RXD 28-75 f2.8 is available in L-mount and this is the one that matches most, but I would rather wait for the G2 to come out, unless I get one at a ridiculously good price. Not the G2.
Sigma 28-70 f2.8 is the cheapest and smallest of the lot and well liked, sharper than the Panasonic 24-105, about the same as the RXD. Strong option and the best priced around.
These all fit well with the 20-60, which is strongest wide, the 85 prime and IRIX 150. I am happy with a kit zoom for wide applications and a manual focus macro/portrait tele, it’s the working middle I need to concentrate on.
Now the rest.
The Pana-Leica S Pro 24-70 f2.8, which is a monster in dimensions and price, but has a reputation for that Leica “X” factor and is built like a tank. It is older than most here, bigger, more expensive and now has some genuine Panasonic competition. It also lacks a stabiliser for video, although the weight alone would help. Too big and expensive.
Panasonic S 24-60 f2.8. For about $1000au less (but still way too expensive), this modernised gem is as sharp as the S Pro, but may lack that special something a Leica approved lens has and also it’s build quality, but it is about the same size as the 20-60 kit lens! This is probably best bought with a camera as the kitted lenses tend to be way cheaper, but I don’t need a camera. To expensive.
Panasonic 24-105 f4, this lens is the sort of lens that can realistically do almost all your work to a decent enough standard. A fixed, semi-fast f4 and sharp with the best range here as well as genuine macro. It is older so easily found second hand. In one lens I could have a reasonable indoor sports option, a better wide angle and a decent enough fixed aperture standard zoom. A kit bargain is also possible. Needs to be the right price.
A Sigma 24 f2 or f3.5. These would give me both a premium prime and a smaller lens than the Panas, for (in Australia) about 60% the price of the 24mm S and cheaper than any zoom. I could even use it as a dual focal length video lens in APS-C mode. Not sure this does anything.
The Tamron 24 f2.8, which is less than half the price of the Sigma 24’s, is a macro and very small and light. On a second body, it could have been the fix for the above scenario, but then again, so could have the the 20-60 kit on a second cam with the 35 on the main one. Maybe in addition to a 28-70?
There are others, like the 24-70 f2.8, 24-45 f1.8, 28-105 f2.8 Sigma’s, but all are really overkill for the need to be addressed.
Leaders at the moment are the solid and versatile 24-105 Pana at $1500au and the slightly better, but less useful 28-70 Sigma for about $1k au.
There is a risk the 35 and 50mm S primes and the 7Art cine lenses may be made redundant, but there is always room for specialist glass, once you have the basics covered.
Ed. So I bought the Sigma on sale with the Australian Sigma supplier with a free SD card and overnight freight for under 1k. It was impulsive, but felt right, was a bargain and hopefully will be covered by my tax return. The Pana was scarce in deals without a camera. I feel the Sigma is not ideal for video (but no slouch), but I am not buying for video.
*M43 gives you about 2 stops more depth of field which means you can often shoot groups “wide open” at f1.8 or f2, which means 2 power levels more flash grunt or less battery drain.
**Battery of the Godox 860 still showed 80% after these and about 500 more shots inside and the images are clean as you would need.
***the excellent Panasonic 10-25 f1.7 would have also, but at $2.5k au if I had gone this way full frame would not even be in the picture.