Why Micro Four Thirds Still Matters in 2025

Over the last decade, I’ve drifted in and out of owning a full Micro Four Thirds kit. Mostly Olympus/OM System bodies, with a few Panasonics thrown in the mix. And every time I’ve sold them off, I notice something strange: I miss shooting with Micro Four Thirds. In fact, heres 5 things that I already love about my OM-3.

That doesn’t happen with most systems. In fact, there are only three camera ecosystems that really pull me back in when I’m without them — OM System, Fujifilm, and Nikon.

So why is it, with a world of larger sensors and technically “better” image quality, that the smaller Micro Four Thirds format keeps drawing me back? Why did I recently buy the OM Systems OM-3?

Ergonomics That Just Feel Right

For me, ergonomics are everything. In an age where nearly every camera from the last five years is “good enough” in terms of image quality, how a camera feels in my hands becomes incredibly important.

Olympus — and now OM System — simply nailed this. The OM/EM bodies feel like an extension of myself. Compare that to when I tried the Nikon Zf last year: technically brilliant, but the ergonomics never clicked, so I couldn’t connect with it.

When a camera doesn’t inspire me to pick it up, all the specs in the world don’t matter.

More Than Just Small and Light

People often assume the appeal of Micro Four Thirds is only about weight. But that’s not the whole story.

The OM-1, for example, isn’t really much smaller than my Nikon Z6 III and is actually heavier than my Fujifilm X-T5. Yet I still reach for it. Why? Because it’s about confidence, not grams. These cameras feel solid, dependable, and built for anything. So when the weather turns, I’m going off the beaten track, or I want to minimise the accessories I need, they’re my go to cameras.

Packed With Features Others Can’t Match

This is where Micro Four Thirds really shines. OM System cameras come loaded with features that make photography easier and more creative:

• World-class IBIS — still the best I’ve used.
• Live View / Live Bulb / Live Composite — long exposures made simple.
• Handheld High Res — 50MP files with better color and noise than the base sensor.
• Built-in ND and graduated ND filters — leave the tripod and filter kit at home.
• Pre-Capture for Wildlife — with the OM-1, this feature has made my life so much easier when photographing birds or fast action. It records frames before you fully press the shutter, meaning you don’t miss the decisive moment. Nikon thought it was so good they built their own version into the Z9 and Z8.

With my OM-3, I can shoot handheld one-second exposures, create high-res files, and even pull off long exposures without a single accessory. That’s freedom other systems just don’t give you.

A Lens Lineup That Makes Sense

The Micro Four Thirds lens ecosystem remains one of the most complete out there.

Yes, other systems have caught up with smaller primes, but MFT still offers a mix of compact, high-quality lenses that cover every focal length. And while people argue endlessly about depth of field equivalence, the reality is simple: f/2.8 is f/2.8.

An f/2.8 zoom on Micro Four Thirds gives me fast shutter speeds, excellent build quality, and optical performance that often surpasses budget f/5.6 full-frame zooms.

Proven Legacy of Innovation

Micro Four Thirds has always been a pioneer:

• Olympus/OM led the way with the best in-body stabilization for years and still does, it’s still the only main manufacturer that gives an actual rating for its weather sealing, and those groundbreaking live exposure modes still haven’t been matched by others.
• Panasonic pushed video forward with the GH line, changing what was possible for hybrid shooters.

Many features we now take for granted in full frame or APS-C cameras started right here.

Not Perfect — But Worth Preserving

I’m not saying Micro Four Thirds is the best system, or that everyone should shoot it. It has limitations, and the sale of Olympus’ imaging division raised real questions about the future.

But I’d argue it still deserves its place. Not out of brand loyalty, but because the more viable systems we have, the better it is for photographers. Choice breeds competition, and competition creates better cameras for all of us.

Some online voices want to write Micro Four Thirds off as “dead.” But why would anyone wish for less choice? I wouldn’t want Sony, Canon, Nikon, or Fujifilm to vanish either. Each system offers something unique, and sometimes the one that gets written off turns out to be the one you miss the most.

For me, Micro Four Thirds still matters in 2025 — not because it’s perfect, but because it makes me want to go out and shoot. And in the end, that’s what really counts.