Forum Index » Photography » Whats the opinion on micro 4/3s


Display Avatars Sort By:
Megan P
(meganpetruccelli) - F - M

Locale: San Francisco
Whats the opinion on micro 4/3s on 04/03/2014 13:42:33 MDT Print View

Hey Everyone,

I have been researching A LOT in here and in a bunch of different forums. I'm looking to either upgrade my camera or change my system all together.

I'll give you all the good info upfront so you know what I'm going for :-) I currently have a Canon T2i with a Canon 10-22mm, Canon 15-85mm, and a Canon 90mm Macro. I love this set up but it's really heavy and bulky. I would say 97% of my shots are landscapes, and I spend a substantial amount of time shooting the stars and making time lapses. I normally would carry the 10-22 on the camera at all times, but if I'm traveling I bring the 15-85 to avoid a 2nd lens. Mainly I am looking for some wide, fast lenses.

The moral of the story is that I have gone through over a dozen P&S camera for backpacking, my iPhone 5, hacking Canon P&S, etc and I'm always left in the wilderness wishing I had my SLR. (Mainly to shot the stars) I hardly ever bring my SLR backpacking bc it weighs 3+lbs, but that is the EXACT place I should ALWAYS have my camera. I do not need a full frame, that's excess for my needs, so I started thinking about instead of hacking a P&S, or carrying a 3lb camera, how about selling the old Canon SLR and switch to the micro 4/3s system. Seems kind of like a win win. Part of me seems like it's too good to be true.

I found this thread which seems to be the most helpful but there have been several new models released since then and that thread is more about what type of camera you need to get star trails then which camera to buy:
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/forums/thread_display.html?forum_thread_id=80145&disable_pagination=1

The 2 cameras I'm looking at are a Sony NEX or the Olympus OM-D E-M10. I know that the Sony is not a micro 4/3rds camera but it is just as small so I'm not sure what the difference is between the sony and micro 4/3rds cameras.

My questions are how does the image compare to my images now, on the old T2i? Will it be the same quality of night shots? How do micro 4/3s do in the nightshot relm?

Does anyone have experience with and olympus or nex and taking star photos? Any recommendations on specific cameras or lens?

Thanks in advance! I always look forward to hearing what everyone out there has to say about this stuff! Cheers! - Megan

RockLake_Plumas

Oregon

Edited by meganpetruccelli on 04/03/2014 13:43:19 MDT.

Brendan Swihart
(brendans) - MLife

Locale: Fruita CO
Re: Whats the opinion on micro 4/3s on 04/03/2014 15:22:34 MDT Print View

I'm of the opinion that if you want an interchangeable lens system that you might as well go aps-c (same sensor size as your canon but mirrorless bodies like the nex are much smaller). M43 lenses might be a little smaller, but just barely and they aren't really any cheaper. Hell, the A7/A7r are full frame and the body is the same size as the OMD. If you really want the flexibility of interchangeable lenses I'd probably go Nex or maybe Fuji. Nex might be more versatile lenswise for adapting third party/rangefinder lenses but the Fuji lenses are pretty excellent.

I'd check out the Sony RX100 as well. It's a pretty grown up P&S and can probably compare well with most m43 systems. Maybe search on flickr for RX100 night stars or something to see if it might fit the bill.

edit: I'd also recommend not discounting fixed lens options. Something like a Ricoh GR costs and is similar size and weight to a nice 28mm lens and you get a killer lens that is matched perfectly to the sensor.

Edited by brendans on 04/03/2014 15:25:16 MDT.

Paul Schwerdt
(flexabull) - F

Locale: State of Jefferson
NEX on 04/03/2014 15:30:04 MDT Print View

I switched from a Nikon D90 to a Sony NEX 5n last year, and haven't looked back.

I think the sensor is the same size in the NEX as in your Canon. (not positive though)

Megan P
(meganpetruccelli) - F - M

Locale: San Francisco
APS-C vs M43 on 04/03/2014 16:01:39 MDT Print View

"I'm of the opinion that if you want an interchangeable lens system that you might as well go aps-c (same sensor size as your canon but mirrorless bodies like the nex are much smaller). M43 lenses might be a little smaller, but just barely and they aren't really any cheaper."

What is the difference between the sony's and M43's? Other then the sony's are a little larger and have a bigger selection of lenses?

marc D
(mareco) - M

Locale: Scotland
APS-C vs M43 on 04/03/2014 16:40:45 MDT Print View

The Sony's have a bigger sensor, so generally more light catching ability (ie better at high ISO's). This can be important for night shots if you want a short exposure so that the stars dont trail, if you do want the star trails then its not so important.

I have the original M43 GF1 and it is only good up to ISO 800, I cant do Milky Way shots with it. The latest models are good to ISO 3200 I believe, the Sony's may be higher. The Sonys also use Zeiss glass, which can be quite special.

Megan P
(meganpetruccelli) - F - M

Locale: San Francisco
RX100 on 04/03/2014 17:11:39 MDT Print View

I'm intrigued by the RX100. The goal here is to get as small and light as possible while not compromising quality or functionality. I think the only thing the RX100 is lacking is the time-lapse ability and interchangeable lenses. The interchangeable lens thing isn't a huge deal especially for backpacking, but i would REALLY like to not sacrifice image quality of night shots and the ability to take a time-lapse is a HUGE plus. Anyone have experience with night shots with the RX100? and time-lapse functionality?

Rick M
(rmjapan) - F

Locale: Tokyo, Japan
Re: APS-C vs M43 on 04/03/2014 17:46:46 MDT Print View

Megan, do you make A4-sized or larger prints or do you mainly view your pics on a PC/TV monitor? Do you crop your images significantly? Do you hope one day to publish or exhibit your pics in a gallery?

If you your answer to all of these questions is "NO" then you might as well stay with a pocket-sized digicam. Olympus just announced its latest TG-3 waterproof camera which might be ideal for your purposes. It does interval exposures/star trails and has a pretty cool new macro mode.

Megan P
(meganpetruccelli) - F - M

Locale: San Francisco
Re: Re: APS-C vs M43 on 04/03/2014 17:57:48 MDT Print View

Hey Rick,

I don't think a pocket cam is going to suffice. Unfortunately! I wish there was a camera that would fit in my pocket!!!! :-)

Yes, I regularly blow my photos up to 11 x 14 or 16 x 20. Never gone bigger then 20 x 30 and don't really intend to. So far I have yet to have a problem with this old t2i blowing up that big. Image are nice and crisp. I don't intend to publish anything but have been in several galleries.

Any suggestion?

Rick M
(rmjapan) - F

Locale: Tokyo, Japan
Re: Re: Re: APS-C vs M43 on 04/03/2014 18:09:08 MDT Print View

In that case, definitely go with the larger APS-C or full frame sensor models out in the mirror-less format. Sorry I can't make any specific recommendations as I've been OK with lugging a dslr when quality matters and the waterproof Oly TG-1 for fun and water so haven't really kept up with the latest/greatest.

Bob Gross
(--B.G.--) - F

Locale: Silicon Valley
Re: Re: APS-C vs M43 on 04/03/2014 18:33:10 MDT Print View

I've never used any four/thirds camera, so I can't comment. However, the larger sensor sizes of full frame 24x36 or APS-C nearly always get better image quality. As was noted, the larger sensor sizes can collect low light easier. So, if you have to shoot in a darkened theatre, the larger sensors are the way to go. In a related manner, the larger sensors typically have as good or better color noise performance at the higher ISO settings. Often, it is lots better. Again, that favors the photographer shooting in a dark place.

A few of us are mostly wildlife shooters, so we are typically trying to stick monster lenses to the front to be able to reach out and snap that animal a quarter mile away. There, the APS-C sensor gives an apparent extra magnification of x1.5 or x1.6 as compared to full frame, so APS-C is the way to go for wildlife. I used the term "apparent" because it really doesn't magnify it, it just makes it seem as it does.

So, as always, you need to plan what kind of photography is your priority, and then get equipped for that.

--B.G.--

Megan P
(meganpetruccelli) - F - M

Locale: San Francisco
Sony NEX, Olympus OMD Or the RX100? on 04/03/2014 18:44:05 MDT Print View

Ya awesome advice. Thank you!

I'm definitely not in the market for a full frame camera. The dinky old t2i is great for me. It's just really big and heavy. I regularly blow up my prints but the sensor that is in the, almost 4 year old, t2i is more then adequate for that. The pictures are nice and crisp. A full frame would just be excessive for me.

My priority to to not sacrifice the quality of the image for a smaller camera. However i have a sneaking suspicion that with either the Sony NEX or the Olympus OMD the image quality would improve. Which just brings me to priority 2. Night shots. and Time Lapses would be a BIG PLUS.

So I guess my question is it what are people's experience with the Sony NEX and the Olympus OMD? Or the RX100? Anyone have any experience with night shots or time lapses? Anyone recommend a different camera?

Ian Van Halen
(IDBLOOM) - MLife

Locale: PNW
Re: Whats the opinion on micro 4/3s on 04/03/2014 19:15:46 MDT Print View

Hi Megan,

I'm in a similar position. I tried a smaller Canon P&S. While it has some really nice features, the sensor is way too small and it comes up short in low light situations and I've lost some awesome shots because of it (of course my lack of skill doesn't help either).

I'm in the process of researching mirror-less cameras. I think this gentleman does a great job of explaining the state of the market and discusses the pros and cons of the various sensor sizes, including and up to APS-C.

I'm still torn between the mirror-less options but the Sony NEX 6 & 7 are very tempting.

Of course I'm a big flake and as of right now I'm thinking about sticking with my DSLR and to start upgrading from my kit glass to something better like the AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR so I can hike with one lens instead of two since it'll handle the wide shots and still zoom in for far away wildlife but then I could upgrade to the Nikon D7100 but then I'd still be stuck with kit glass and I really need to get out of Auto and start shooting in manual mode so putting me behind a D7100 is about as pointless as putting me in a F1 car so yeah.... yeah... the 18-300 is probably the way to go and wait on the upgrade for a few years and maybe then I'll just jump up to a FX chassis which would be REALLY sweet but I can still see how awesome it would be to have a smaller mirror-less option that's capable of taking professional quality shots you know... because it's smaller and lighter... but now the Nikon 1 AW1 is weather proof which is REALLY great for backpacking but I keep hearing that their mirror-less options are great for sports but are not as great in low light situations which is more important to me... so... oops...

Oh dear... did I just say all of that out loud? I'll be over here in my time out chair.

Edited by IDBLOOM on 04/03/2014 19:41:55 MDT.

Ed Engel
(Doorknob) - F

Locale: West of what you think is west
Camera on 04/04/2014 10:41:40 MDT Print View

You may also want to look into the Fuji camera lineup.
They have some great lenses.

Michael L
(mpl_35) - MLife

Locale: The Palouse
Re: Whats the opinion on micro 4/3s on 04/04/2014 13:44:27 MDT Print View

Megan,

I'm kind of in the same boat as you. I have a d7100 (used to have d80) that I take everywhere hiking. I bought a Olympus TG-2 for fun at the pool and for portability, but it doesn't work for me for backpacking.

I am no considering the Sony a6000 (replaces the NEX lines)for a dedicated hiking camera. It is small and with the kit lens is down right tiny. I am thinking about getting it when released this month. I hope it can fit my needs.

Megan P
(meganpetruccelli) - F - M

Locale: San Francisco
Sony a7000 on 04/04/2014 14:09:29 MDT Print View

Hi Michael!

There are so many good option out there all around the same price point. I have no idea how to chose. If it was between 2 models I would go out and buy them and just try them but there seems to be SOOOOO many different models I'm at a loss.

Olympus OMD M5
Olympus OMD ME10
Sony NEX 7
Sony a6000
Sony RX100
Fuji X-M1
Fuji X-A1

What made you decide on the Sony a6000?

Brendan Swihart
(brendans) - MLife

Locale: Fruita CO
Re: Sony a7000 on 04/04/2014 15:34:15 MDT Print View

Nex 6/5 will probably be better/less noisy in low light than 7/a6000 due to lower pixel density. One advantage they also have over the Fujis you listed (though not true of x e2) and RX100 is a real viewfinder. I use a Sigma DP2m and get by without it but I really wish it had an EVF. If you're doing largish prints, which it sounds like you are, then I'm not sure the RX100 will cut it. I'm picky about prints, though, so some might disagree. I'd go nex 5n/6 or Fuji X-e2 based on your criteria. Buy used. Keh.com is super conservative with their grading and has great customer service. If you can find bargain rated stuff on there it's usually a good bet. Fredmiranda and getdpi forums are good for buying used as well.

Megan P
(meganpetruccelli) - F - M

Locale: San Francisco
THANKS on 04/04/2014 16:04:17 MDT Print View

Thanks Brendan! Super helpful advice! Everyone seems to be leaning towards the Sony's. Good to know!

Also about the used gear. I've been looking on Craigslist a bunch. You can get a Sony NEX5 with a 16-50 lens for $500 on Craigslist. Seems like a great deal!

Michael L
(mpl_35) - MLife

Locale: The Palouse
Re: Sony a7000 on 04/04/2014 16:10:04 MDT Print View

First Brendan makes some good points.

I decided for a variety of reasons. Weight, reviews, lens selection, controls. It was close between sony and Olympus for me. I wanted to go with Nikon since I'm ther already, but the cost isn't worth it.

Sony was lighter and cheaper than Olympus for the most part. Then I looked at which nex to get. I was considering the 7, but wanted to wait for the newest incarnation. I decided on the newest since it has a few new features/sensor. Then they dropped "nex" and changed the name!

But a used 7/5nex would work I think.

Several things I read that pushed one SLIGHTLY ahead:



http://hikeitlikeit.com/2012/backpacking-camera-breakdown-2012/

http://www.switchbacktravel.com/best-cameras-hiking-2014

http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/sony_nex-7_review#.Uz8rZPldWao

Megan P
(meganpetruccelli) - F - M

Locale: San Francisco
Sony a7000 on 04/04/2014 16:20:18 MDT Print View

Hey Michael,

What's the difference MAJOR difference between the NEX 6 and the a7000? There are so many reviews out there my head is spinning. I think I agree with you. It's between a Sony NEX 6 and the OMD E-M10.

I like the m10 because it's so small and nice. But I have yet to get my hands on a Sony. Whichever one takes better picture will be the one i go with.

Rick M
(rmjapan) - F

Locale: Tokyo, Japan
Re: Sony A7 on 04/04/2014 19:15:54 MDT Print View

So this thread got me curious about the latest and greatest and after a quick scan I don't get why you would not consider the full frame Sony A7 since the body is roughly same size as the Olies with demonstrably better IQ. Maybe a lens issue? Or cost?

Megan P
(meganpetruccelli) - F - M

Locale: San Francisco
A7 on 04/04/2014 19:57:25 MDT Print View

I'm not considering the A7 because I do not need a full frame camera in the slightest. I'm really happy with what I have now with the expectation of the weight. Any of the cameras we've discussed will be an improvement so why waste the money on something I don't need.

Not to mention it's $1000 more then any of the cameras I'm looking at. I would much prefer to spend that money on new tents, sleeping bags, stoves, and the plethora of other things I could do with $1000.

Michael L
(mpl_35) - MLife

Locale: The Palouse
Re: Sony a7000 on 04/04/2014 21:23:38 MDT Print View

Megan,
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3624269#forum-post-53110039

That covers it for me. I like what I hear about the menus and newer sensor. Xbut really i just want the newest. :)

Levon Jensen
(LevonJensen) - MLife

Locale: Canadian Rockies
Star shots. on 04/04/2014 23:12:31 MDT Print View

i used to use a sony nex 5n, and a 8mm rokinon f2.8 for star shots.

http://500px.com/photo/65801451 sample shot from my nex5n.

If you are on a budget, i would look into a used nex 5 or 5n, ( 5n has a better on off switch and that's about it. same sensor)

look into the new rokinon 10mm, the 8mm is a fisheye and the 10 should give a better FOV without the heavy distortion.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1039934-REG/rokinon_10m_e_10mm_f_2_8_ed_as.html

Rokinon , or samyang makes the best night photography lenses. and they are cheap.

The nex line lacks lenses, but for under 1000 you could have a top of the line night photography setup. which is less then most cameras.




If your not on a budget, I think the best compact camera at the moment, is the fuji xt-1, but its 1300 plus lenses.

And the A7-r ( the a7 is not worth buying) is the best camera for size and weight. if you have no budget, you would be looking at 2000 for the camera, and i think a wait on the rokinon lenses, not sure if they are out yet. and i think there 35mm is around a grand.

One more, if the weight of your old camera was ok, the canon 6d is the best star shot camera avaiable at the moment, and can be found for 1300-1400 , plus a rokinon 14mm f2.8 is the very best setup you can get.
If star shots matter, that will be your best kit.


Feel free to pm me, i just went through the process and decided on a Nikon d610, but image quality for night/star shots was my only concern, and i can feel the weight :P

Edited by LevonJensen on 04/04/2014 23:23:01 MDT.

Megan P
(meganpetruccelli) - F - M

Locale: San Francisco
THANK YOU! on 04/04/2014 23:28:37 MDT Print View

Hey Levon,

THANK YOU! Awesome info, and exactly what I was looking for.

"The nex line lacks lenses, but for under 1000 you could have a top of the line night photography setup. which is less then most cameras."

Are you referring to a NEX 5 or 5n with the rokinon 10mm? That is the exact lens that I was looking at and I was wondering about samyang so thanks for the info!

I think if I changed I would go to a lighter and smaller set up. I just think I would use it more all around. Although I would LOVE to get both :-)

Levon Jensen
(LevonJensen) - MLife

Locale: Canadian Rockies
reply on 04/05/2014 16:22:11 MDT Print View

yes the nex 5 or 5n ( or even the 5t, 3n to 3c ) they all use the same sensor i believe, and the rokinon/bower/samyang, 10mm f2.8. you could also look at there other lenses all are the best for the cost for landscapes.


And yes i find i use my lighter setup a lot more . and almost dread bringing my new gear out.

Jacob D
(JacobD) - F

Locale: North Bay
Re: Sony a7000 on 04/07/2014 08:59:59 MDT Print View

Megan,

I think you'd be well served by either the NEX 5N, 6, 7, a5000, or a6000. These APS-C sensors offer some of the best image quality you can find. For long exposures, especially night shots m4/3 is going to show its weakness, otherwise differences in IQ are probably not worth worrying about much.

Fuji and Olympus are where you want to be looking if you're leaning toward m4/3 at the end of the day.

A good friend of mine switched from a full frame Pentax DSLR to the Oly E-M5 and has been mostly happy with it but he likes to shoot star trails and other long exposure shots and I know he's been a little frustrated with excessive hot pixels and noise. Granted that sensor is starting to show its age now, but I think comparing modern APS-C to modern m4/3 it's generally going to be the case.

Here are a couple of older blog posts that might be of some use to you...
http://hikeitlikeit.com/2012/photography-and-backpacking-8/
http://hikeitlikeit.com/2013/olympus-omd-em5-impressions/


I still find my 5N to be a great camera. I recently purchased an RX100 to take on runs and it's pretty impressive too... but it can't hold highlight or shadow detail like the 5N can. I'll be posting a writeup about it soon, as well as some thoughts on the full frame mirrorless and why I'm not switching to them (as if anyone really cared :)

TL;DR... 5N can be had for a song. Just sayin!

Edited by JacobD on 04/07/2014 09:00:50 MDT.

Stuart .
(lotuseater) - M

Locale: Where the air is thin
My head hurts on 04/07/2014 09:56:02 MDT Print View

The proliferation of models from each manufacturer means I have regularly window shopped but not replaced my Canon 20D from about a decade ago. There's too much choice and not enough clarity in how each model is positioned. Add to that the arms race to release newer versions every few months, and the quandary becomes "should I buy something that'll be obsolete soon" vs "am I buying an unproven lemon"?

I like the look of the Sony NEX / Ax000 models, but their choice of prime lens focal lengths leaves me cold. As a former Leica film shooter (woah, those prices have gone into the stratosphere in the last 15 years!), I became really comfortable with 21mm, 35mm and 50mm. Sony have some curious gaps - their full-frame equivalent focal lengths work out to be 24mm, 30mm, 52.5mm and 75mm. They might not sound all that significant, but there's an unlearning process to go through.

Can anyone convince me that any of the Sony APS-C zooms that are small enough for backpacking offer good enough image quality? I long ago gave up kit zooms, and f/3.5 or f/4 seems like a horribly slow maximum aperture. Or is there an aftermarket alternative that beats Sony hands down in the FL ranges I mention above?

Jacob D
(JacobD) - F

Locale: North Bay
Re: My head hurts on 04/07/2014 10:58:04 MDT Print View

Stuart, there are quite a few lenses now for the E-mount. Have you looked into the Zeiss primes at all? Sigma? Samyang? Not to mention you can mount just about any manual focus legacy lenses with adapters - and depending on the sensor, many rangefinder lenses as well.

As for zooms... not really my thing. The Sony zooms are not very impressive. The Zeiss 16-70 has been pretty well received, but quality control issues exist (which is not all that uncommon). Phillip Reeve is a friend of mine, and a very capable photog. He reviewed the lens a few months ago.

This thread being about m4/3 opinion, I'd say there are options there as well if you want those focal lengths. You'll just have to weigh everything out. If you're worried about buying unproven bodies... then don't :) Problem solved! Buying a generation back has never bothered me, especially when it saved me some cash.

James Couch
(JBC) - M

Locale: Cascade Mountains
Re: My head hurts on 04/07/2014 21:22:20 MDT Print View

You are looking at it all backwards Stuart. Quit looking at cameras for a bit! Look at lenses, find the lenses you want - and then look for a camera that fits the lenses!

Bob Gross
(--B.G.--) - F

Locale: Silicon Valley
Re: Re: My head hurts on 04/07/2014 21:43:29 MDT Print View

I agree, look for lenses first. Over a long period of time, your investment in good lenses will prove better than the investment in camera bodies. A good camera body may be semi-obsolete after several years, but good lenses stay around longer. I'm using Canon EF lenses that I purchased in 1997.

--B.G.--

Stuart .
(lotuseater) - M

Locale: Where the air is thin
Re: My head hurts on 04/07/2014 22:12:35 MDT Print View

Good feedback Jacob, Jim and Bob. Zooms leave me cold. Buying a system based on the lens was how I wound up with a Leica M4 rangefinder that's older than me. Before digital that suited me down to the ground. I'm simply not able to make the leap to a digital M to bring my one and only remaining Leica M lens, a 4th generation pre-ASPH 35mm Summicron, into the 21st century.

I like fast primes, and compact systems. Which led me to look carefully at m4/3 and specifically the Panasonic 20/1.7 or Pana-pseudo-leica 25/1.4, and the Olympus 45/1.8. However as this thread pointed out the smaller sensor gives up a lot vs APS-C, and that's why I briefly considered Sony NEX. Time for some more lens research.

Garrett McLarty
(gmac) - F - M

Locale: PNW, Seattle
full frame to m43 on 04/14/2014 08:46:24 MDT Print View

Just my two cents.

My camera progression; D40, D3100, D7000, 6D, OMD-EM1.

Going through the APS-C line to full frame and then to the Olympus EM1, I wish that the Olympus would have been around 10 years ago. My two frustrations with APS-C were lack of manual controls and high iso noise. The problem with full frame and APS-C was size. If the EM10 had been out when I bought the EM1, I very likely would have gotten it as it is smaller and cheaper.

Yes there are some compromises with m43 vs full frame image quality, but not enough for me to want to carry such a large camera. I love the m43 as it does everything I need and is small enough to carry. If you are wondering about it'd capabilities, check out this link. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1127925/247

Peace

Jacob D
(JacobD) - F

Locale: North Bay
Re: Re: My head hurts on 04/14/2014 12:14:54 MDT Print View

Stuart,

Leica is proud of their product line, and always has been. Great stuff for those who can afford it. It's worth noting that some (many) of the Leica and Leica-compatible rangefinder lenses can be mounted to NEX bodies via an adapter, and will work great. I'm not sure yet how this translates to the new "NEX" (no longer NEX) bodies, but for a very small and high quality manual-focus system... I love it and use rangefinder lenses exclusively on my NEX.


Anyway... I didn't mean to imply that m4/3 gives up a lot vs. APS-C. It really doesn't give up much at all. Compared against full frame, the differences are more obvious but modern m4/3 has become very impressive (Olympus pretty much proved this with the OM-D E-M5).

Regarding Garrett's comment above about lack of manual control and amount of noise with APS-C... I'm not quite following (?) Controls would be only related to the camera body, have nothing to do with the sensor size. On the other hand, I can't think of a body from any manufacturer that offers and APS-C sensor and lacks full manual control, hence confused face :) Regarding noise, if comparing same-generation sensors, APS-C would have more noise than Full Frame, but less than m4/3 as a general rule. HE seems happy with his m4/3, so again not sure how to interpret his remark about noise (Garrett?). If you look at the performance of modern sensors compared to those from 5 or 6 years ago, the ISO performance has advanced so much that noise is *almost* not worth mentioning, relatively speaking anyway. I would only be concerned about that if you focus heavily on long exposures and low light photography.

Edited by JacobD on 04/14/2014 12:16:14 MDT.

Garrett McLarty
(gmac) - F - M

Locale: PNW, Seattle
Clarification on 04/14/2014 21:15:23 MDT Print View

Sorry about the possible confusion in the last post.

To clarify, on the first 2 Nikons I owned (D40 and D3100), you have to dive into the menus to change several frequently used settings. That prompted me to move to the D7000 which has dual dials and several more buttons. The D7000 did everything that I wanted except that I was still unhappy with the noise at high iso, and tempted by the image quality of a full frame. The Canon 6D was a lot of fun to shoot. I like its controls. (one thing that Canon did on the 6D was put almost all the controls on the right side so you don't need a second hand to change settings very often). The Canon 6D also has amazingly good high iso performance. The downside to all of these camera setups with multiple lenses was size and weight. I hated carrying them. My wife used them only rarely because of size. Many times hiking and backpacking, we only took a little lumix point and shoot.

Due to the size and weight issue, I began to look for an alternative. I tried Fuji and nex but was not happy with the external controls, and lack of viewfinder, autofocus. When I saw the pictures people were taking with the OMD series, and tried them out in the store, I was sold. The OMD series give you DSLR like controls and image quality in a very small package.

Yes there are other small bodies like the Fuji (XT-1 is improved from what I tried) or the Sony. However, APS-C and Full frame bodies can be small but the lenses will not be nearly as small as the m43.

My advice for anyone making a decision like this is to go to a camera store where you can play with each of the bodies that you are interested in along with a lens or two and then make the choice.

Hopefully this clears up any confusion from my last post.

Peace

Anton Solovyev
(solovam) - M

Locale: Colorado, Utah
m43 on 04/14/2014 22:37:22 MDT Print View

m43 is great for outdoor use. The difference between an APS-C DSLR and a m43 camera for me was that the DSLR always stayed home, whereas the m43 camera travels with me.

With a pancake prime a m43 camera is very light, compact, has no moving parts and has a great image quality. There are a lot of lens choices for m43, more than other compact interchangeable lens systems.

I have had Olympus E-PL2, upgraded to GX-1 and looking to upgrade to GX-7 or OMD in the future. I have a Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 prime (~$180 on Ebay). That system makes a tiny package.

Recently I got a Panasonic 7-14mm f/4.0 (~$950). It's a great lens for landscape shots and tight spaces, like canyons. I printed images taken with this lens to 20x30 size and there's still room to print larger, I believe.

The choice between Panasonic and Olympus for me is better quality out of camera JPEGs in Olympus and better support for Panasonic lenses in Panasonic bodies.

***

I am not an expert by any means, but I am very happy with m43, first time in a long series of various cameras I have used. If I were to think about a different system, I would be looking at an "enthusiast" type full frame DSLR, where there would be a noticeable increase in image quality.

Edited by solovam on 04/14/2014 22:42:15 MDT.

Megan P
(meganpetruccelli) - F - M

Locale: San Francisco
I DID IT! on 04/30/2014 11:05:20 MDT Print View

I did it. I pulled the trigger and bought a OMD e-M10. I'm REALLY excited!

Looking for suggestions for lenses. I didn't buy the kit lens and I instead upgraded to the 14-42 EZ lens which is the same as the kit lens but a fraction of the size. It's TINY. I wanted to get the smallest package I could to start.

I'm looking for a wide angle now. That's good for night shots. There are quite a few out there so I was wondering if anyone has suggestions. I'm open to a prime lens but I definitely like the idea of a wide zoom. Anyways.. any suggestions for a good sharp wide angle for stars?

I had a 10-22mm for my Canon and loved it. Really nice lens.

THANKS SO MUCH!