login info join!
Forums > Photography Talk > Micro Four Thirds Dilemma Search   Reply
Photographer
You Can Call Me Pierre
Posts: 735
Montreal, Quebec, Canada


I was an early adapter with E-P1, G1, GF1 and GH1 but now that I have the D600, I am smitten with FX.

Is there any reason to hang on to Oly-Pan?

The D7000 also hangs in the balance, which would be more practical as a backup since it is the same lens mount.
Dec 05 12 05:27 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Tom Nguyen Studio
Posts: 411
Shakopee, Minnesota, US


Micro 4/3rds would make for great travel cameras if you want to travel light and still get decent image quality (depending on your lens collection).  Your cameras are older generation ones, and if it doesn't bother you to keep using them, I say why not?  In an extreme pinch, if your D600/D7000 fails during a shoot, you still have backups smile    I just got lured into micro 4/3rds early this year, now have an Oly OMD-EM5 with the Sony sensor--it is significantly better in image quality to early generation sensors of micro 4/3rds.  I have so much fun with it bringing it everywhere, I shoot with it more than with my Canon DSLR setup.
Dec 05 12 06:09 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Ken Williams Photo
Posts: 3,067
Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin, US


Photo Samurai wrote:
Micro 4/3rds would make for great travel cameras if you want to travel light and still get decent image quality (depending on your lens collection).  Your cameras are older generation ones, and if it doesn't bother you to keep using them, I say why not?  In an extreme pinch, if your D600/D7000 fails during a shoot, you still have backups smile    I just got lured into micro 4/3rds early this year, now have an Oly OMD-EM5 with the Sony sensor--it is significantly better in image quality to early generation sensors of micro 4/3rds.  I have so much fun with it bringing it everywhere, I shoot with it more than with my Canon DSLR setup.

I was an early adopter of the 4/3 format with the e1 shooting side by side with Canon MkII 1d and 1ds.  I really like the Oly bodies.  They were very tight, the menus were intuitive and it felt good in my hand.   And their pro level lenses, particularly the 35-100 and 14-35 were optically a superior product.  It was nice to have both formats, although a bit expensive to run two systems.  I continued to run both systems side by side until the news of Oly's debacle with the laundering funds came out.  At that point, I felt there was too much uncertainty of their direction and I didn't want to risk further investment with them.  I've heard great things about the OMD and I'm certain it's a great body.  Hopefully Oly will be able to continue to produce the solid bodies and lenses they always have.

Dec 05 12 07:46 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jon Winkleman Photo
Posts: 86
New York, New York, US


Amos Chapple shoots with micro four thirds for Italian Vanity Fair. The pixel peeping photo editors still love his work. There are some early adopter pros using top of the line MFT for fashion, product, wedding and other professional shoots. It all depends on what you are doing. For most uses the MFT format regarding resolution, dynamic range and depth of field is fine.
http://www.wirefresh.com/is-micro-four- … er-is-yes/

Also Giulio Sciorio is a big advocate of MFT for his full time professional business. The following is a must read for pros regarding MFT and their clients.
http://www.smallcamerabigpicture.com/ho … vironment/

Advantages are the camera is less obtrusive and newer models are very quiet. Easier to shoot candid or stealth. For some rugged outdoor photography, it is easier carrying a smaller body and lenses. I can carry a Panny 35-100 f2.8 plus 3 or 4 other lenses and have less weight and volume than carrying a single equivalent Canon 70-200 f2.8. This is the biggest development. MFT sensors and bodies have been good but initially the professional quality of glass was lacking. However as the pro-MFT market, especially in video, has grown exponentially, there are many pro-level MFT lenses on and coming onto thew market.

In the future as electronic viewfinder technology improves, SLR's will be a thing of the past. The mirror will not be needed and optics are improved by removing it. However it would probably be replaced by full frame mirrorless.

The biggest advantage is that the GH2 and the GH3 are superior cameras for video. They have some advantage over Canon. As new technology and media changes the business there is more demand for photographers who can deliver both stills and multimedia. MFT hybrids are a great solution for multimedia assignments.

Last view Will Crockett's video forum with a panel of pros who use both DSLRs and MFT for assignments or exclusively MFT.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj-QLmy7 … Nw&index=7
Dec 09 12 02:16 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Raoul Isidro Images
Posts: 5,975
Sydney, New South Wales, Australia


gl-amour wrote:
Is there any reason to hang on to Oly-Pan?

With a cheap $15 full metal adapter, you could use ALL your Nikon lenses on the Oly.

Great also as a back up video camera.

.

Dec 09 12 03:57 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Chris Macan
Posts: 12,789
HAVERTOWN, Pennsylvania, US


gl-amour wrote:
Is there any reason to hang on to Oly-Pan?

Size... Sometimes smaller and quieter is better.

Dec 10 12 06:49 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jon Winkleman Photo
Posts: 86
New York, New York, US


I also like using legacy lenses on my GH2. Without the mirror box you can use practically any lens on your camera. There are many great rangefinder lenses at a good price. Some of the Canon RF glass from the 60's was as good as if not optically a bit better than the Leica's of that time though they are mechanically more primitive. My favorite portrait lens is a Canon RF 85 1.8. It's a 170mm equivalent on full frame. Perfect for head and shoulders.

If you have the budget Leica M glass works on MFT. The new Zeiss M mounts are also great.

I will be expanding my gear to include a larger format body but I will keep my MFT.
Dec 10 12 09:35 am  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Zack Zoll
Posts: 2,270
Glens Falls, New York, US


I'm an NEX user, but I use my Sony for EVERYTHING that isn't sports or weddings.  If you're going to use Olympus/Panny glass, then the only real advantage over a D7000 is size; otherwise the D7000 is a better camera in just about every way.

On the other hand, if you don't mind manual focus, then you can adapt lenses to the mirrorless cameras that are either much cheaper than their AF versions, or just plain better, or occasionally both.  I have a several German lenses for my NEX.  Good luck making that happen on a traditional SLR without shelling out the cost of a good used car.
Dec 10 12 08:08 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 5,481
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Zack Zoll wrote:
I'm an NEX user, but I use my Sony for EVERYTHING that isn't sports or weddings.  If you're going to use Olympus/Panny glass, then the only real advantage over a D7000 is size; otherwise the D7000 is a better camera in just about every way.

On the other hand, if you don't mind manual focus, then you can adapt lenses to the mirrorless cameras that are either much cheaper than their AF versions, or just plain better, or occasionally both.  I have a several German lenses for my NEX.  Good luck making that happen on a traditional SLR without shelling out the cost of a good used car.

Is the d7000 really clearly better. The dpreview comparison tool seems to show the om-d as fairly evenly matched. Only one review sure I know but they do this all day every day for s living.....

Dec 10 12 08:47 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 5,481
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Zack Zoll wrote:
I'm an NEX user, but I use my Sony for EVERYTHING that isn't sports or weddings.  If you're going to use Olympus/Panny glass, then the only real advantage over a D7000 is size; otherwise the D7000 is a better camera in just about every way.

On the other hand, if you don't mind manual focus, then you can adapt lenses to the mirrorless cameras that are either much cheaper than their AF versions, or just plain better, or occasionally both.  I have a several German lenses for my NEX.  Good luck making that happen on a traditional SLR without shelling out the cost of a good used car.

Is the d7000 really clearly better. The dpreview comparison tool seems to show the om-d as fairly evenly matched. Only one review sure I know but they do this all day every day for s living.....

Dec 10 12 08:47 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
You Can Call Me Pierre
Posts: 735
Montreal, Quebec, Canada


Although I am impressed with current MFT offerings, the D7000 obsoleted the first generation Olympus and Panasonic.
Dec 10 12 08:54 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Virtual Studio
Posts: 5,481
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


gl-amour wrote:
Although I am impressed with current MFT offerings, the D7000 obsoleted the first generation Olympus and Panasonic.

Agreed. I have an epl1. Great camera, shoot with it all the time, clearly not as good as a medium level dslr in many ways; however it kicks ass for portability.

My om-d is quite s lot better than that though.

Dec 10 12 09:10 pm  Link  Quote 
Photographer
Jon Winkleman Photo
Posts: 86
New York, New York, US


Zack Zoll wrote:
I'm an NEX user, but I use my Sony for EVERYTHING that isn't sports or weddings.  If you're going to use Olympus/Panny glass, then the only real advantage over a D7000 is size; otherwise the D7000 is a better camera in just about every way.

On the other hand, if you don't mind manual focus, then you can adapt lenses to the mirrorless cameras that are either much cheaper than their AF versions, or just plain better, or occasionally both.  I have a several German lenses for my NEX.  Good luck making that happen on a traditional SLR without shelling out the cost of a good used car.

The IQ difference between top of the line MFT's and the D7000 is negligible in pixel peeping tests and nothing in real world shooting. To be fair The D7000 is Nikon's flagship DX format camera. You can't compare it to an EP-1 or even a GF-1. When compared to the 2 year old flagship GH2, the D7000 was evenly matched on still images when using comparable quality glass. The video of the GH2 is superior to the video optimized D7000. The current flagship MFT bodies., Oly OMD-5 and the Panny GH3, blow both Nikon and Canon's mirrorless systems out of the water and hold their own against Nikon's DX bodies.

The OMD-5 has very effective 5 axis in camera image stabilization that works with any lens. GH3 can produce HD video that meets network standards and when blown up on a theater screen produces and image comparable to the $10-50K video cameras used in independent film making.

I won't compare it to a D4 or D800 any more than you could make a fair comparison between the IQ of Nikon's top pro-bodies and a medium format Hasselblad (with the exception of high ISO)

As pro-level glass for MFT is released, a growing number of pro's whose commercial clients do not need to print murals and are using printing or display media with lower dynamic range are finding that the top of the line MFT's better serve their needs than behemoth full frames or medium format. Medium format slide film beat all digital. However most magazines have a dynamic range of 4-6. My GH2 has a dynamic range around 11.5. Home computer screens have a limited color gamut and dynamic range.

Dec 10 12 11:59 pm  Link  Quote 
guide forum
Photographer
Robb Mann
Posts: 10,007
Baltimore, Maryland, US


Ive followed the m43 platform since launch, but never bought in. I like Panny's UI, and ive been very happy with my lx3/5. For me, the m43 cameras always came up short in image quality and lens selection. Even now they have few fast primes.

I recently picked up a Nikon V1 setup, figured id try it, and B&H's fire-sale pricing made it too tempting to pass up.  (You can now get the V1 with 10-30 lens for $299). Im impressed with the system. Focus is DSLR fast. Images have a quality to them that is very film-like. I also got the adapter to use F-mount glass, and im enjoying that too.

The V1 is now my travel/location scouting camera.
Dec 11 12 03:19 am  Link  Quote 
  Search   Reply



main | browse | casting/travel | forums | shout box | help | advertising | contests | share | join the mayhem

more modelmayhem on: | | | edu

©2006-2014 ModelMayhem.com. All Rights Reserved.
MODEL MAYHEM is a registered trademark.
Toggle Worksafe Mode: Off | On
Terms | Privacy | Careers