Hey all! I've got a query for the wisdom of the FM crowd. I've been shooting with a D700 for a while and have been spoiled by its ability to shoot in near-dark situations. I want something more portable to carry around with me just for fun, small trips, etc when I can't bring the D700. A number of people told me the EP3 would be a good camera for that, but thus far it's really fallen short of my expectations.
So... are there any smaller cameras out there that come close to the D700 in terms of quality High ISO? (Quick focus would be nice too, but I know I'm asking a lot here.)
Just the OM-d. Much better noise performance. Slightly worse than a D7000 in all respects but not by a horrible amount. The new epl5 or em2 use the same sensor but don't have the same level of IBIS which can gain you a stop more if your subject is static.
^ Agree completely. Love the OM-D compared to previous M4/3 models including the EP-3 which I think was horrible with noise. The new sensor is much better and of course the IBIS is amazing...
The OM-D is much worse than the D700 at any ISO. Sure, the noise isn't more like ~2 stops behind, but the colors are fading very fast in low light and never comes close to the D700 even at ISO 200. I though I could live with the OM-D and some nice primes, but I couldn't stand the lesser IQ so I have both.
That said, it's a great camera, but there is no free lunch. A larger sensor will beat it any day.
If your priority is high ISO in a smaller camera, I think the consensus is the Fuji XP-1 and XE-1 are at the top of the heap right now. Of course, they have other quirks that you'll want to make sure you can live with.
Makten wrote:
The OM-D is much worse than the D700 at any ISO. Sure, the noise isn't more like ~2 stops behind, but the colors are fading very fast in low light and never comes close to the D700 even at ISO 200. I though I could live with the OM-D and some nice primes, but I couldn't stand the lesser IQ so I have both.
That said, it's a great camera, but there is no free lunch. A larger sensor will beat it any day.
+1 (except I don't have both but decided to return the OM-D)
NX20 + clean and downsample or that Fuji XP-1. Downside is that both are not exactly small.
m4/3s are nice, but high ISO isnt strong point of them. But E-PL5 packs a lot of quality in very small body. Another thing is, that there are lens like 25mm f0.95, which isnt bad for fighting with high ISO.
I got rid of my D700 and went with an OM-D. Loved the D700, but the weight with lenses was just too much for what I do. I didn't use the D700 for low light as much as I thought I would and the OM-D fit right in very well. My Fuji X-E1 is arriving today and I can't wait to do some testing this weekend between the two. Both are very different in capabilities, but I prefer the form of the X-E1 a little more than the OM-D.
These smaller mirrorless cameras are wonderful if they fit your shooting style. I'll never go back to a full size DSLR.
Makten wrote:
The OM-D is much worse than the D700 at any ISO. Sure, the noise isn't more like ~2 stops behind, but the colors are fading very fast in low light and never comes close to the D700 even at ISO 200. I though I could live with the OM-D and some nice primes, but I couldn't stand the lesser IQ so I have both.
That said, it's a great camera, but there is no free lunch. A larger sensor will beat it any day.
At prints upto 13x19 (my largest print size), you would be pretty hard pressed to find any difference in image quality. Saying that it's "much" worse at any iso is like saying the D700 is much worse than the D800 at any iso.
I'd say that if your looking for something significantly more portable, the EM-5 isn't the best choice. Its a fine camera, and it is smaller/lighter than the D700 (I've owned both) but the EM-5 still ends up being a decent size, especially if you add the grip, which I think is a must have, and some of the more desirable glass such as the 25mm f1.4, which again, I'd say is a must have.
It will be a weight savings yes, but its still not going to fit into pocket or anything, nor really be something you want to walk around with around you neck all day. You can end up carrying a smaller shoulder bag than the D700, but your still going to have a shoulder bag.
What I found made me the happiest in terms of a small portable camera was the Sony RX100. I went through the X100, XPro, NEX5n and NEX7 as well as the EM-5 before realizing the main issue I had with all those CSC's wasn't the IQ or anything else, but simply that they didn't represent a big enough change from what I was looking to get away from when out using my DSLR gear.
It wasn't an issue of having this type of IBIS or that amount of glass options, it was simply that I often didn't want to carry the darn things with me and would leave the gear at home. Huge waste having thousands in glass for my so called "casual" camera that always ended up feeling like "work" when taking it.
Got the RX100 and there was no looking back, sold everything else. Finally had a little camera I could slip into my pocket and actually was taking places, which lead to actually taking more photos and getting back to the fun of photography.
The Rx100 is darn good for its size too, and while its not going to match a D700 at high ISO, at lower ISO, its 20meg resolution and pretty nice lens is seldom going to leave you wanting as far as IQ goes. 28mm equiv and f1.8 or f2.0 and its got a quite nice Zeiss-like way of rendering to it.
Worth checking out IMHO and at just $650, its also rather nice not having to be too worried about it on casual outings. Certainly would suck to loose it etc, but it certainly gives me less to concern myself with if I'm out for dinner/drinks with friends etc than knowing I've got a shoulder bag with $2000+ of m4/3 gear I have to hope I don't leave unattended at a booth etc.
String wrote:
Well then Makten, if you can see "significant" differences on a 1024 wide web image I have to congratulate you on a pair of amazing golden eyes!
If we're not doing a bokeh test, I would put up a $100 to say that in a double blind test, nobody will be able to reliably point out which was the D700 shot vs OM-D for a given scene post processed by myself in 1024 width.
Another thing is, that there are lens like 25mm f0.95, which isnt bad for fighting with high ISO.
. I have both Canon and Nikon in addition to Olympus OM-D.