MarcG19 Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.6 #2 · p.6 #2 · Anyone else disappointed with their mirrorless system? | |
Random thought inspired by this thread:
re: nobody complained about DSLRs being to heavy a few years ago, I would disagree. I always found my D90 plus even a few lenses a bit heavy to carry around all day, say, hiking or walking around a city. More to the point, it plus a 10-24, 18-55, and a 55-200 (to say nothing of bigger leneses) took up half of a carry-on bag. Smaller, lighter m4/3 bodies plus smaller zooms (for those who like those) or 2-3 even smaller, high quality primes (my preference) could fit in military BDU-style cargo pants without issues.
I would also add this is a long term trend in photography. No one complained about view cameras being too heavy prior to the invention of 35mm cameras, too. 20 years ago, large format, medium format, 35mm and even smaller formats had their advantages - you chose formats based on your income, your needs, the level of automation, etc. I see sensors and camera specs the same way: from the best sensors out there (medium format digital) you compromise on size for portability and (in the case of the best DSLRs) features. You have to decide what your needs are - not everyone wants/needs medium format quality. Smaller mirrorless sensors (4/3 and Nikon 1) have their place, it's a matter of what tradeoffs you want for size/price/features.
(FWIW I get perfectly fine 8X10 prints out of my OM-D EM-5 at ISO 6400, and even at ISO 800 I had no problems making 10X30 prints from my D90, an antiquated sensor compared to the EM-5. Besides, at least for me, the vast majority of my photography does not involve rapidly moving subjects and is posted to the internet. The portability of the EM-5 gives it an advantage for most of my hobbyist shooting, and I really can't imagine using a better sensor. In this context, a full frame sensor would be overkill and I only found 1-2 stops improvement from the D600, which was not enough to persuade me to keep it).
|