Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4       5       end
  

Archive 2017 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear

  
 
RobCD
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


walts.photo wrote:
Just dropped Sony because handling and the "feel" is just not there yet. Is M43 any better?


Maybe you could explain where your "there" is unless ypu are saying that it isn't "there" for anyone and we jist didn't know it.



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:01 AM
walts.photo
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


I neglected to add the critical "for me" in the phrase "feel is not there".

For me, the key reason I went back to Nikon is simple. When I pick up a Canikon FF body with lens, it feels good to me. When I pick up an Sony FF body with lens, it does not feel good to me.

Silly reason, I know. But, this is my hobby. I do it for pleasure.



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:09 AM
SoundHound
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


Sony has so much performances an features built into their RX10 and RX100 lines that I use them instead of M343, or even APS C, when I use other than FF.


Sep 14, 2017 at 09:37 AM
mttran
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


SoundHound wrote:
Sony has so much performances an features built into their RX10 and RX100 lines that I use them instead of M343, or even APS C, when I use other than FF.


+1, IQ and flexible size on all sony sensor(s) format with universal mount does fit my needs.



Sep 14, 2017 at 10:42 AM
coase
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


I started with M43 but mostly divesting myself of it. I have been keeping it as an adjunct to Sony for telephoto and very long reach as the giant zoom lenses that all the FF makers have seem too cumbersome for me. When I want to travel light I'll bring the Olympus and a zoom lens or two or even smaller just the 45 f2 and a Rokinon fisheye.

Otherwise I bring a Sony FF cam and an Rx100m2 as a backup.



Sep 14, 2017 at 10:47 AM
Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


If I was more into video I'd be looking closely at the Panasonic GH5, especially with the new anamorphic modes. But alas I primarily shoot stills, and am very rarely focal length limited so wouldn't gain anything going m43. For IQ/weight ratio nothing beats the A7 + 35/2.8 (well except for the RX1R II).

Edited on Sep 14, 2017 at 10:50 AM · View previous versions



Sep 14, 2017 at 10:48 AM
balga
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


i think m43 has yes the advantage of weight but if you seek similar subject isolation you'll end up carrying pretty much the same glass and spending pretty much the same.
M43 lenses might be super sharp, but I find myself preferring more the look of the FF; and when I started seeking more versatility and reach I noticed how a simple 24-240 would give me better looks than most m43 zooms.
Take this photo for instance:
https://flic.kr/p/YqCHpq


To take this same shot with same isolation I would have needed one of the PRO zooms, which cost and weight, and have none of the versatility of a single do it all lens.

Plus Sony has another advantage: the tri navi wheels, which are super useful to nail the exposure I want to achieve.

Not that m43 is just garbage, but since the 90% of the photos I shoot are between 28 and 105mm, I don't want to sacrifice the FF looks for 100g less weight, or 500g that day when I need the long Tele..



Sep 14, 2017 at 10:48 AM
rw11
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


BTW - Panasonic bodies have a focus control function that comes very close to emulating the famed Nikon defocus control lenses (DF)


Sep 14, 2017 at 02:54 PM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


walts.photo wrote:
Just dropped Sony because handling and the "feel" is just not there yet. Is M43 any better?


Depends on the camera and your personal preferences. To me, the EM II is better in that regard than any Sony I had. On the other hand, I couldn’t get used to any Panasonic camera.



Sep 14, 2017 at 04:04 PM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


Steve Spencer wrote:
For hobbyists I think m4/3rds can make a lot of sense. It is small, convenient to use, and generally produces nice results. It can also be quite inexpensive. There are some inherent drawbacks to the small sensor--less dynamic range, more noise, and less ability to get shallow depth of the field being the big ones, but if you value small size and you are on a tight budget it can be a good option. It can also produce fine results in the right hands. See Bobby Tan's work with m4/3rds for examples of just how good the results can
...Show more

While I generally agree, I think you should mention that most top-notch MFT lenses can be used wide open, while most FF lenses cannot (unless you spend a lot more money). Also, the quality of the bokeh is generally excellent on the top MFT lenses.



Sep 14, 2017 at 04:10 PM
johnvanr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


walts.photo wrote:
I neglected to add the critical "for me" in the phrase "feel is not there".

For me, the key reason I went back to Nikon is simple. When I pick up a Canikon FF body with lens, it feels good to me. When I pick up an Sony FF body with lens, it does not feel good to me.

Silly reason, I know. But, this is my hobby. I do it for pleasure.


Not silly at all. Why shoot with a camera you don’t enjoy using?



Sep 14, 2017 at 04:12 PM
walts.photo
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


I'd guess most pros decide on equipment that helps their job rather than provide them with pleasure. If they coincide, fine, but the job is the priority.


Sep 14, 2017 at 05:10 PM
Adam73
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


walts.photo wrote:
I neglected to add the critical "for me" in the phrase "feel is not there".

For me, the key reason I went back to Nikon is simple. When I pick up a Canikon FF body with lens, it feels good to me. When I pick up an Sony FF body with lens, it does not feel good to me.

Silly reason, I know. But, this is my hobby. I do it for pleasure.


I don't think its a silly reason. I shoot with a Sony A9, A7Rii, A7ii and none of them are very comfortable to hold. They feel small in my hands and a bit slippery. I can imagine how people with big hands would feel. I shoot with Nikon D4 and D750 and they feel secure in my hand. I shoot with both systems. I do sometimes feel like I will drop the Sony trying to get it out of my "Peak Designs" clip. I just love the image quality, technology, focus points reaching to the outer parts of the sensor that I don't mind the feel.




Sep 14, 2017 at 05:50 PM
GMPhotography
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


Be surprised how much that is true. I probably would not own a AF lens if money was not on the line. It's more about speed of operation and such. If it was not a client than I would be happy with MF lenses. I have a few but I haveAF lenses for work only. I certainly would simplify my life with gear. I said it before I am envious of the hobbyists. You all have total freedom to chose. I really don't per say. Not that I'm unhappy but you make a good point.

walts.photo wrote:
I'd guess most pros decide on equipment that helps their job rather than provide them with pleasure. If they coincide, fine, but the job is the priority.




Sep 14, 2017 at 06:06 PM
philip_pj
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


Yes, it's a luxury good issue for those for whom it is not.

We need an intermediate category for 'committed non-pro'; I hate the term 'hobbyist' because it implies dilettante, dabbler, dissipated and world weary; just a perpetual adolescent mucking around with photography. When I look over the images here, nothing could be further from the truth. The 4am rises, the long hauls over the mountains, the trips to wild and savage places.

It's hard work, it's expensive, it takes commitment..just like anything in the world worth doing, and somehow 'hobbyist' demeans the practitioners who go through the hardships and hard work for the love of it, for the love of the art of it. It's not like setting up a model railway and watching the little trains go round and round..toot toot.



Sep 14, 2017 at 06:25 PM
k-h.a.w
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


Coming from Nikon F and Leica M digital cameras, that I still have, I use side by side mainly Sony FF, APS-C, and Olympus OM-D cameras. I don't see a contradiction in using several different format cameras. In good light the MFT gear certainly delivers.

There are plenty of excellent native lenses now for Sony FE, E and Olympus FT, MFT gear in addition to the (TAP) adapted Nikkor F and Leica M, R lenses. I find the mirrorless gear I have complementary, use it accordingly and have no plans to sell any of it.

K-H.



Sep 14, 2017 at 10:56 PM
justruss
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


philip_pj wrote:
Yes, it's a luxury good issue for those for whom it is not.

We need an intermediate category for 'committed non-pro'; I hate the term 'hobbyist' because it implies dilettante, dabbler, dissipated and world weary; just a perpetual adolescent mucking around with photography. When I look over the images here, nothing could be further from the truth. The 4am rises, the long hauls over the mountains, the trips to wild and savage places.

It's hard work, it's expensive, it takes commitment..just like anything in the world worth doing, and somehow 'hobbyist' demeans the practitioners who go through the hardships and hard
...Show more

I see the split more at Pro and non-Pro.

Interestingly, when I was in the non-Pro camp, I always kinda associated Pro with "better, committed, best output" and every other superlative one could think of. Pro was the sexy group.

Now that I've been in the Pro camp for so long, I totally see it differently. To me, I see the Pro camp more in terms of nuts-and-bolts, running a business, totally not-sexy, using old dilapidated gear longer, making kluges work, often deliver-the-shot-but-not-perfection-- literally the opposite of best, sexy, superlative. Pros may need to go out and come back on a timeframe; non-Pros can take years of early mornings and get that perfect, sexy, superlative shot. For the most part I would say that non-Pros cover a wider distribution, with a lot of really weak work-- but much of the best photography there is. Pros also cover a range, with plenty of shlock, but in general the lower boundary appears higher to me... but the top may not actually reach quite as high as that of the truly dedicated non-Pros who are really about perfection rather than delivering on a deadline/budget. And this goes for everything from PJs to those working 5-6-digit commercial campaigns. Early on I had a lot of visibility of such large campaigns... and the photography in many cases was extremely quotidian: Get a happy customer leaving a bank branch smiling; here's a couple walking into a new home; nice landscape with a car sitting in the foreground during sunset; extreme landscape with man jumping in air facing away from camera for million dollar tech campaign. All shots delivered; all.... meh.

So I think it's also a matter of perspective. And as a pro myself, I don't really the pro vs non-pro dichotomy as mapping to better vs mediocre. I mainly see it as the injection of the need to generate income. And the delivery on that need is probably 90% about running a business, balancing the books, making strategic decisions about clients/marketing, networking, person-to-person skills... and the rest is about being good enough with a camera that you keep getting hired. It's like any field: There are a few people pretty bad at the job, a bulk just kinda in the middle, and a few people who are incredibly good at what they do. Those real rockstars, the ones pulling down the big-big bucks... here's secret: they often aren't the one's who are incredibly good at photography. They tend to be the ones who are incredibly good at business (positioning, posing, networking, personal marketing, etc).

So I'm a bit disillusioned by the whole Pro vs non-Pro/Hobbyist/Amateur thing. Pro doesn't carry any cache for me anymore. More like: Working schlub. There's a lot of smoke and mirrors.



Sep 15, 2017 at 03:18 AM
k-h.a.w
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


Realistic but interesting perspective. Makes sense to me as a non-Pro.

K-H.




Sep 15, 2017 at 04:37 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


philip_pj wrote:
Yes, it's a luxury good issue for those for whom it is not.

We need an intermediate category for 'committed non-pro'; I hate the term 'hobbyist' because it implies dilettante, dabbler, dissipated and world weary; just a perpetual adolescent mucking around with photography. When I look over the images here, nothing could be further from the truth. The 4am rises, the long hauls over the mountains, the trips to wild and savage places.

It's hard work, it's expensive, it takes commitment..just like anything in the world worth doing, and somehow 'hobbyist' demeans the practitioners who go through the hardships and hard
...Show more

So how does one transfer from hobbyist to your "committed non-pro"? Amount of gear collected? Amount of images taken? Amount spent pixel peeping or shooting test charts just to find that one diamond lens?

And as far as setting up model railways, I've seen some amazing setups with unbelievable detail...very much like your "committed non-pro". Just as much dedicated to their "hobby" ad people here on this forum.

I'm ok being called a hobbyist...I have no ego stigma...even though I do sell a few prints. I don't need a glorified title to feel good.




Sep 15, 2017 at 07:23 AM
Gunzorro
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · Has anyone considered moving from Sony to m43 gear


k-h.a.w wrote:
Realistic but interesting perspective. Makes sense to me as a non-Pro.

K-H.



Very interesting summary, Russ. I agree, having been in that game as a freelancer in architecture and commercial real estate, along with other odds and ends of advertising and PR.

To expand on some of what you said, or to use your words as a springboard for my take:

As you say, a pro has to set aside their personal choices to supply the client with the approved image parameters. These are often formed by a committee or individuals removed from the nuts and bolts of the photoshoot and its technical and logistical limitations. Every once in a while you have a truly educated and experienced director of marketing or an intermediary such as a design/graphics studio spearheading the assignments.

The key is that pros work to fulfill the parameters of the assignment and have to work within the limitations which are primarily time and money. The client needs X image by Y date. Of necessity, the assignment is limited creatively, otherwise it would have to be shot, and re-shot indefinitely (we've all been on a few of those poorly planned shoots that work out painfully on-the-fly). So the pro has to deliver, no question, even on dumb and inane concepts. That's the real key: how to take some concept that is barely possible, and providing a final workable image, if not a superlative one. Often this has to be done within hours of the call, or days.

Even a mid-range pro has to be flexible and think on their feet, turn on a dime, and produce what the client feels are unique images, or they get no referrals or later assignments. It's a lot of pressure, but some people enjoy that and it raises their game.

A non-pro experiences these same factors, but as you said, it is done at their leisure and few people to impress but themselves and maybe a few like minded souls. The amatuer/hobbiest is really a beautiful thing: creator and client in one. Having the luxury of time, research, and love of subject, the non-pro can undertake a project to produce amazing images that likely could never be agreed upon by a committee of bean-counters.

I count myself lucky to have been able to pursue my preferred line of photography, which left me mostly alone outdoors, and to call my own shots most of the time, even if that meant lower earnings from not doing weddings, headshots, tabletop, and many other commercial photography subjects. I might be poor financially, but I've got to shoot some of the best urban landscapes in the world on someone else's dime, and that's saying something!

That's it in a nutshell -- the pro is shooting on someone else's dime. That can be good, or that can be awful, but when the stars align, it's a rewarding thing both artistically and financially.



Sep 15, 2017 at 07:52 AM
1       2      
3
       4       5       end




FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4       5       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.