Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

  

  Previous versions of austinschutz's message #13775966 « Struggling to pick a system: m4/3 or Sony FE »

  

austinschutz
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Struggling to pick a system: m4/3 or Sony FE


darrellc wrote:
I used a huge m4/3 kit for a long time, ran Sony and m4/3 in parallel and ultimately divested m4/3 as the Sony system matured. Had GH4, EM1, GM5, towards the end etc. and most of the glass you are considering.

Two key impressions:

1. The A7x bodies shine with the best glass, and the glass lineup you are suggesting seems kind of weak. Fewer, better glass choices may give you greater satisfaction with the FF choice.

2. That\'s a huge lineup of glass on m4/3 that covers every possible shooting situation. The opposite of your current gear lineup. That\'s a rapid and dramatic change. If you go the m4/3 route, a progressive approach slowly adding used glass might make more sense until you land on the lineup you want and actually use.

The two systems you are considering seem very different to me. Perhaps if you could enumerate your decision criteria and kind of weight or prioritize them, it might be useful. Try to get out more of your thinking about about what appeals between the two proposed kits.

Also, I think this is key, given you are operating under budget constraints, what are your most important focal lengths / shooting scenarios that you want to optimize for. I think if you could surface those things and make them explicit, it might make it easier for others to help. Is a mid-range zoom critical to have - would you be happier with two great primes in the same range like the FE 28/FE 55? An FE 70-300 will take up 1/3 your budget. How important is your wildlife shooting, do you need AF there?

My guess, given how you tend to shoot with the Nex and 55/1.2 combo now primarily, is that you might be well served with the A7II and 3 or maybe 4 high quality (don\'t have to be expensive if OK with some MF) lenses. I glanced at your Flickr and some really nice low light, landscape, portrait pics there. Both systems could deliver, but seems like Sony FF is right up your alley based on your Flickr photo stream!


I certainly think in the long run, the Sony FF system is probably better for me, if I got m4/3 now it would just be to last through grad school, and maybe that\'s the answer I need to think about. Addressing your points

1. Yes, it probably is weak. The GH4 + 12-35mm made me appreciate having a high-quality standard zoom...but in general, I do enjoy primes more. It\'s just a matter of flexibility vs. performance and right now I don\'t have much flexibility. If I were to imagine an ideal lineup it would be something like:

20
24-105
35
50
85
135
300

But I probably need to think about what lenses are actually going to meet my expectations.

2. Yup, that\'s the appeal...but you are right, I probably wouldn\'t use all of it to its fullest (I imagine the PL 25/1.4 would be my most used).

EDIT:
3. Addressing this:
\"Also, I think this is key, given you are operating under budget constraints, what are your most important focal lengths / shooting scenarios that you want to optimize for. I think if you could surface those things and make them explicit, it might make it easier for others to help. Is a mid-range zoom critical to have - would you be happier with two great primes in the same range like the FE 28/FE 55?\"

I really would like a high quality walkabout zoom; but it wouldn\'t be a deal breaker to go with two primes. The Zony 24-70/4 with all its flaws, seems good enough with the prices that it is going for now. But I\'ve obviously never used it. In terms of the telephoto, I don\'t think having autofocus is all that critical for me. It would be convenient, but perhaps an mf prime would be better. UWA (but not absurdly wide because the distortion characteristics are just a little bit too intense for my tastes) is a high priority and the Pentax 20mm f/4 seems like a decent, but not stellar performer, I\'ve really enjoyed my Voigtlander on APS-C (270 equivalent) so I think a 300 would be nice; and I use it enough for landscape stuff to think it is justified.



Oct 23, 2016 at 01:39 PM
austinschutz
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Struggling to pick a system: m4/3 or Sony FE


darrellc wrote:
I used a huge m4/3 kit for a long time, ran Sony and m4/3 in parallel and ultimately divested m4/3 as the Sony system matured. Had GH4, EM1, GM5, towards the end etc. and most of the glass you are considering.

Two key impressions:

1. The A7x bodies shine with the best glass, and the glass lineup you are suggesting seems kind of weak. Fewer, better glass choices may give you greater satisfaction with the FF choice.

2. That\'s a huge lineup of glass on m4/3 that covers every possible shooting situation. The opposite of your current gear lineup. That\'s a rapid and dramatic change. If you go the m4/3 route, a progressive approach slowly adding used glass might make more sense until you land on the lineup you want and actually use.

The two systems you are considering seem very different to me. Perhaps if you could enumerate your decision criteria and kind of weight or prioritize them, it might be useful. Try to get out more of your thinking about about what appeals between the two proposed kits.

Also, I think this is key, given you are operating under budget constraints, what are your most important focal lengths / shooting scenarios that you want to optimize for. I think if you could surface those things and make them explicit, it might make it easier for others to help. Is a mid-range zoom critical to have - would you be happier with two great primes in the same range like the FE 28/FE 55? An FE 70-300 will take up 1/3 your budget. How important is your wildlife shooting, do you need AF there?

My guess, given how you tend to shoot with the Nex and 55/1.2 combo now primarily, is that you might be well served with the A7II and 3 or maybe 4 high quality (don\'t have to be expensive if OK with some MF) lenses. I glanced at your Flickr and some really nice low light, landscape, portrait pics there. Both systems could deliver, but seems like Sony FF is right up your alley based on your Flickr photo stream!


I certainly think in the long run, the Sony FF system is probably better for me, if I got m4/3 now it would just be to last through grad school, and maybe that\'s the answer I need to think about. Addressing your points

1. Yes, it probably is weak. The GH4 + 12-35mm made me appreciate having a high-quality standard zoom...but in general, I do enjoy primes more. It\'s just a matter of flexibility vs. performance and right now I don\'t have much flexibility. If I were to imagine an ideal lineup it would be something like:

20
24-105
35
50
85
135
300

But I probably need to think about what lenses are actually going to meet my expectations.

2. Yup, that\'s the appeal...but you are right, I probably wouldn\'t use all of it to its fullest (I imagine the PL 25/1.4 would be my most used).

EDIT:
3. Addressing this:
\"Also, I think this is key, given you are operating under budget constraints, what are your most important focal lengths / shooting scenarios that you want to optimize for. I think if you could surface those things and make them explicit, it might make it easier for others to help. Is a mid-range zoom critical to have - would you be happier with two great primes in the same range like the FE 28/FE 55?\"

I really would like a high quality walkabout zoom. The Zony 24-70/4 with all its flaws, seems good enough with the prices that it is going for now. But I\'ve obviously never used it. In terms of the telephoto, I don\'t think having autofocus is all that critical for me. It would be convenient, but perhaps an mf prime would be better. UWA (but not absurdly wide because the distortion characteristics are just a little bit too intense for my tastes) is a high priority and the Pentax 20mm f/4 seems like a decent, but not stellar performer, I\'ve really enjoyed my Voigtlander on APS-C (270 equivalent) so I think a 300 would be nice; and I use it enough for landscape stuff to think it is justified.



Oct 23, 2016 at 01:38 PM
austinschutz
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
Re: Struggling to pick a system: m4/3 or Sony FE


darrellc wrote:
I used a huge m4/3 kit for a long time, ran Sony and m4/3 in parallel and ultimately divested m4/3 as the Sony system matured. Had GH4, EM1, GM5, towards the end etc. and most of the glass you are considering.

Two key impressions:

1. The A7x bodies shine with the best glass, and the glass lineup you are suggesting seems kind of weak. Fewer, better glass choices may give you greater satisfaction with the FF choice.

2. That\'s a huge lineup of glass on m4/3 that covers every possible shooting situation. The opposite of your current gear lineup. That\'s a rapid and dramatic change. If you go the m4/3 route, a progressive approach slowly adding used glass might make more sense until you land on the lineup you want and actually use.

The two systems you are considering seem very different to me. Perhaps if you could enumerate your decision criteria and kind of weight or prioritize them, it might be useful. Try to get out more of your thinking about about what appeals between the two proposed kits.

Also, I think this is key, given you are operating under budget constraints, what are your most important focal lengths / shooting scenarios that you want to optimize for. I think if you could surface those things and make them explicit, it might make it easier for others to help. Is a mid-range zoom critical to have - would you be happier with two great primes in the same range like the FE 28/FE 55? An FE 70-300 will take up 1/3 your budget. How important is your wildlife shooting, do you need AF there?

My guess, given how you tend to shoot with the Nex and 55/1.2 combo now primarily, is that you might be well served with the A7II and 3 or maybe 4 high quality (don\'t have to be expensive if OK with some MF) lenses. I glanced at your Flickr and some really nice low light, landscape, portrait pics there. Both systems could deliver, but seems like Sony FF is right up your alley based on your Flickr photo stream!


I certainly think in the long run, the Sony FF system is probably better for me, if I got m4/3 now it would just be to last through grad school, and maybe that\'s the answer I need to think about. Addressing your points

1. Yes, it probably is weak. The GH4 + 12-35mm made me appreciate having a high-quality standard zoom...but in general, I do enjoy primes more. It\'s just a matter of flexibility vs. performance and right now I don\'t have much flexibility. If I were to imagine an ideal lineup it would be something like:

20
24-105
35
50
85
135
300

But I probably need to think about what lenses are actually going to meet my expectations.

2. Yup, that\'s the appeal...but you are right, I probably wouldn\'t use all of it to its fullest (I imagine the PL 25/1.4 would be my most used).






Oct 23, 2016 at 01:28 PM





  Previous versions of austinschutz's message #13775966 « Struggling to pick a system: m4/3 or Sony FE »

 




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