p.3 #1 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
My wrists and back thank me when I shoot for a job all day using my nex7 and omd vs a full frame dslr. The clients only use it online so as long as I bracket and expose properly IQ is never an issue. Even prints wouldn't be an issue up to standard poster sizes.
As I gain more experience, I find that I rely less in post to save some shots. This is where ff really can help, if you screw up shots due to inexperience.
Usually I'm fighting to increase Dof, not shrink it. The touch screen providing exact focus points and contrast detect being 99% accurate is also a huge help.
All the reasons why I just sold all my full frame gear.
p.3 #2 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
I agree with JonasY , but also note: If you're 5D shooter you will be disappointed by quality of 4/3 cameras like OM-D
I completely disagree and I own a 5D2 now, and formerly a 5Dc.
My OM-D seems to have higher dynamic range than the 5D2, or at least gives it a run for its money, and when it comes to salvaging shadows, there's no comparison - OM-D wins by a mile. I haven't tested highlights yet.
Noise? Sure, the 5D2 wins - a FF camera vs a 43, but we're not talking a huge disadvantage here and noise isn't the only determinant of image quality.
p.3 #3 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
The only area where I find all sensors lacking except maybe the D700 is blue sky noise. All these cameras even at their base ISO have too much sky noise.
p.3 #4 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
Buying a mirrorless camera is not as straight forward as buying a DSLR. You have to really research and try a few before deciding on one.
OM-D is flavor of the month right now, before that it was Fuji Xpro1 and before that Fuji X100 and before that some other camera. If one were to base camera buying decisions on the mood of online photography forums then that is the sure way to doom.
Personally I won't buy a OM-D because its a DSLR-wannabe, it looks like one and I might as well carry a DSLR instead - a Nikon D7000/Canon equivalent for example.
Sony Nex-7 is jack of all trades and master of none, its EVF is not as great as it was hyped, in fact its tunnel like and too contrasty.
Nikon V1 is not for the pixel-peeping landscape shooter, or for someone who's conscious of camera size. Nikon V1 is for photojournalist/street photographer who's more after content and needs a camera to nail 'the moment'.
Panasonic GX1 with its EVF combined looks too bulky, which might not be a bad thing for some people -- other than that like all Panasonic cameras its image quality is love it or hate it.
Fuji X100 is still a great camera but its quirky and its discontinued according to some news, which means X200 will be announced shortly.
Spend a couple of weeks researching before buying a mirrorless otherwise you'll regret your purchase like I did with Panny GF2. mirrorless cameras depreciate by almost %30 once you leave the shop and selling them second hand is a pain because there are so many of them and no one is buying.
p.3 #6 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
altern3 wrote:
Personally I won't buy a OM-D because its a DSLR-wannabe, it looks like one and I might as well carry a DSLR instead - a Nikon D7000/Canon equivalent for example.
Huh? Because it has a little hump? Do you have any idea how much smaller an OM-D is vs something like the D7000? Sure, in height and width, it's only, say 10% smaller, but it's half the thickness and half the weight. Include the lenses, and it's not even close.
I picked up a Rebel T4i in the store yesterday, and it's been a while since I've handled a non-pro DSLR (my only DSLR is the 1Ds II)...and I still couldn't believe how HUGE it felt in my hand after shooting m4/3 for the past two years.
The OM-D is only very slightly larger than the Olympus E-P3 or Panasonic GX1.
p.3 #7 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
The size difference is minimal but then the OM-D sensor is smaller, it has an EVF and one cannot use all those great line up of lenses that Nikon mount offers - very cheap in some cases.
People buying all these super expensive zoom lenses for a M4/3 sensor really makes my head spin when cheap FF DSLRs might be just a month away...
p.3 #8 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
The size difference ISN'T minimal...that's the whole point. (and I for one prefer a good EVF to an OVF...much easier manual focusing and better in low light). My kit bag went from 18 lbs with my FF DLSR kit to 6, including the bag and accessories I carry.
p.3 #9 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
Almost everyone with OM-D has bought a third-party grip or a battery grip, so they could 'hold' the camera properly.
And here is the comparison, yes the D7000 has more heft but the fake DSLR blob on the top of OM-D gives them similar highest. http://camerasize.com/compact/#7,289,ha,t
p.3 #13 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
altern3 wrote:
Almost everyone with OM-D has bought a third-party grip or a battery grip, so they could 'hold' the camera properly.
And here is the comparison, yes the D7000 has more heft but the fake DSLR blob on the top of OM-D gives them similar highest. http://camerasize.com/compact/#7,289,ha,t
I have to wonder if you've actually used (or how much you've used) a m43 system before, including the OM-D.
Dont' take this as an insult - Believe it or not, I was very much like you before I bought the OM-D (my first m43 camera) - I looked at numbers and just couldn't "see" it and it looked about what I would handle with a D7000 or my now 7D.
Trust me, there is no freaking comparison.
First - Yes, the OM-D grip *does* add a great grip to the camera, but I had no real problem taking the bare camera with me in walk-around shooting (yes, I would prefer a more substantial on-body grip). I was just a little scared I would drop it A wrist strap solved this issue. The part 1 of the OM-D grip adds minimal bulk and weight. with the battery grip and you're finally to the size of just a bare-body DSLR, and a small one at that.
The Lenses - none of these cameras will work properly without them. This is where you really "make up your money" because the lenses are no comparison - they're tiny and the primes are (mostly) extremely good in IQ (some zooms are okay and Pany seems to be introducing some pretty hot zooms).
Granted, the mirrorless systems don't have the lens selection of the larger guys, but it's also a much newer system, so it's an unfair comparison.
Taken for what it is (a system that's what, only four years old), it's got a great lineup, and a lot of good stuff coming down the pipeline.
My photos don't do it justice (and somewhat cheat, with the 45 missing its hood), but the weight difference alone is staggering, especially considering a lot of my shooting is one-handed, no matter the camera format.
p.3 #14 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
Interesting that you should say that ... because this is PRECISELY the reason why I like the OM-D so much. I see it as a Baby DSLR with 90% of the IQ of a FF DSLR ... but weighs only 20% when you factor-in the big guns like the 85L, 200L or 200-400L, etc.
altern3 wrote:
Personally I won't buy a OM-D because its a DSLR-wannabe, it looks like one and I might as well carry a DSLR instead - a Nikon D7000/Canon equivalent for example.
p.3 #15 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
Guari wrote:
To the OP, please don't get sucked into the different format fastness equivalence and photonic complication some people like discuss on these threads. While true, this is what the people at Olympus, Nikon and such have to worry about. The one's who worry about this are usually electronic engineers and not photographers. There's a reason it is not listed in the EXIF.
It actually is listed in the EXIF tho.
-- just saying...
vovkinson wrote:
The OM-D is a big leap from GH2 , I agree on that, but IQ is still not up to DSLR.
mawz wrote:
Umm, the IQ is in fact superior to many DSLR's (including all of the 4/3rds DSLR's and several of the currently available APS-C DSLR's including IMHO the 7D). What it can't match is the current 35mm FF bodies (not DSLR's as a whole).
But I would disagree that the OM-D is a "big leap" from the GH2 in terms of IQ. In fact, I think it's a tiny little baby-step. And you really really need to examine the images closely and for long periods of time to see the differences. At least all of the sensical comparisons and reviews I've read show that to be the case.
p.3 #18 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
In noise, yes. In DR, no. There is a huge DR leap from the Gh2 and GX1 to the OM-D. There is not a big DR leap from the OM -D to a 5D (any version). The OM-D has been tested several times at 12 stops+ of DR. The GX1 has about 10. My own testing shows about 2-2.5 stops more DR for the OM-D vs the Gh2.
p.3 #19 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
bobbytan wrote:
Let's compare the weight difference between the OM-D kit that I have to a DSLR equivalent:
OM-D E-M5 0.94
Panny 7-14 0.66
Panny 25 0.44
Zuiko 45 0.26
Panny 100-300 1.14
Total weight: 3.44 lbs
5D Mk III 1.90
Nikon 14-24 2.13
EF 50/1.4 0.64
EF 85L 2.26
200-400/4 7.40
Total weight: 14.33 lbs
A 10-lb weight saving is very significant to me ... not to mention the bulk/size difference.
While I agree with your general statement about weight and bulk, I have to take issue with your comparisons
The Nikon 14-24 is a full stop faster than the Pany, and as we know, adding stops adds glass, sometimes a lot of it. There is no real direct comparison in this area, but the f/2.8 shouldn't be ignored.
Same with the 85L - you're talking f/1.2 vs f/1.8, which is a stop difference. A more direct comparison would be the 85 1.8 from Canon.
Same thing, yet again, with the 200-400 f/4 - f/4 vs 5.6 makes a huge difference when talking telephoto, especially zooms. I know you're going for roughly-comparable equivalent FOVs, but the differences between the lens stats (apertures) makes this comparison a bit unfair.
I realize maybe you're comparing your own kits, so perhaps that is your basis?
p.3 #20 · "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder?
I know Chuck a bit, we're both wedding photographers and we recorded a podcast together HERE.
I also recently decided that I needed a smaller camera for personal use. I didn't find myself pulling out the D3 very often for light usage so I wasn't shooting anything but paid work. Being a huge Leica fan I ended up buying an M9 and I was horribly disappointed. I found the image quality to be worse than the original 5D in color, white balance control and overall noise and DR. I know people will disagree with me but those were my informed opinions. I also think for all the talk about Leica lenses I wasn't impressed with what I was getting for the money. I was far more impressed with Fuji and 4/3 lenses and they don't break the bank. For me the M9 was a dilettante's camera at best and the performance didn't justify the cost. If I want the RF experience I'll stick with an M6.
Next I tried the xPro1 and while I really wanted to like it I just didn't warm up to it. I always found I needed to be in the menu for something and shifting the AF point seemed to be a clumsy 2-handed operation that wasn't intuitive. Neither the EVF or optical viewfinder really seemed to work as well as I'd like. I was hoping for the simplicity of the Leica (just ISO, Shutter and aperture to worry about) and instead I felt I was always fighting the camera and looking for some weird setting to get what I wanted. Awesome IQ but it just frustrated the heck out of me.
So surprisingly I ended up getting an Olympus OM-D. I never thought I would get a m4/3 crop camera but it is impressive. If you are coming from a DSLR the Olympus works basically the same way but in cheap, super smaller and lightweight body with incredible performance. It just works and works simply. The IQ is really impressive and there are a ton of high-performance, small lenses that are cheap. The OM-D ended up giving me exactly what I wanted out of the M9 with better IQ, less wallet impact, more performance and more options. I was surprised that it ended up being the best thing for me, but it is one impressive camera.
I still miss the OVF of the OMs