Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1 2

4 5 6 end

Archive 2014 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

fsiagian
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

You need to start a photography (landscape) class/tour/session in that area. Amazing shots.

Aug 17, 2014 at 11:08 AM

fotografur
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

Your images are beautiful.

Of course almost everyone is going to tell you to get a sony A7 here. Next a nikon 810. I feel the MFT is a great tool in the right hands.

dennis

Aug 17, 2014 at 11:09 AM

bobbytan
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

Touché. Even the Sony RX100 is a formidable tool if your capture and pp skills are good. If you want to take your images to another level in terms of IQ, consider medium format … not 35mm.

fotografur wrote:
Your images are beautiful.

Of course almost everyone is going to tell you to get a sony A7 here. Next a nikon 810. I feel the MFT is a great tool in the right hands.

dennis

Aug 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM

Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

bobbytan wrote:
Lightroom 5 has an amazing grad filter tool and it's so much easier to control this in post. ND filters are a different matter altogether.

I really don't know if it is better to do this in post or with physical filters. One thing that ND grad filters can do that you can't do in post on a single shot is that it can allow you to shoot a high dynamic range scene without blowing out highlights or burying shadows at least in some cases. This can't be replicated in post with a single shot if there is too much dynamic range for the sensor to capture. Now if you combine a software grad filter with HDR, maybe you could achieve the same look. I have heard people argue that physical filters are the way to go and others argue it is better to handle such issues in post. I don't really know which is right, but if the OP wants to try the physical filters and many serious landscapers do like them, then that would be a potential reason to think about changing systems.

Aug 17, 2014 at 12:21 PM

Two23
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

It is true that as you increase sensor size, you decrease DoF per f-stop. For me to go from Nikon DX to Nikon FX I will lose one stop of DoF. This means I must decrease the aperture size by one stop, i.e. instead of shooting at f5.6 on DX I must go to f8 on FX. I think by going from M43 you will be losing at least two stops of DoF going to FX. I.e., if you take a shot with current camera using f8 you will need to shoot f16 on FX body. This will require either raising ISO two stops or living with two stops less shutter speed. It could potentially present a problem depending on your style.

Kent in SD

Aug 17, 2014 at 12:34 PM

sebboh
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

for your print size i really don't think you need to upgrade. there is certainly a visible difference in resolution and tonality between the 16mp µ4/3 sensor and 36mp FF sensor at that size, but is relatively small. it's possible the tonality difference even disappears with HDR, i've not really used it.

Phillip Reeve wrote:
If you decide that the investment makes sense for you I would look into buying a A7r, Canon 16-35/4 IS, Zeiss 35-70/3.4, Canon 70-200/4 IS which should make an awesome set and you would have much better LV than with the d800 and some great lenses.

this would probably be my choice too, though i'd probably take the leica m WATE 16-21mm over the canon for size and IQ. especially since the OP will be selling it in a year and the WATE should hold value better. i might choose the canon 70-300mm L as instead of the 70-200/4 as well.

Aug 17, 2014 at 12:34 PM

millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

bobbytan wrote:
I was briefly toying with the idea of going to a Sony A7r … but the lack of good/fast native AF lenses was a turn off - not to mention the quirks. To get very good and reasonably small lenses you will have to do a ton of research to figure out which Sony, Olympus, Leica, Zeiss, Canon, Sigma lenses would work best … and then you have to deal with the different adaptors and quirks. Assuming you have the time and the patience for this … what is all this going to cost you?

You may be better off just...Show more →

Luckily tons of people, including 100's of FM members have already done this and is quite easy to find out which focal lengths work best from different brands of lenses.

The A7(r) thread is basically 400+ pages of rolling research

Aug 17, 2014 at 01:25 PM

bobbytan
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

I won't have the patience to sieve through 40 pages, let alone 400+ pages.

millsart wrote:
Luckily tons of people, including 100's of FM members have already done this and is quite easy to find out which focal lengths work best from different brands of lenses.

The A7(r) thread is basically 400+ pages of rolling research

Aug 17, 2014 at 01:45 PM

millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

bobbytan wrote:
I won't have the patience to sieve through 40 pages, let alone 400+ pages.

I'm sorry but I'm calling total BS on this

You've posted over 7000 times and your a daily regular here just like the rest of us but you don't have the patience to read a thread ?

In the amount of time you've spent typing responses to this very thread you could of easily looked through a dedicated OM, FD, MD etc image thread and gotten a great understanding of what is popular.

Again, this isn't rocket science.

Myself or basically any FM regular with an A7(r) could easily rattle off a list of what works and what doesn't.

You make it out like its this in depth research that takes days to find out what a good, say 21 or 20mm option is.

Nope its easy, OM213.5 if you want small, Canon FD 20 if you want cheap, Zeiss 21 if you want the best, and Leica WATE if your made of money.

Its that easy.

Just post a message if you want the answers delivered on a silver platter saying "hey, whats the best small 24mm options for the A7" or similar and you'll get plenty of people telling you what they've used and what works.

Adapters also are not a big deal. I've used nothing but cheap Ebay adapters, in every mount possible and all have been just fine. Maybe a dud is out there but if so, just buy another one, they are like $10 or less, but like I said, every MD, OM, Fd, M et al., adapter has focused on infinity just fine.

Bottom line is that using a legacy lens on the A7(r) is not exploring brave new ground.

Aug 17, 2014 at 02:33 PM

kwalsh
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

Goodness, overwhelmed by so many thoughtful and thought provoking responses. Thank you everyone!

And before I forget, thanks so much for the kind words on my photos. The quality of the work and the people on this board is so very high that kudos earned here are very meaningful and humbling. Thank you.

Not that I expect people to keep up or necessarily respond, but I figured I'd offer some thoughts and comments on specific suggestions so far for those that might post later and just because "thinking out loud" is helpful to me too.

As a TL;DR summary I think I'm realizing that a very import first step for me to do in the coming year before I actually start this "sabbatical" is to do some larger prints just to see where I'm starting at. I might rent a D810 and 14-24 before my next short trip to the desert just to collect some ground truth next to my m43 setup. I'm going to watch what comes from Canon and Sony in the coming year. I'm also thinking a bit differently about whether I should go with a whole focal range system or not. And thanks for the many specific lens/body pairing recommendations.

More specific thoughts/replies:

DP2M - That's a really interesting out of the box suggestion. I've actually been considering that camera for sometime as sort of a niche toy to complement my "serious" setup. Part of it is techno-geek, one of my good friends from college was actually one of the chip designers for Foveon for many years and so I've always wanted a Foveon but not a Sigma if you get my meaning. But the DP2M perfectly paired with its lens at a reasonable price has had me itching. Definitely a good way to get very high resolution at very low price and still small too. Obviously something very different from a flexible FF setup meant for my car - but might be worth picking up as something to experiment with and the camera is different enough from my usual approach to things it might stir some creative juices.

MFDB/645 - I'm pretty sure I'm not going to do that. Definitely an 80MP back and lenses to keep up with it would be a significant improvement in resolution - or even the 645Z at 50MP! And notionally the working style would be different as well. But actually most of my best landscapes are scouted a day or more in advance and I'm on site a good hour before the light I want so the slowness and deliberateness of MF is not an issue for me. I intentionally force myself to shoot my m43 almost like it was 4x5 already. But I think actually going MF might be a "bridge too far" both in cost and becoming too technique obsessed. I do have a GW690II that I never shoot if I get the urge to load some Velvia

Up and coming Canon - Yes, definitely not going to bite on anything for at least 6 to 9 months. I forgot about that new 16-35/4. If Canon comes up with a better sensor in not too long I'll definitely have to think about Nikon vs. Canon carefully.

TS - There is a definite risk that if I end up with a body that the 17 TS will mount on that I'm going to have to try it. Also wonder about the 24 for shift panos. I'm not sure this is a rabbit hole I should really go down. That said, while I am pretty adamant about having a quality slow zoom trio for most of my compositions I do enjoy occasional "technique/equipment in a search for a composition" as a useful creative exercise. The point of my "sabbatical" is to have enough time to do such things. The key is going to be to limit how many I try such that I don't divide my time too finely.

I will keep m43 regardless - Any FF system I do get will be a second system. It may even be a second system for just the year I'm on my break. I'll be keeping my m43 kit regardless for two reasons. First, I've got a 2yo running around and the the tiny m43 bodies with compact but excellent primes are now a must have for family shooting - GM1+15/1.7 is a dream for environmental portraits on the go. Second, I've got a few photo locations I know I'm going to shoot that are simply too dang far for me to haul a heftier system and especially the requisite tripod! I'm one of those ultralight wimps when it comes to long distances over rough terrain and sleeping on location for a morning light composition.

Grad ND Filters - I've used them in film days, don't anymore. There are definitely cases in which a grad has a different effect than can be achieved via HDR bracket and digital grad - but they are pretty limited cases. Essentially you need an extremely bright highlight (a.k.a. the sun itself) in the frame of the shot creating flare effects that extend into your shadow region. So that is a real problem for things like sunsets at a beach with water in shadow in the front. In my compositions I haven't run up against a case like this - most all of my shots that require gradients the sun is already below the horizon.

m43 upgrades - I'll have my eyes on the various coming "pro" lenses from Olympus for sure. Minor improvements of course in the grand scheme, but I'm always interested in the best within the format and if I get cleaner corners a little more weight and bulk is acceptable.

Leica, Ricoh, etc. - Much like the DP2M I'm thinking another route would be a small body with either fixed lens or a few light quality legacy primes at focals I know I like or would be difficult to stitch (e.g. UWA). m43 for a full range of focals and something else for some special shots. I'll have to think this through more... what exactly am I going for? Notionally I was thinking a full second system for the car and my scouted shots that are usually within a mile or so of a road. m43 for everything else. But maybe I fold a higher IQ system in a bit differently than that...

A7r - Like the above, maybe the A7r and something crazy like the WATE as a big print UWA machine (and oh my goodness would I only be holding onto that WATE for just the year and selling at the end - also fire up ye olde Valuable Personal Property insurance again too). If 95% of my shooting doesn't need to print big maybe what I need to do is make "print big" its own special creative goal focused only on certain compositions and subjects. Hmmm..... I'm looking at this a whole different way now.

Again, super big thanks to everyone. This has been very, very helpful so far.

I posed this question a whole year before I plan to actually start doing anything with new gear partly because I'm struggling to think it through and I figured this group of folks would give me a lot to think about in the coming months of planning. And partly because part of the fun of taking time off is building castles in the sky ahead of time. Like on the beach as a kid the best castles are built with others helping

Aug 17, 2014 at 03:09 PM

Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

Shoot that GW690II. Doubt you will regret it even for a second.

D810 is nice camera, at least output is, even by my standarts. That zoom? Eh.. not so much. Zeiss or Leica instead.

WATE - worth it, almost every pic I saw proves that it is. And there is very very few lens like that (eg. worth its price). Not that sure about A7r tho. Would probably wait if Sony wont make something better. M9 is special thing. Also colors are bit "too special" for some.

Fear of being obsessed by technique? Um, how did you achieved your photos? By ignoring technique?

Im not exactly sure why you dismiss lets say 1Ds MK3 and 17 or 24 TS-E MK2. With how you shoot? Really doubt you would be disappointed.. Dont let all those high mpix Nikon/Sony bodies fool you, there is a bit more than just that.. and that "something" is in 1Ds MK3, not Nikon or Sony mirrorless. At least, I never saw it outside of that Canon combination.

Aug 17, 2014 at 05:48 PM

mhespenheide
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

Kwalsh,

First, I'll echo the comments of others. Beautiful work. While I mostly work in color myself, the shot looking down on Eureka Dunes (in black and white) is remarkable (not to take anything away from the others).

I'll say that I was able to take a sabbatical from my teaching job back in '06-'07. If you're interested in reading about it and looking at some of the work, it's online here: http://markhespenheide.com/sabbatical/sabbatical.htm

If you are absolutely convinced that you don't want to print bigger than 13x19", stick with the system that you know.

That said, I look back on some of the work that I did over my sabbatical and wish that I had it in higher quality. While not often, I've had a couple of requests for prints from that series that I can't fulfill at the sizes people want.

I have an a7r with a variety of adapted lenses. I think it's a fantastic landscape camera. The main drawbacks to it that I've seen are a long shutter lag and mediocre autofocus -- it's not a sports or wildlife camera. I've only shot with it mounted directly to the ballhead (rather than levered out when mounted by the adapter) and have only seen shutter shock a couple of times. I'm using a Mirex adapter to shoot with Mamiya 645 lenses as tilt-shift lenses and, with the magnified live view, it is transformative. I haven't yet bought a Canon T/S 24v2 yet, but I know others have had good success with it.

If it were me, today, I'd go with an a7r and likely a trio of adapted Canon lenses: the new 16-35 f/4L, the old 70-200 f/4L (non-IS, just to save money), and the 24 T/S. Then I'd add a Sony 55. That's a lot of money but should be a class-leading setup. That said, I think you're right to hold up -- at least through Photokina.

Having been through a sabbatical, the one thing that you won't be able to get back is your time. The opportunity to shoot regularly is priceless.

Aug 18, 2014 at 01:19 PM

uhoh7
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

Based on your reports, it seems to me the choice is pretty simple.

1)DSLR
Canon 5D3 or D810 and you'll need three zooms either way.

2)Leica M9 (or240)
zm18, a good 28, 50 and maybe just a 90--or 75.

I don't include the sony A7 because the lens situation is such a mess right now, especially 28 and wider. If they manage a great UWA zoom it would be workable. A7s is apparently really good with many UWA, so that might be a serious consideration.

so, the choices are radically different. You want to play with DSLR tech, AF, zoom etc. then it's #1

you want the best glass and sharpest images, pure photography, and no bells/whistles, it's #2

Aug 18, 2014 at 01:33 PM

alwang
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

uhoh7 wrote:
Based on your reports, it seems to me the choice is pretty simple.

1)DSLR
Canon 5D3 or D810 and you'll need three zooms either way.

2)Leica M9 (or240)
zm18, a good 28, 50 and maybe just a 90--or 75.

I don't include the sony A7 because the lens situation is such a mess right now, especially 28 and wider. If they manage a great UWA zoom it would be workable. A7s is apparently really good with many UWA, so that might be a serious consideration.

The A7 lens situation is only messy if you require small, rangefinder-sized lenses. If you're comparing them to DSLRs and DSLR-sized lenses, there are no shortage of options 28 and wider, AF or manual: the Sony ZA 16-35 or 24, adapted ZF, adapted Canon TS, etc. I'm just not convinced any of these options will give the OP considerably better results other than print size.

Aug 18, 2014 at 01:48 PM

sebboh
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

uhoh7 wrote:
Based on your reports, it seems to me the choice is pretty simple.

1)DSLR
Canon 5D3 or D810 and you'll need three zooms either way.

2)Leica M9 (or240)
zm18, a good 28, 50 and maybe just a 90--or 75.

I don't include the sony A7 because the lens situation is such a mess right now, especially 28 and wider. If they manage a great UWA zoom it would be workable. A7s is apparently really good with many UWA, so that might be a serious consideration.

so, the choices are radically different. You want to play with DSLR tech, AF, zoom etc. then it's #1

you want...Show more →

the problems of finding good lenses for the a7r are mostly non-existant, all the lenses that work on canon and nikon work fine plus all the legacy stuff. the WATE is better on the a7r than the m9 or m240 according to most of the people who've used both.

getting precise ultra wide angle framing with a rangefinder is PITA imho (yay! double acronyms).

Aug 18, 2014 at 02:48 PM

uhoh7
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

sebboh wrote:
all the lenses that work on canon and nikon work fine plus all the legacy stuff....

I surprised to see you write this after Fred's long thread where the 5D smokes the A7r with wide canon zooms.

you put forward the WATE option. Seriously?

You want the OP to invest 4k in a lens which is easily bested in it's mount by any number of much cheaper wides---they of course are not great in the sony except the new S.

Would be much smarter to wait for the native glass. Like I said, it's a mess.

Sure you can put a nFD 20/2.8 on the A7 or the ZA 16-35, but I'm not sure you are beating a real good m43 with the latter, and the former is good, but devastated by something like the M9+21SEM. In fact at 21mm that's the best in the world for daylight landscape today--possibly excepting some MF rig.

There are other 21s and 24s out there for the A7/R but they are SLRs and don't match the nice zeiss and Leica M glass.

I know you "hate rangefinders"; a view which might or might not survive day to day use and practice. Framing is a skill which can be learned without much trouble--but not without practice, and perhaps the right VF. My own feeling after 6 months of daily use: RF is often, but not always, nice. Not make or break one way or the other. Sensor, size, and lens---those are my biggest issues. Certainly all else equal, I'd take a smaller M9 with EVF, but not at the cost of image quality. Every system has it's downsides or quirks; the RX1 does not sound too fun to focus manually, for example.

anyway I'm not trying to dis the sonys, as you know I have one, but show what options seem most obvious considering what he likes to shoot.

Only my view

L1018186 by unoh7, M9+50cron

Aug 18, 2014 at 04:05 PM

alwang
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

uhoh7 wrote:
Sure you can put a nFD 20/2.8 on the A7 or the ZA 16-35, but I'm not sure you are beating a real good m43 with the latter, and the former is good, but devastated by something like the M9+21SEM. In fact at 21mm that's the best in the world for daylight landscape today--possibly excepting some MF rig.

There are other 21s and 24s out there for the A7/R but they are SLRs and don't match the nice zeiss and Leica M glass.

I know you "hate rangefinders"; a view which might or might not survive day to day use and practice....Show more →

I'm not trying to recommend the Sonys, but recommending a rangefinder system + primes doesn't seem like an obvious option when the OP explicitly said he likes to shoot zooms.

Aug 18, 2014 at 04:37 PM

sebboh
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

uhoh7 wrote:
I surprised to see you write this after Fred's long thread where the 5D smokes the A7r with wide canon zooms.

you put forward the WATE option. Seriously?

You want the OP to invest 4k in a lens which is easily bested in it's mount by any number of much cheaper wides---they of course are not great in the sony except the new S.

links please? i've not seen it beat by anything other than the ZE 21/2.8, 18 SEM, and 21 SEM and the last two only beat it on the m-cameras which probably don't beat it on the a7r given pixel difference. also, the OP wants zooms, which the WATE is on the A7r (try using it at one of those in between focal lengths on the m9

). finally, the WATE will hold it's value (especially if bought used) over the course of a year much better than an slr zoom.

uhoh7 wrote:
I know you "hate rangefinders"; a view which might or might not survive day to day use and practice. Framing is a skill which can be learned without much trouble--but not without practice, and perhaps the right VF. My own feeling after 6 months of daily use: RF is often, but not always, nice. Not make or break one way or the other. Sensor, size, and lens---those are my biggest issues. Certainly all else equal, I'd take a smaller M9 with EVF, but not at the cost of image quality. Every system has it's downsides or quirks; the RX1 does...Show more →

i shot a rangefinder exclusively for 6 months on film. they're great for casual portraits and street shooting and terrible if you are anal about compositions or like to focus quickly off center.

i think the OP should just stick with what he has actually. i think telling him to use ultrawide angle primes on rangefinder is bad advice given the way he says he shoots.

Aug 18, 2014 at 04:49 PM

Two23
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

Over the years (decades,) I've come to the conclusion that really the best use of money to improve your photography usually isn't gear, it's the opportunity to make images (i.e. travel.)

Kent in SD

Aug 18, 2014 at 05:36 PM

kwalsh
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · For landscape, what is worth stepping up to from m43?

Two23 wrote:
Over the years (decades,) I've come to the conclusion that really the best use of money to improve your photography usually isn't gear, it's the opportunity to make images (i.e. travel.)

Yes I reached the same conclusion some time ago. In my case now taking it to the extreme of forgoing half my annual salary which would pay for a whole heck of a lot of gear. I am, however, willing to spend a reasonable chunk of dough on gear that I might find "useful" during my extra time shooting - especially if that gear doesn't become a permanent capital expense but just a "rental" for the year.

Aug 18, 2014 at 05:51 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 5 6 end

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