waterden wrote:
I am a Sony shooter (mainly a7r ii) but find the longer lenses simply too big for travel; the new GM lenses even more so. So on a recent trip I thought I'd try M43 out with a used (but as new) EM1 together with the 12-40/2.8 pro. Quite honestly, it has been a bit of an epiphany, not just for the IQ but even more for the fabulous ergomics. For me, it is a nicer camera to use than the a7r ii. The controls are more flexible and intuitive and the shutter snick is a major improvement on that of the Sony. Of course, the IQ of the latter is clearly better, the raw files have much greater latitude and the low light performance is better as is the potential for narrow dof. But the mft files are fine for most purposes and the package weighs and costs a lot less. I have been particularly impressed by the build quality of the em1 body and the pro lenses and note that they offer a greater degree of weather proofing than the Sony. And the longer lenses are smaller and lighter. I've just added the 40-150/2.8 pro and it too is a gem. Current sensor technology is fantastic and is allowing mft to compete in the pro stakes despite its relatively small size and while my Sony will keep its place in my arsenal I am pretty sure that my future investment will be in m43....Show more →
Going through a similar epiphany here except still haven't made the jump to mirrorless from Canon.
The lenses for Sony don't buy any size and weight reduction. I really like Fuji X system and their lower noise APS-C sensors, but the lack of in-body IS is an issue. So is the backwards zooming and focusing.
That brings me to m43 and Olympus... But I worry about noise and IQ and, interestingly, I'm not sure I can get used to the 4:3 format, which just seems... off.
However, I am waiting to hear about the EM-1 II, new sensor, and more f/1.2 lenses... Such an aperture should help claw back a little DOF control...
In my opinion there is nothing to be worried about concerning noise and IQ. Noise is perfectly acceptable up to 1600 and sharpness is fantastic, at least with the two pro lenses I have acquired. I have yet to print MFT but 100% screen shots indicate that A3 and A2 will be more than acceptable.
Personally, I prefer 4:3 to 3:2 but I am a lover of 1:1 as well. It might require a rethink of compositional techniques but differing aspect ratios never deterred painters.
waterden wrote:
In my opinion there is nothing to be worried about concerning noise and IQ. Noise is perfectly acceptable up to 1600 and sharpness is fantastic, at least with the two pro lenses I have acquired. I have yet to print MFT but 100% screen shots indicate that A3 and A2 will be more than acceptable.
Personally, I prefer 4:3 to 3:2 but I am a lover of 1:1 as well. It might require a rethink of compositional techniques but differing aspect ratios never deterred painters.
waterden wrote:
I am a Sony shooter (mainly a7r ii) but find the longer lenses simply too big for travel; the new GM lenses even more so. So on a recent trip I thought I'd try M43 out with a used (but as new) EM1 together with the 12-40/2.8 pro. Quite honestly, it has been a bit of an epiphany, not just for the IQ but even more for the fabulous ergomics. For me, it is a nicer camera to use than the a7r ii. The controls are more flexible and intuitive and the shutter snick is a major improvement on that of the Sony. Of course, the IQ of the latter is clearly better, the raw files have much greater latitude and the low light performance is better as is the potential for narrow dof. But the mft files are fine for most purposes and the package weighs and costs a lot less. I have been particularly impressed by the build quality of the em1 body and the pro lenses and note that they offer a greater degree of weather proofing than the Sony. And the longer lenses are smaller and lighter. I've just added the 40-150/2.8 pro and it too is a gem. Current sensor technology is fantastic and is allowing mft to compete in the pro stakes despite its relatively small size and while my Sony will keep its place in my arsenal I am pretty sure that my future investment will be in m43....Show more →
Use Canon lenses with adapters and you can keep both M4/3 and Sony but for different angles of view. Maybe not for all your lenses but some work quite well across systems.
Yes, one can adapt most lenses to mirrorless bodies but I simply don't understand why one would want to adapt, or indeed use native, large glass with these systems. It defeats the point for me. Hence my growing interest in m43 which, unlike APS-c or FF mirrorless, keeps everything small. If you want to use Canon EF glass why not just stick with Canon bodies? Adapted Leica glass? That is another matter because the Ms are small lenses as are some of the Rs. It will be very interesting to see, assuming they happen, how big these rumoured f/1.2 lenses are. Judging by the PL 42.5/1.2 they could still be relatively small.
My m43 kits has put on a considerable amount of weight. Lenses like the Nocticron 42.5/1.2 and the PRO series lenses (maybe with the exception of the 12-40 PRO) are relatively big and heavy. The Pan-Leica 12/1.4 is not a small/light lens either, and the forthcoming Olympus f1.2 lenses will be hefty as well. Having said that, the comparably FF versions would be significantly bigger and heavier.
waterden wrote:
Yes, one can adapt most lenses to mirrorless bodies but I simply don't understand why one would want to adapt, or indeed use native, large glass with these systems. It defeats the point for me. Hence my growing interest in m43 which, unlike APS-c or FF mirrorless, keeps everything small. If you want to use Canon EF glass why not just stick with Canon bodies? Adapted Leica glass? That is another matter because the Ms are small lenses as are some of the Rs.
waterden wrote:
Yes, one can adapt most lenses to mirrorless bodies but I simply don't understand why one would want to adapt, or indeed use native, large glass with these systems. It defeats the point for me. Hence my growing interest in m43 which, unlike APS-c or FF mirrorless, keeps everything small. If you want to use Canon EF glass why not just stick with Canon bodies? Adapted Leica glass? That is another matter because the Ms are small lenses as are some of the Rs. It will be very interesting to see, assuming they happen, how big these rumoured f/1.2 lenses are. Judging by the PL 42.5/1.2 they could still be relatively small....Show more →
To me, it means I don't have to pay for full set of lenses for two systems (or three even) and The lenses become very different on different sensor sizes.
A full frame lens may well be fairly big no matter what system it is used on but when you consider the "different" use, it may well be positively tiny.
150 2.8 works great on M4/3 as a 300mm angle of view tele lens while being nice for its intended uses on FF for instance.
Not for everyone and I don't use m4/3 all that much now but it can be a lot of fun to use and for daytime use is pretty good image quality.
garyvot wrote:
I don't think anyone knows, but as the E-M1 does, it seems likely that its successor would have it too.... Unless there is something about the new sensor that makes this impossible.
The E-M1 has the Panasonic 16mp sensor while this is a Sony 20mp Sensor. Doesn't automatically mean it won't have it but makes me a bit nervous. I would really like using legacy lenses on the Sony sensor due to it's color rendering. Never liked the E-M1's colors out of the box (compared to E-M5s)
garyvot wrote:
I don't think anyone knows, but as the E-M1 does, it seems likely that its successor would have it too.... Unless there is something about the new sensor that makes this impossible.
No on-sensor PDAF would be a step back for some of us - my now-departed E-M1 focused the 150/2 Oly quite well and any improvements from a Sony PDAF sensor would be welcomed, especially since I can't seem to sell my 150/2 . . .
jhinkey wrote:
No on-sensor PDAF would be a step back for some of us - my now-departed E-M1 focused the 150/2 Oly quite well and any improvements from a Sony PDAF sensor would be welcomed, especially since I can't seem to sell my 150/2 . . .
Yeah, I agree with this... which is why I think Olympus will try to keep this feature if possible...
So what will 20mpix sensor in the m43 size do for diffraction limits, seeing that F8 is about as high as I dare go now, and 2.8 - 4.0 is the sweet spot?
Handheld high rez is a nice step forward, if the rumor sites have this right. I wonder if if there is a chance for high-rez and stacking at the same time.
Whatever the details turn out to be ... one things is clear to me; that there is less and less reason for pro's shooting non-specialized subjects to avoid the system. I think it is now a fully professional camera choice - as is the Fuji brand.
It's a Mk II so I would doubt it - except maybe for the swiveling instead of tilting screen.
megancanada wrote:
I'm really looking forward to the EMII. With the rumoured updates and a new menu design I wonder if there will be any changes in body design?
bobbytan wrote:
With the E-M1 you can shoot 8 sequential and stacked photos in approx 1 second, so you get a 64mb RAW file. Because it took 1 second to complete the shot it has to be done on a tripod, as otherwise the 8 images may not be in perfect register. Olympus have said earlier they were working on getting the time down from 1 second to just 1/60 second ... so there is no need for you to do this on a tripod. With the new 20mp sensor you would be able to now shoot an 80mb file/image in 1/60 second i.e. it can be done while hand-holding the camera. Here's a shot I took in the Hi-Res mode in Iceland. ...Show more →
