You strike me as a worrier. I suggest you chill and just take it easy and try to stop worrying about what is best for what. Composition and interesting shots are really what it is all about, not which CAF system is the best because it has a 10% better hit rate. As for not being able to take shots in dusk, I don't understand; Olympus has superb IBIS and fast lenses, I don't find it a problem, in fact much less than I did with my Canon system most of the time, and much more pleasurable.
It’s probably a temporary phase, as I have too much gear and can’t decide what to get rid off and what to keep.
Generally, dusk is fine, but I like to include people so better high ISO IQ is preferable.
Depends on what you shoot. If you shoot a lot of BIF (as John does) m43 may give you the reach but your keeper rate will be ultra low ... compared to say a Sony A9. Composition and content won't matter if your camera AF is incapable of locking on a BIF.
Robin Smith wrote:
John
You strike me as a worrier. I suggest you chill and just take it easy and try to stop worrying about what is best for what. Composition and interesting shots are really what it is all about, not which CAF system is the best because it has a 10% better hit rate. As for not being able to take shots in dusk, I don't understand; Olympus has superb IBIS and fast lenses, I don't find it a problem, in fact much less than I did with my Canon system most of the time, and much more pleasurable.
hoodlum90 wrote:
I've been at Algonquin Park when it is -35 Celcius in the early morning. That is not fun especially with the wind in the open. I found it difficult to keep my batteries warm for more than a few minutes of use as the E-M1ii slowed to a crawl and shut down. What do you do to keep your camera and batteries warm either during or between uses?
I keep the camera and batteries in my parka, with the batteries tucked into my second layer pocket. And it's all open in the Arctic sans trees or really any cover. If properly layered, it's not an issue opening the parka. What's more of an issue is keeping the fingers warm. At -50C and further windchill, frostnip occurs in the super dry Arctic air within 90 seconds. To keep exposure down you must use limited presets; no way to mess around with settings. But the light condition is usually one setting for hours.
bobbytan wrote:
Depends on what you shoot. If you shoot a lot of BIF (as John does) m43 may give you the reach but your keeper rate will be ultra low ... compared to say a Sony A9. Composition and content won't matter if your camera AF is incapable of locking on a BIF.
To make clear, my dusk comment was about shooting in places like Istanbul. But you’re correct, when light is low for birds, a bigger sensor helps a lot.
Reading back, I think my take on gear comes across wrong. I sound like I'm a pixel peeping Otus-card carrying engineering-oriented type, but I'm not. First of all, it's much more important to me to have fun shooting than to squeeze the last little bit of resolution or sharpness out of an image. I don't go nuts at the computer when an image isn't 100% technically perfect, but when a camera gets in the way of me trying to capture something, I do get angry. Slow-focusing cameras, cameras that take a long time to wake up, these drive me nuts and don't last long.
CAF is therefore important, because if I spend time standing out in the cold for hours on end shooting or waiting for birds, I want to be the weak link. So, I get a camera that does make me the weak link. I now can only swear at myself, but since I can't replace myself in this scenario, that's about it.
Likewise, if I shoot in low light, I want the gear that gets me the best shot in that light. Since I like to include people in my travel photography, the subjects move and thus IBIS alone doesn't cut it.
I shoot with Olympus' best glass because it's faster, it's weather sealed and it renders beautifully, while still being small. For my Sony, I have a few Tamron lenses because they're good enough and they're relatively small. The only exception is a Batis 85mm, because for portraits I'm a sucker for micro contrast and beautiful rendition over small glass.
So, I agree with all the comments on composition and the like and Seanloup Sieff is actually my favorite photographer (love what that guy did with a 21mm), both in style and attitude.
All of the above needs to be put against the background of the current offerings from my perspective. MFT is small, which I like, as well as ergonomically perfect for me. FF is better for low-light people photography. And Sony is best, at the moment, for CAF for BIF (that sounds extremely geekish). Unlike for Morten Hilmer, there isn't any system that offers what I consider key to my photographic interests. Compromising to MFT means not getting the CAF and low-light performance I want; compromising to Sony means not getting the user experience I want; compromising to Nikon or Canon means not getting the best CAF or small systems. Note that nowhere did I say I need more megapixels.
I am very glad that my other hobby already takes up my gear head tendencies/budget, so for camera stuff I stick with just what I need/use on a regular basis. Currently EM1 Mk2, a 7-14 Pro lens and a 12-40 Pro lens. And a beat up used set of Gitzo legs along with a good RRS head and leveling base. Nothing extra! Gives me more to focus my efforts on with, like bobbytan said up thread.
The Rat wrote:
I am very glad that my other hobby already takes up my gear head tendencies/budget, so for camera stuff I stick with just what I need/use on a regular basis. Currently EM1 Mk2, a 7-14 Pro lens and a 12-40 Pro lens. And a beat up used set of Gitzo legs along with a good RRS head and leveling base. Nothing extra! Gives me more to focus my efforts on with, like bobbytan said up thread.
True. It's actually amazing to me that I geek out over photography, but stuff that looks similar but is aimed solely at video or audio, I very much approach like a pro in the sense that I only buy after a lot of research and then only if I know I really, really need it, because I'm just not into it and don't like to spend money on it.
bobbytan wrote:
Depends on what you shoot. If you shoot a lot of BIF (as John does) m43 may give you the reach but your keeper rate will be ultra low ... compared to say a Sony A9.
But then you have to sort through hundreds of nearly identical frames trying to find the one or two that are actual keepers, not merely just in focus...
I didn't say that you should shoot in the Continuous High mode. Continuous Low mode or even Single C-AF would be fine. I am talking about the camera's ability to instantly lock focus and track a BIF. Compared to the A9 the Olympus suck at this.
molson wrote:
But then you have to sort through hundreds of nearly identical frames trying to find the one or two that are actual keepers, not merely just in focus...
bobbytan wrote:
I didn't say that you should shoot in the Continuous High mode. Continuous Low mode or even Single C-AF would be fine. I am talking about the camera's ability to instantly lock focus and track a BIF. Compared to the A9 the Olympus suck at this.
But for small birds up close, the G9 in S-AF seems to lock focus more quickly and accurately than the A9... so it all depends on your priorities I guess.
Geoff D F wrote:
It's a good reminder to help us retain perspective. I was looking though old photos of mine last night ranging from shots taken 12 years ago with a Canon 450D and cheap lens to the latest taken with my Sony A7III with a G lens, with some stuff taken on Oly and Fuji in the mix.
And yes I can see the difference in output between the different systems and increasingly higher MP count, but it wasn't a case of gee this old 8mp file taken with a cheap lens looks terrible.
The late Galen Rowell said it all when someone in the audience of one of his slide shows asked what his secrets were to getting great shots - his answer "f8 and be there!".
Canon 450D user myself, Geoff What's changed for me (I'm so glad I didn't delete the old raw files) is that I learnt raw file editing beyond the basics, and DXO PhotoLab / Topaz Denoise came along
What's changed for me (I'm so glad I didn't delete the old raw files) is that I learnt raw file editing beyond the basics, and DXO PhotoLab / Topaz Denoise came along