What you say makes a bit of sense if you are just looking for a pocket camera ... in which case I would highly recommend the Sony X100. But if you are looking for a full systems camera with a range of lenses, the difference in bulk and weight difference is HUGE.
Bifurcator wrote: 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
cputeq wrote:
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.
I\'ve always said the same thing that altern3 is saying. If you use alt lenses (except for a few RF lenses) then µ4/3 cameras occupy about the same amount of space or as he put it: The size differences are minimal. And I\'ll add inconsequential to that as well. If a person fits his kit with all the smallest µ4/3 native lenses then there\'s something to actually talk about - otherwise, nope.
Also someone said \"it\'s half the weight\" as if that held some meaning. Consider the difference between 1 gram and 0.5 grams. One is half the weight of the other but in your pocket you\'d never know it. It\'s pretty much the same with cameras IMO. Again, sure, if you fit your kit with all the lightest µ4/3 native lenses then there\'re something to talk about. But if you\'re a one lens toter or you use adapted lenses (like almost everyone here is doing) then nope, like the 0.5 grams in your pocket you won\'t even know it.
There is however a perception thing that I think occurs a lot here. People get told just how light and small these cameras are (endlessly and repeatedly) so their perception of reality is altered. The reality itself however remains a constant. It\'s like when some chick blows cigarette smoke in your face. The reality of the event is a constant but in one case the guy takes it as a sexual advance and in the other instance he assumes she\'s telling him to get lost. This is also mixed with the placebo (power of suggestion) affect. If I give a person a 15lbs backpack raving about how lightweight it is and have them carry it for a day at the end of that day they won\'t be minding it as much as if I had been ranting about how freaking heavy it was!
The reality is that µ4/3 cameras with a single lens or alt lenses are just not very different in size and weight. Your perception of the differences however may differ from reality considerably based on what you hear and what you read.
What you say is true if you are just looking for a pocket camera ... in which case I would highly recommend the Sony X100. But if you are looking for a full systems camera with a range of lenses, the difference in bulk and weight difference is HUGE.
Bifurcator wrote: 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
cputeq wrote:
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.
I\'ve always said the same thing that altern3 is saying. If you use alt lenses (except for a few RF lenses) then µ4/3 cameras occupy about the same amount of space or as he put it: The size differences are minimal. And I\'ll add inconsequential to that as well. If a person fits his kit with all the smallest µ4/3 native lenses then there\'s something to actually talk about - otherwise, nope.
Also someone said \"it\'s half the weight\" as if that held some meaning. Consider the difference between 1 gram and 0.5 grams. One is half the weight of the other but in your pocket you\'d never know it. It\'s pretty much the same with cameras IMO. Again, sure, if you fit your kit with all the lightest µ4/3 native lenses then there\'re something to talk about. But if you\'re a one lens toter or you use adapted lenses (like almost everyone here is doing) then nope, like the 0.5 grams in your pocket you won\'t even know it.
There is however a perception thing that I think occurs a lot here. People get told just how light and small these cameras are (endlessly and repeatedly) so their perception of reality is altered. The reality itself however remains a constant. It\'s like when some chick blows cigarette smoke in your face. The reality of the event is a constant but in one case the guy takes it as a sexual advance and in the other instance he assumes she\'s telling him to get lost. This is also mixed with the placebo (power of suggestion) affect. If I give a person a 15lbs backpack raving about how lightweight it is and have them carry it for a day at the end of that day they won\'t be minding it as much as if I had been ranting about how freaking heavy it was!
The reality is that µ4/3 cameras with a single lens or alt lenses are just not very different in size and weight. Your perception of the differences however may differ from reality considerably based on what you hear and what you read.
Aug 11, 2012 at 12:18 PM
Previous versions of bobbytan's message #10874608 « "Best" Mirrorless Camera with Viewfinder? »
