Actually it was reading these kinds of posts that convinced me to get a MFT system in the first place. I liked the weak AA filters, the Oly JPG and IBIS engines as well as the much hailed Oly colors.
However, in the end, after using the D7000 and A850, I came away regretting ever going MFT and having a family of images I know would have looked better if I had other portable gear.
IMO, the EPL-2 + kit lens + 20mm F1.7 still requires a bag. Now this will be a per person preference but when I carry a messenger bag or backpack, I feel almost no difference between a MFT kit and a APS-C kit as long as I\'m not carrying a 70-200 F2.8 or something gigantic like that. Maybe it\'s because I\'m still in my late 20s and in shape.
And to answer your specific question, yes when I travel, I often carry a camera bag with me and spend many days just shooting photos. When I took those beach shots, it was one of those days I was walking around just looking for photo opportunities. I really regret taking people\'s advice on the MFT DPreview forum and traveling with MFT, it made no difference to me in carrying it around and made a big difference in how big I can blow these up.
BTW, I did apply NR in LR3 in those beach shots and that\'s about as comfortable as I am with it without losing detail.
In the end, a Nikon D7000 with a 35mm DX and the 18-105mm kit lens would have been a much better combo for me than the EPL-2 with a 20mm F1.7 and 14-42mm kit lens. I would have had sharper higher quality photos with much more dynamic range. And while the D7k kit would have weighed more, it would have been a moot point for me since either way I have to carry a bag.
You seem to think that its a black and white situation where why not carry the biggest camera made OR MFT. That\'s simply not the case and is just a strawman argument. Ultimately, due to bad advice on photoforums and my own misjudgement I made some mistakes and I\'m glad I can learn from them.
CKrueger wrote: FlyPenFly wrote:
Sure, any talented photographer can take a great photo with any equipment you give him including an iPhone. There are people producing amazing work with MFT that is without a doubt. It is however in spite of it, not because of it.
However, why should you limit yourself to what is perhaps subpar of what is available in the market especially at the same price points. There are no lenses or compelling reason MFT can offer right now except size and weight. They are albeit two extremely important factors and it\'s up to every consumer to choose what they value more.
If you go to page 2 you can see two images I shot with an EPL2, probably the best sensor that Olympus has used so far and in those shots in very easy shooting conditions I KNOW I would have had better final images that I can print big with if I had a D7000 or A850 or 5d2 on me. This is a simple fact.
Is not size and weight a consideration? Would you shoot with a view camera? You can get the equipment pretty cheap. Cheaper than an A850 and a stable of lenses for it, at least.
I don\'t see M43 as sub-par. Yes the IQ from a FF DSLR could be better. I AM giving up IQ for convenience. But I\'m giving up a little IQ for a LOT of convenience. Perhaps that\'s just the difference in how you and I judge IQ. I do consider a few of the shots to come out of my G10 to be pretty good, for example.
I think one thing you said to be a perfect illustration of why people like these small cameras. You would have gotten a better final image with your A850. Nobody is going to argue that. But you had the EPL2 with you instead. Just like you might have a NEX camera with you today. And then you might get a bit better noise, but the IQ from the NEX lens lineup is lower. So either way you\'re stuck with something less than the best image possible.
So what do you do? Bring your A850 everywhere? And what happens when Ansel Adams Jr sets up his 8x10 next to you and shoots a photo with significantly better IQ? When does it end? Where is the bar at which IQ is acceptable? Obviously your bar is higher than mine. That should tell you why I\'m scratching my head why you\'d lug such a giant hunk of camera with you while you\'re scratching your head why I\'d even bother using a camera with such low IQ. (Please forgive me if that sounds combative, that\'s not my intent.)
FWIW, I would have been happy with the beach image. You obviously do PP, so I would have just turned the NR up a bit in LR. I know the noise you speak of; even my 7D exhibits it. To me it\'s no big deal; it comes out with NR in large prints, and I ignore it in small prints.
Actually it was reading these kinds of posts that convinced me to get a MFT system in the first place. I liked the weak AA filters, the Oly JPG and IBIS engines as well as the much hailed Oly colors.
However, in the end, after using the D7000 and A850, I came away regretting ever going MFT and having a family of images I know would have looked better if I had other portable gear.
IMO, the EPL-2 + kit lens + 20mm F1.7 still requires a bag. Now this will be a per person preference but when I carry a messenger bag or backpack, I feel almost no difference between a MFT kit and a APS-C kit as long as I\'m not carrying a 70-200 F2.8 or something gigantic like that. Maybe it\'s because I\'m still in my late 20s and in shape.
And to answer your specific question, yes when I travel, I often carry a camera bag with me and spend many days just shooting photos. When I took those beach shots, it was one of those days I was walking around just looking for photo opportunities. I really regret taking people\'s advice on the MFT DPreview forum and traveling with MFT, it made no difference to me in carrying it around and made a big difference in how big I can blow these up.
BTW, I did apply NR in LR3 in those beach shots and that\'s about as comfortable as I am with it without losing detail.
In the end, a Nikon D7000 with a 35mm DX and the 18-105mm kit lens would have been a much better combo for me than the EPL-2 with a 20mm F1.7 and 14-42mm kit lens. I would have had sharper higher quality photos with much more dynamic range. And while the D7k kit would have weighed more, it would have been a moot point for me since either way I have to carry a bag.
You seem to think that its a black and white situation where why not carry the biggest camera made OR MFT. That\'s simply not the case and is just a strawman argument.
CKrueger wrote: FlyPenFly wrote:
Sure, any talented photographer can take a great photo with any equipment you give him including an iPhone. There are people producing amazing work with MFT that is without a doubt. It is however in spite of it, not because of it.
However, why should you limit yourself to what is perhaps subpar of what is available in the market especially at the same price points. There are no lenses or compelling reason MFT can offer right now except size and weight. They are albeit two extremely important factors and it\'s up to every consumer to choose what they value more.
If you go to page 2 you can see two images I shot with an EPL2, probably the best sensor that Olympus has used so far and in those shots in very easy shooting conditions I KNOW I would have had better final images that I can print big with if I had a D7000 or A850 or 5d2 on me. This is a simple fact.
Is not size and weight a consideration? Would you shoot with a view camera? You can get the equipment pretty cheap. Cheaper than an A850 and a stable of lenses for it, at least.
I don\'t see M43 as sub-par. Yes the IQ from a FF DSLR could be better. I AM giving up IQ for convenience. But I\'m giving up a little IQ for a LOT of convenience. Perhaps that\'s just the difference in how you and I judge IQ. I do consider a few of the shots to come out of my G10 to be pretty good, for example.
I think one thing you said to be a perfect illustration of why people like these small cameras. You would have gotten a better final image with your A850. Nobody is going to argue that. But you had the EPL2 with you instead. Just like you might have a NEX camera with you today. And then you might get a bit better noise, but the IQ from the NEX lens lineup is lower. So either way you\'re stuck with something less than the best image possible.
So what do you do? Bring your A850 everywhere? And what happens when Ansel Adams Jr sets up his 8x10 next to you and shoots a photo with significantly better IQ? When does it end? Where is the bar at which IQ is acceptable? Obviously your bar is higher than mine. That should tell you why I\'m scratching my head why you\'d lug such a giant hunk of camera with you while you\'re scratching your head why I\'d even bother using a camera with such low IQ. (Please forgive me if that sounds combative, that\'s not my intent.)
FWIW, I would have been happy with the beach image. You obviously do PP, so I would have just turned the NR up a bit in LR. I know the noise you speak of; even my 7D exhibits it. To me it\'s no big deal; it comes out with NR in large prints, and I ignore it in small prints.
Actually it was reading these kinds of posts that convinced me to get a MFT system in the first place. I liked the weak AA filters, the Oly JPG and IBIS engines as well as the much hailed Oly colors.
However, in the end, after using the D7000 and A850, I came away regretting ever going MFT and having a family of images I know would have looked better if I had other portable gear.
IMO, the EPL-2 + kit lens + 20mm F1.7 still requires a bag. Now this will be a per person preference but when I carry a messenger bag or backpack, I feel almost no difference between a MFT kit and a APS-C kit as long as I\'m not carrying a 70-200 F2.8 or something gigantic like that. Maybe it\'s because I\'m still in my late 20s and in shape.
And to answer your specific question, yes when I travel, I often carry a camera bag with me and spend many days just shooting photos. When I took those beach shots, it was one of those days I was walking around just looking for photo opportunities. I really regret taking people\'s advice on the MFT DPreview forum and traveling with MFT, it made no difference to me in carrying it around and made a big difference in how big I can blow these up.
BTW, I did apply NR in LR3 in those beach shots and that\'s about as comfortable as I am with it without losing detail.
In the end, a Nikon D7000 with a 35mm DX and the 18-105mm kit lens would have been a much better combo for me than the EPL-2 with a 20mm F1.7 and 14-42mm kit lens. I would have had sharper higher quality photos with much more dynamic range. And while the D7k kit would have weighed more, it would have been a moot point for me since either way I have to carry a bag.
CKrueger wrote: FlyPenFly wrote:
Sure, any talented photographer can take a great photo with any equipment you give him including an iPhone. There are people producing amazing work with MFT that is without a doubt. It is however in spite of it, not because of it.
However, why should you limit yourself to what is perhaps subpar of what is available in the market especially at the same price points. There are no lenses or compelling reason MFT can offer right now except size and weight. They are albeit two extremely important factors and it\'s up to every consumer to choose what they value more.
If you go to page 2 you can see two images I shot with an EPL2, probably the best sensor that Olympus has used so far and in those shots in very easy shooting conditions I KNOW I would have had better final images that I can print big with if I had a D7000 or A850 or 5d2 on me. This is a simple fact.
Is not size and weight a consideration? Would you shoot with a view camera? You can get the equipment pretty cheap. Cheaper than an A850 and a stable of lenses for it, at least.
I don\'t see M43 as sub-par. Yes the IQ from a FF DSLR could be better. I AM giving up IQ for convenience. But I\'m giving up a little IQ for a LOT of convenience. Perhaps that\'s just the difference in how you and I judge IQ. I do consider a few of the shots to come out of my G10 to be pretty good, for example.
I think one thing you said to be a perfect illustration of why people like these small cameras. You would have gotten a better final image with your A850. Nobody is going to argue that. But you had the EPL2 with you instead. Just like you might have a NEX camera with you today. And then you might get a bit better noise, but the IQ from the NEX lens lineup is lower. So either way you\'re stuck with something less than the best image possible.
So what do you do? Bring your A850 everywhere? And what happens when Ansel Adams Jr sets up his 8x10 next to you and shoots a photo with significantly better IQ? When does it end? Where is the bar at which IQ is acceptable? Obviously your bar is higher than mine. That should tell you why I\'m scratching my head why you\'d lug such a giant hunk of camera with you while you\'re scratching your head why I\'d even bother using a camera with such low IQ. (Please forgive me if that sounds combative, that\'s not my intent.)
FWIW, I would have been happy with the beach image. You obviously do PP, so I would have just turned the NR up a bit in LR. I know the noise you speak of; even my 7D exhibits it. To me it\'s no big deal; it comes out with NR in large prints, and I ignore it in small prints.
Actually it was reading these kinds of posts that convinced me to get a MFT system in the first place. I liked the weak AA filters, the Oly JPG and IBIS engines as well as the much hailed Oly colors.
However, in the end, after using the D7000 and A850, I came away regretting ever going MFT and having a family of images I know would have looked better if I had other portable gear.
IMO, the EPL-2 + kit lens + 20mm F1.7 still requires a bag. Now this will be a per person preference but when I carry a messenger bag or backpack, I feel almost no difference between a MFT kit and a APS-C kit as long as I\'m not carrying a 70-200 F2.8 or something gigantic like that. Maybe it\'s because I\'m still in my late 20s and in shape.
And to answer your specific question, yes when I travel, I often carry a camera bag with me and spend many days just shooting photos. When I took those beach shots, it was one of those days I was walking around just looking for photo opportunities. I really regret taking people\'s advice on the MFT DPreview forum and traveling with MFT, it made no difference to me in carrying it around and made a big difference in how big I can blow these up.
BTW, I did apply NR in LR3 in those beach shots and that\'s about as comfortable as I am with it without losing detail.
CKrueger wrote: FlyPenFly wrote:
Sure, any talented photographer can take a great photo with any equipment you give him including an iPhone. There are people producing amazing work with MFT that is without a doubt. It is however in spite of it, not because of it.
However, why should you limit yourself to what is perhaps subpar of what is available in the market especially at the same price points. There are no lenses or compelling reason MFT can offer right now except size and weight. They are albeit two extremely important factors and it\'s up to every consumer to choose what they value more.
If you go to page 2 you can see two images I shot with an EPL2, probably the best sensor that Olympus has used so far and in those shots in very easy shooting conditions I KNOW I would have had better final images that I can print big with if I had a D7000 or A850 or 5d2 on me. This is a simple fact.
Is not size and weight a consideration? Would you shoot with a view camera? You can get the equipment pretty cheap. Cheaper than an A850 and a stable of lenses for it, at least.
I don\'t see M43 as sub-par. Yes the IQ from a FF DSLR could be better. I AM giving up IQ for convenience. But I\'m giving up a little IQ for a LOT of convenience. Perhaps that\'s just the difference in how you and I judge IQ. I do consider a few of the shots to come out of my G10 to be pretty good, for example.
I think one thing you said to be a perfect illustration of why people like these small cameras. You would have gotten a better final image with your A850. Nobody is going to argue that. But you had the EPL2 with you instead. Just like you might have a NEX camera with you today. And then you might get a bit better noise, but the IQ from the NEX lens lineup is lower. So either way you\'re stuck with something less than the best image possible.
So what do you do? Bring your A850 everywhere? And what happens when Ansel Adams Jr sets up his 8x10 next to you and shoots a photo with significantly better IQ? When does it end? Where is the bar at which IQ is acceptable? Obviously your bar is higher than mine. That should tell you why I\'m scratching my head why you\'d lug such a giant hunk of camera with you while you\'re scratching your head why I\'d even bother using a camera with such low IQ. (Please forgive me if that sounds combative, that\'s not my intent.)
FWIW, I would have been happy with the beach image. You obviously do PP, so I would have just turned the NR up a bit in LR. I know the noise you speak of; even my 7D exhibits it. To me it\'s no big deal; it comes out with NR in large prints, and I ignore it in small prints.
Aug 07, 2011 at 05:41 PM
Previous versions of FlyPenFly's message #9821630 « Switched entirely to Micro4/3 »
