Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Making the switch to 4/3's
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Jun 17, 2012 10:25 pm    Post subject: Making the switch to 4/3's Reply with quote

I am considering a switch between my entry-level dSLR and a m4/3 body.

Why? Well I cannot afford a full-frame body and the extra HDR capabilities, ISO performance and resolution would be my goals by making that upgrade.
On the other hand I am beginning to question the sense of having a crop sensor such as the one on entry level dSLR's like mine on a bulky body.

However, I am still a bit uncertain on what would be the main advantages of say, getting a NEX-3 body after selling the current 1000D I own:

I would gain:

- Extra 4MP of resolution (NEX-3);
- portability;
- video recording;

But lose:

- ergonomics;
- viewfinder;
- Shooting speed;
- Ruggedness (I have the clear feeling that the mechanics on a dSLR are more durable than a fully electronic camera, am I wrong?)
- ISO100;
- ISO performance overall;
- external flash (only proprietary?);

Am I seeing this all wrong or are there too many disadvantages to justify the switch?


PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Some observations.

I bought a Lumix G1 body a few weeks ago, mainly to be able to use my Canon FD lenses for digital photography, which I can't do on my Pentax. And I can also use my Leica and Pentax lenses on it.

Why a G1? Easy - they can now be bought for really low prices. And it's a tiny, lightweight camera. First impressions? It feels reassuringly solid. Results are better than I expected - manual focus CAN be very precise thanks to the VF magnification feature. But you need it to be on a tripod with longer lenses - ! I guess that applies to all similar sytems, though.

For MF lens work, M4/3 is tempting but I think it can be the road to nowhere. Already, I use the G1 almost exclusively with my 75 and 90mm rangefinder Voigtlander lenses which are in scale with the body. I find even the 28 and 35mm FD lenses feel oversize on it. The 100 and 135mm lenses overwhelm it. Tiny body plus big lenses does not equal sound sense in my opinion. If anything, the body feels slightly too small to me, and I don't have huge hands.

But although I wouldn't switch from the Pentax for MF lens work, I can see the sense of M4/3 if using purpose-designed AF lenses. The quality out of the camera is indeed good, from what I've seen so far.

A purely personal set of observations, of course.

I've played with NEX 5 and 7 in local camera shops and - to me - the ergonomics are dreadful. The new Olympus OM-D might be a different beast though.

In summary, I can't see any real benefit in ditching an APS-C camera to switch to M4/3 - unless you mostly use lenses over 75mm or find it impossible to focus your present camera manually.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well the NEX's are actually not m4/3 they have APS-C sized sensors as far as I know but what astonished me was the lack of direct control over what you get when you buy a dSLR.

I must confess I had never taken the time to investigate this but after seeing the pics of the physical interfaces these cameras provide I must conclude that aperture, exposure and ISO are only accessible through a haphazard of firmware menu navigation.

I've had a Sony Cybershot that was easier to get to these controls than these m4/3 bodies because even the creative modes (AV/TV/P) are only accessible through the menus. WHAT?

I am a bit confused right now and beginning to think that m4/3 are like advanced P&S in terms of image quality due to much larger sensors but nowhere near the practicality of even any entry level dSLR.

Portability is not everything and even that is very disputable since even the kit lenses on those cameras means you'll still need some kind of bag to carry it safely.

Maybe this was just a very bad idea because the way I see it they have just dumbed down the dSLR concept.



I rarely use the 1000D's menus. Will a NEX (or any m4/3 body for that matter) make me need to use them for a simple ISO adjustment or AV compensation?...


PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The main draw of M4/3 or any mirrorless cam is the ability to use most any lens on it, with a few exceptions.
I bought a G1, because I couldn't afford a new G3.

G1. Bad, no video, first gen EVF, not as good as the Nex in low light.

Good. Very good ergonomics, it's really like a mini DSLR. All functions available thru EVF without looking at the main screen. Main screen flips over, if you want it to. I shoot with the EVF with the screen flipped over to protect the screen.
Pretty eassy to use with most 50mm or smaller lenses. You hold the cam like a traditional dslr. Bigger lenses you hold the lens insted of the cam.

ISO 100 handheld all the way down to 1/30s with practice is no problem. I've shot lower.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IQ of the Nex is excellent and the buttons are programmable for ISO, WB etc. However, the kit lenses are huge, other than the crappy 16mm pancake.

The Samsung NX might be a better bet, although high ISO is poor.

The micro 4/3rds cameras have noticeably worse image quality, but are much nicer to use than the Nex series. I've paired a GF1 with a 20/1.7 Panasonic lens and it works nicely for snaps up to ISO800. Personally though, I would save for a 5D Wink


PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nex is my choice:
+ better grip than any m4/3 I've tried
+ customizable buttons, quick access to all functions without old fashioned dials
+ small and great IQ, much better in low light than any m43
+ tilting screen is a must in a camera like this


PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you want to try, do it! You can always go back to what you liked the most (dslr, aps-c mirrorless or m4/3) Very Happy


PostPosted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Riku wrote:
Nex is my choice:
+ better grip than any m4/3 I've tried
+ customizable buttons, quick access to all functions without old fashioned dials
+ small and great IQ, much better in low light than any m43
+ tilting screen is a must in a camera like this


Well if the buttons are customizable that is better then, I was getting a bit scared!

Nordentro wrote:
If you want to try, do it! You can always go back to what you liked the most (dslr, aps-c mirrorless or m4/3) Very Happy


Sort of, I am not exactly living out of photography to afford that kind of switches in a blink of an eye.

ManualFocus-G wrote:
Personally though, I would save for a 5D Wink


Wow, me too but my idea was like "Ok I sell my 1000D+kit lens for ~250 and get a NEX-3+M42 adapter and I'm good to go again". The 5D is a whole different investment. The best I can get it is for about 600 with some extras. I would have to spend at least an extra 350 after selling the 1000D. Not that I have to save money to buy it, fortunately not, but still, it's 350 more than going for a m4/3 or a NEX. Unfortunately it wouldn't make me a better photographer, if that was the case yep I would get one in a blink of an eye.

Thanks for the opinions so far.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi, I have the Canon EOS 400 (aka XTi) ,the old brother of D1000 ,10MP sensor , the Sony NEX 3 (APS-C sensor ,14mp) and the m4/3 Olympus EPL 1 .
Because I was contaminated with MF lens mania (ok, a mild form , stabilised somehow now Laughing ) the Canon reflex gathers the dust .
I am mainly using the NEX 3 with mfl .Great little camera for little money.You have to adapt yourself to it's particular ergonomy , but if you'd get a Rolleiflex it would be the same.
Recently I bought an Olympus EPL1 for replacing my compact light camera ,wich was a Canon Powershot G9 . good results until now , still learning the camera , but not regreting the investment. AF , stabilised body.
It depends on what type of photography you are doing ,how much you like tele end or wide . if you're a tele guy , the 2x crop of m4/3 will help . In this case I'd suggest the G series of Panasonic or the Oly + EVF (not cheap !) for a better stabilisation . Of course , if you are a tripod photographer , you can go without EVF , but you'll need a good hood for the LCD .
If you prefere high ISO ( over 3200) , go with NEX . EPL1 does a good job though until 1600 .If you like rather wider focal lenghts 1.5x crop is preferable, of course.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i went through your exact analysis last year, with my 5d, a great camera, full frame, great lenses, contax-zeiss, and great results. too bulky, too off putting to the subjects, had to go.

i'm not sure of your budget, but i can tell you one thing for sure, the new olympus omd has IQ every bit as good if not better than comparably priced apsc, including lw light up to iso3200. no disrespect intended to those who disagree, but they are just flat wrong.

having said that, i think you need to make two decisions before you pick a camera: what lenses do you want to shoot (legacy vs 'system AF, RF vs slr), and if you choose legacy glass, do you want your lenses to do double duty on film camera?

my answer to these questions was RF glass and doing double duty on film. i chose RF glass even though i came from an slr system, because the logic of reducing the bulk of my kit and of keeping a proper proprtion and balance between lens and camera, seemed to lead me there.

if this makes sense to you, then i would consider the ricoh gxr with M module, which is optimized for RF glass, but also has the benefit of being able to mount pretty much any glass on it with adapter. it also has a few AF options if you need.

if you choose another way to go, here are my caveats: an eye level VF is a must, whether innate to the camera or as an optional add on. your work will suffer without it. in body IS makes a tremendous difference with small cameras because they do not innately provide the weighted leverage of large models. your work will suffer without this in certain situations.

it was these considerations that lead me to the olympus omd, and it has not disappointed in these regards.
good luck
tony


PostPosted: Sat Jun 23, 2012 11:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ManualFocus-G wrote:
IQ of the Nex is excellent and the buttons are programmable for ISO, WB etc. However, the kit lenses are huge, other than the crappy 16mm pancake.

The Samsung NX might be a better bet, although high ISO is poor.

The micro 4/3rds cameras have noticeably worse image quality, but are much nicer to use than the Nex series. I've paired a GF1 with a 20/1.7 Panasonic lens and it works nicely for snaps up to ISO800. Personally though, I would save for a 5D Wink

+1 except instead of 5D I bought three cameras 2 NEX and one NX100 and lend me G1 to my friend and not miss it.


PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2012 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pretty happy with my m43 GF1. Although MF does taje a little practice. M43 has the best lens choice, however Samsung's nx is not too shabby. IBIS is important for mg lenses and so for Olympus is the only option. But I'm holding off on an OM-D until we get to see what happens next year.


PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2012 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I actually ended up purchasing a 5D, in the end I had to get a taste of the fullframe mania, or is it a myth?

Well I already feel the difference in image quality, definitely noticeable, worth the 550? I am not sure.

I am currently trying to figure out if I will adjust to the bulk/weight, it is sturdy but is the price for sturdiness too high?

I could still sell it easily around here and get a m4/3 but I am afraid I would miss the dSLR capabilities.

At the moment I just might fall in love with it or simply loose the interest in photography and never look back. I am definitely going thru a transition period and I hope it all goes for the best.

Thanks for all the opinions so far.

(that OM-D is sweet indeed, but 1,149.00 is something I don't see myself spending on photography not now, not ever)