I am starting to think about a mirrorless camera. The main reason is that I need an equipment that is convenient to take for various travels. For your information, I am currently a D700 user. I am fully satisfied with D700 in every apsects except it is not always easy to carry for a trip. I am new to the mirrorless, so I am somewhat lost when I start investigating the big world of mirrorless cameras. So I need your advices.
Although I should not expect a mirrorless to produce images with quality matching D700 (unless I can pay a lot of money), I hope that I can find one that is not too far from D700 or a general DSLR in image quality, high iso performance, and DR. Of course, with a price that I can afford. This means, Leica M and Fuji X-pro 1 are excluded (indeed I also feel that the AF/MF of X-pro1 will be somewhat frustrating for me).
The Nikon mirrorless are also excluded, I cannot accept a too small sensor. For me, the starting point for sensor size would be the 4/3 system (about 13x17mm).
Sony has nice mirrorless cameras, with APS-C size senors and affordable prices, for example the NEX-5N. However, as a Nikon user I feel a little bit strange to buy a non-Nikon APS-C camera since it implies that I need to build up a new system of APS-C or even FX size lenses (APS-C size prime lenses are rare). (To be honest, I also don't like the shape of Sony mirrorless cameras, whick looks too "modern"--of course this is irrelevant to image quality, just personal preference.) (Please tell me if you think I should not have this kind of concerns.)
The Olympus E-M5 is cool, it gets a very high score at dpreview review. But it is also somewhat out of budget for me. For serious photography, I would always consider to use my D700.
Then, the next good one seems to be the Panasonic Lumix GX1. The evaluation at dpreview is good. The price is marginally afordable for me. However, according to the dpreview review, the kit lens lumix 14-42mm produces blur images at long fucus end. A nice feature of 4/3 cameras is that all 4/3 lenses are exchangeable, but I don't know how the olympus kit lens will behave on panasonic, e.g. the AF. On the other hand, I may consider to buy the camera with a few prime lenses.
So, I am still lost. I would like to hear your opinions. All opinions, advices, and recomendations will be highly welcome.
Best regards,
Frank
Cam body: Have a look at the GX1 and the G3. IQ is identical, features and price differ. Alternatively, there are very good offers around for MFT cams with the older 12 MP sensor, e.g. a new GF3 for less than 250 Euros, about 130 Euros more add the Pana 14mm f/2.5 prime. I suppose a GH2 is already beyond your budget, but if video is important look no further.
Lenses: The latest Pana 14-42 X kit lens is said to blur at shutter speeds between 1/80 to 1/160 - to my knowledge this issue is as yet unresolved. The original 14-45 is optically probably still the best choice. If you go for primes grab the Pana 20mm f/1.7 and the M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8. The Pana 25mm f/1.4 is very good but pricey. Generally, M.Zuiko lenses work fine on Pana bodies but they don´t provide image stabilization.
Posts: 6,715
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
22
Dynamic range? Really? Are you really sure that is a concern for your travel photography? The focus on DR is very much overrated the last few years... With maybe one or two exceptions all cameras have more than enough DR. So you should just have to worry about higher ISO performance. And there again, most cameras now perform well up to ISO 800 to 1600.
The one thing your D700 does that makes it special is the sensor size. This gives you a play with/control over DOF which sets it apart.
This control is restricted more and more the smaller the sensor gets, and I feel this is the only real reason to not want a small sensor for a convenient camera.
My main dislike for 4/3rds (Panasonic GH models excluded) is the 4:3 format. For the rest, it is upto you to decide what kind of lenses you want with the camera.
My main concern with the Nikon 1, besides the limited DOF control, is the huge lenses for such a small camera... feels kind of like a mismatch. The Sony NEX series also have a lens size problem. And you do not like the look of it.
Samsung actually has quite a nice line up now.
And most probably the soon to arrive Canon mirrorless will have a 4:3 format, which will make it less attractive in my view.
So... all have downsides. Most attractive from them then are some of the more compact 4/3rds, except for their image format. And maybe the Samsung NX1000/210.
Personally I will miss the OVF... So I would still look at compact DSLRs unless size really has to be restricted.
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1338540157' post='18585']My main dislike for 4/3rds (Panasonic GH models excluded) is the 4:3 format.[/quote]
While the multi-aspect sensor of the GH series is certainly a very nice thing to have one can still shoot in 3:2 with all models. E.g. a GX1 in 4:3 provides 15.8 MP whereas in 3:2 one gets 14 MP. A very minor loss of resolution as basis for a "main dislike"?
Well the first question you have to ask your self is do you need a view finder. I personally never found shooting from the screen very comfortable (i.e, i want to hold the camera up to my eye). Anyways probably the best bargin is if you can find a GH2 for around $550 or $600. There has been a few steep sales (this is usa) though I personally have not seen it below $700. The motivation for these sales is the rumored GH3.
Personally I'm pretty close to buying the EM-5; as I really liked the camera when I played with it at a store; I sort of wish it came with the handle portion of the grip (as oppose to the bottom piece) as that helps quite a bit with the feel of the camera (though I think it is a bit overpriced; and will likely pass on the grip unless they produce a less expensive one without the bottom battery pack). At the super cheap end is the nex c3 (though the nex 5n works better with asymetric wide angle lenses; if you are into that sort of thing).
Generally the 5n seems to work best with third party lenses (adapters tend to run around $25) and manual focusing is not impossible with focus peaking and mangificaiton; if you like to work 'slow'.
So at the high end I would definitely go with the em-5 if you can live with 4:3; at the best buy I would go with the Gh2 if you can find one for $550 or $600 new; as the best solution (for price range) if you can use manual focus lenses probalby the 5n; as a simple automated low price solution perhaps one of the older 4/3 (ep1 can be found for $200); gh1, g1 and such.
The older 4/3 tend to have lower dynamic range so do you give up something noticable here.
using the Samsungs now for a while I would want to point you to the NX200 (on sale at more and more locations due to the replacement being lined up) or the ones to come being the NX1000/NX210 all using the same 20Mpix Sensor.
If you stay at base ISO up to ISO800 the details delivered are just great, above you would need to go with RAW as you will have some 1EV advantage there. There is a cut at ISO3200/6000 where the DR drops so that colors start washing out but you can always attach one of the primes to stay at good ISO levels easily.
The attractive side of especially the NX200 is the availability of three Pancakes and a collapsible zoom so that you have an extremely portable package not much larger than the mFT's.
At CNET.DE you do have some ISO comparision of the new NX20 (which might be out of scope because of price and size) but it gives you some impression on the IQ.
While having not suffered so much from DR limits, I can tell you that first gen MFT were showing their limits more often than not, in travel photography. Travel photography doesn't mean you will start to like gritty shadows or burnt highlights. But it's manageable with a bit of common sense and ... that good old histogram & blinking shadows & highlight.
I would recommend you the EM5 with absolutely no reservation but if it's a matter of budget, it's not helpful for you. My second choice would probably be the GH2 or the G3. I'd skip the GX1 because after a couple years without viewfinder, I grew very tired of not having one. The 14-42 X did not impress me at all despite its diminutive size, the power lever turned out to be very frustrating in use for me. And it was beaten in every single parameters by the 14-45mm, apart from size & AF speed (extremely fast vs very fast).
Lenses wise, Sammy is 100% spot on. 14-45 + 20 + 45mm and you've got plenty to play with in a tight package.
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1338540157' post='18585']
Dynamic range? Really? Are you really sure that is a concern for your travel photography? The focus on DR is very much overrated the last few years... With maybe one or two exceptions all cameras have more than enough DR. So you should just have to worry about higher ISO performance. And there again, most cameras now perform well up to ISO 800 to 1600.
The one thing your D700 does that makes it special is the sensor size. This gives you a play with/control over DOF which sets it apart.
This control is restricted more and more the smaller the sensor gets, and I feel this is the only real reason to not want a small sensor for a convenient camera.
My main dislike for 4/3rds (Panasonic GH models excluded) is the 4:3 format. For the rest, it is upto you to decide what kind of lenses you want with the camera.
My main concern with the Nikon 1, besides the limited DOF control, is the huge lenses for such a small camera... feels kind of like a mismatch. The Sony NEX series also have a lens size problem. And you do not like the look of it.
Samsung actually has quite a nice line up now.
And most probably the soon to arrive Canon mirrorless will have a 4:3 format, which will make it less attractive in my view.
So... all have downsides. Most attractive from them then are some of the more compact 4/3rds, except for their image format. And maybe the Samsung NX1000/210.
Personally I will miss the OVF... So I would still look at compact DSLRs unless size really has to be restricted.
[/quote]
Thank you all for your kind and valuable inputs.
Although I am not very picky about DR for a MFT camera, I do hope that it is not very limited. While for high ISO performance, I do have a strong desire that it should be good up to at least ISO 1600.
The view finder seems to be a big deal. I just checked the price of an EVF for GX1, it is very pricy. If the price of the EVF is taken into account, then the price gap between E-M5 and GX1+EVF is greatly reduced. For me it will be a pain without an EVF/OVF. The 4:3 format is not a big concern for me, since with most (if not all) of those MTF cameras I can always choose to shoot with 3:2 format with minimal loss of resolution.
Frank
[quote name='Frank' timestamp='1338556430' post='18597']For me it will be a pain without an EVF/OVF.[/quote]
Which directs you towards a G3, GH2, or EM-5.
Or one of the other cameras and an external finder. There are plus/minus of the external finder. I forget which models have which feature but some of them will tilt and similar. On the other hand they become dated (my understanding from what others have said is that the em-5 (for example) evf is actually 'better' than the vf2 (same resolution; but higher dynamic range; better fidelity and faster refresh; I cannot confirm or deny this first hand).
Anyways one can argue that with an external view finder you can always update if there is a need (and option to do so) but on the other hand when I was pricing cameras the external evf never seemed cost effective (i.e, seemed better to just buy camera with built in evf; though being able to tilt the evf seems like a neat option).
[quote name='Sammy' timestamp='1338565735' post='18600']
Which directs you towards a G3, GH2, or EM-5.
[/quote]
|
