Quote:These days I would prefer the Tamron 15-30 instead of the Nikon with it's "flare-magnetism". Without strong light sources involved, it's still fine glass.
Still, Nikon has the better sensors
Oh, and of course an "amazing service". I just got an envelope with the rubber cover for the battery grip (of the body). I only needed to mail twice and it happened - whoopsy - within just 3 weeks. Of course, no unnecessary paper (like a "how-to glue the bloody thing back on the plastic"), just a plastic bag with the rubber pad and another with double sided tape. So I can fix a 1 1/2 year old body without bothering the very valuable service personnel. I feel so highly estimated and trustworthy
As to sensors, it has been a leapfrog game as long as I can remember, not just with sensors, mostly between Canon and Nikon. Of course, Nikon is cheating (and so is Sony), by doing an 80% of pixels noise reduction in Raw, making it look much better than it is, and effectively fooling DxO . A few researchers actually showed that if you do the same with Canon (in PP of course, there si no other way), you get very similar noise and DR results, at the most with a 0.3 or 0.4 stop difference. This with the previous generation of cameras.
Lately Canon seems to be on the rise again; give it another few years and they will likely have the best sensors, for a few years, next Nikon/Sony again, etc.
To me it does not matter, I am happy with a DR of 8 to 10 stops, and I rarely shoot 3200 iso, let alone 6400 iso, an I never needed anything faster anyway .
Considering this, MFT is fine for me, no problem whatsoever . Oh, and I would like to see what Nikon/Sony/Canon would get from a 20 MP MFT equivalent sensor (40 MP APS-C, 80 MP FF ).
Also considering that at 6 to 8 MP we got already as much out fo a dslr as the best analog amateurs out there, and at 12 MP the same as pros, I don't really think we're missing out at all, we're really quite spoilt. more MPs just mean you have more detail when printing, and even way back when I thought the results I got from Pan-X at 25 iso was outstanding anyway .
Personally, I will likely do one more upgrade of my FF camera, in order to make it stand out from the MFT cameras I have. I use FF in a much different way anyway; MFT with me all the time (I travel a lot for work), and FF for very specific self-initiated photo shoots . I am using FF in a way as medium format these days, no longer the way I used to shoot with analog gear. Funnily enough, MFT gear is about the same size as my old analog (Pentax) gear, which I incidentally sold a few weeks ago.
And as to fixing stuff oneself, with a body still under warranty: I would only do so if I could not miss the camera for the period of time they would need to do that. Crazy...
Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....